Pros: Inexpensive, relatively unlimited, reliable, no emissions, efficientHydro-Electric:Cons: Melt-downs (or fear of them), storage of nuclear waste, social and political opinion, non-renewable, need a lake or water for cooling
Pros: Renewable, no emissions, eventually inexpensiveSolar:Cons: Water pollution, alteration of ecosystems, locations are rare, not always reliable (drought), inefficient
Pros: Renewable, cleanCons: Unreliable, inefficient, expensive (PV cells), takes up space
Pros: Renewable, no transportation of resourcesCons: Relatively unknown, inaccessible areas, inefficient, expensive
Pros: Renewable, no emissionsCons: Inefficient, unreliable, heavy land use, rare locations, expensive
Pros: Cheap, easy, any location, got a lot of it set up already, efficientCons: Nonrenewable, high emissions, high environmental impact
Pros: CheapCons: Nonrenewable, chance of spills, high emissions
Pros: Renewable (we never run out of trash), reduces methane emissions, reliableCons: Expensive to set up? Cost effective?
Pros: Cleaner burning, efficientCons: Nonrenewable, have to mine for it
Pros: Relatively renewableCons: Some pollution, inefficient
-How much energy goes into creating PV cells, windmills, gas wells, etc.?-How efficient is landfill methane combustion? how many homes can Keifer landfill support? -
-How big a landfill do you need?
-Does this encourage people to waste?
-What would it take to shift everything to a renewable resource (in terms of money, jobs, etc.)
Group Opinion:
Solar, because we know more about it, can use it personally (individual houses).
Final Energy Opinions
We think that every house and building should be equipped with solar panels, which will subsequently become less expensive due to high demand. The government could tax these solar grids, but also subsidize the homeowner to make the initial purchase less expensive. People would have an incentive to put these solar panels on their houses because their electric bills would be lowered accordingly. Any excess power from the personal panels would go to the grid for use by others. When there is less power than demand, it could be supplied with the nuclear plants and the hydroelectric plants that would continue to run, sending power to the grid for widespread use. No new hydroelectric plants would be built, but those in use would have continued licenses. New nuclear plants could also be built.
| Power Type | Benefits | Drawbacks | |
| Coal | cheap, provides many jobs, provides majority of energy, easy to use | nonrenewable, destructive to environment, people are too reliant | |
| Oil | abundant (for now) | dirty, must be imported, nonrenewable | |
| Nuclear | big output, relatively harmless | radioactive waste, public fear, not many jobs | |
| Solar | harmless to environment, easy, renewable | not many jobs, dependent on weather, expensive to implement | |
| Hydroelectric | renewable, no pollution, pay for itself | destructive to river ecosystem, costly to build, dependent on water coming in | |
| MSW | renewable, reduces CO2 & CH4 emissions, puts garbage to use | expensive | |
| Wind | renewable, environmentally friendly, once you buy it you have it | not feasible in all areas, dependent on consistent wind, expensive | |
| Geothermal | renewable, comparable to hydroelectric, no air pollution | location dependent, damages environment, expensive | |
| Biomass | cheap, semi-renewable | burning causes pollution |
-it is cool
-best renewable resource--most reliable and widespread
-can be shared among utilities
-the production can be spread out over all homes, businesses
Questions:
-What dangers are there in extracting gases in the MSW program?POWER OPTIONS (Post)-How cost-efficient is the MSW program?
-How long does garbage continue to emit gases? Can the same dump be used to produce power forever? If not how long?
-How much electricity does each solar panel provide?
-What are the waste products in the production of solar panels?
-How much does it cost for an individual to install solar panels?
-Has the cost of the solar panels had a negative effect on the eagerness of homeowners to purchase them?
-How many homeowners will need to purchase solar panels for a majority of Sacramento's power to be solar?
-What would be the hypothetical effects of a lightning strike on an individual solar panel?
Rachel: do not rely completely on solar; use other renewable resources as wellHeather: can we say that? :-)
-majority renewable, but have lots of optionsJeff: homes have solar, nuclear for nighttime, cloudy days. Pay for it by the government surplus-solar panels on buildings, not on corn
Kristie: solar, keep trying to develop storage, educate people, use other renewable resources
Elena: the government won't support solar until they can tax it
Adam: solar panels on buildings, use nuclear for the night time and cloudy days, hydro for power spurts. Dams should not be removed as a rule, but case by case: if they can be environmentally improved, do it. MSW is good, need to deposit garbage
Solar power is definitely our first choice. We feel that all homes and buildings should have solar panels on the roofs, with the government subsidizing the panels' construction. However, we recognize that solar panels cannot be used during the night or during cloudy days, so we recommend that nuclear power be used to replace the coal and oil that supplies night-time power. Hydroelectric power should continue to be used to supply power spurts during peak times. There should be no more dams built, but the present dams should be improved to meet environmental standards and to lessen the effect of the dam on the river it blocks. Other renewable sources of power should be explored. MSW can be used as supplementary to large urban areas where there is a lot of trash. Geothermal is expensive, biomass is pointless, and wind needs to be improved. The public must be educated about the safety and reliability of nuclear power as well as the availability of fuel. The safety of the storage of spent nuclear fuel is also something that needs to be conveyed to the general public.
What energy sources should the US use in the future?
Louise Boland, Robyn Baas, Josh Sundquist, Ned Gearing, Katy MeltonWe suggest solar panels on all houses that will sustain the houses' energy needs during daylight hours. The government will make this economically feasible for the resident by providing the photovoltaic panels at a reduced price by buying/building the panels in bulk and also by giving the residents tax exemptions for buying photovoltaic panels. When a household's panels produce more energy than they use, the excess energy will be returned to the grid and will be subtracted from the energy they use in the evening from other sources.
For the evening hours when the photovoltaic panels will not be of use, we suggest the use of nuclear power as well as the use of hydroelectric power through existing dams. We do not believe that nuclear power is dangerous to the public because of the low amounts of radiation that nuclear power plants emit while in production, the legal levels of radiation emission are a small fraction of the background radiation that we are subjected to on a yearly basis. We also believe nuclear power to be a clean, efficient, economical and reliable source of energy for the United States.
Those who cannot afford to purchase photovoltaic panels for their home, or live in an environment that does not collect enough sunlight to make a photovoltaic panel efficient, will get their energy supply from the nuclear and hydroelectric power plants as well as from the excess of photovoltaic energy that will be returned to the grid as families use less than they make with their panels.
In addition to the previous plans, we propose to continue research and development of the procedure of converting the energy stored in landfills as methane gas into useable energy. We would like to use this form of renewable energy in the future but feel that at this time it is not profitable.
As a group we decided that solar power is the most feasible power source. Along with solar we would have hydroelectric power as a foundation and biomass as an experimental energy source.Most of the power would come from solar. We will use hydropower to carry our baseload requirements as it is the most reliable and renewable resource. Biomass is designated experimental because the actual amount of land needed to be cultivated at this time is unknown. Municipal waste energy generation is promising because much of the nation's landfills are untapped and contain large quantities of energy producing methane with limited environmental impacts (it burns cleaner than natural gas).
The promising solar technologies are capable of producing our nation's electricity with further development. Our limiting factor is not being able to store the energy efficiently. Solar power is extremely expensive because there is not a sufficient market in the status quo. Through litigation process we will require energy companies to develop solar energy resources. If power companies invest in the market, they will encourage market growth which will result in technology development and improvement. These advances will make solar panels on the roof of every home a reality.