Power Your Home With Solar Energy and Wind
Energy has been a main concern of our global leaders. We use up a lot of non-recyclable fuel to heat up our own homes. Of course, heating up our homes is a need. When the weather is cold, we all need heat to stay warm and comfortable. The problem is not with the heating. The problem is the use of non-recyclable fuels to power our heating. Here is an example.
Many homes are powered by heating systems that use oil or gas either directly or indirectly. Those that use oil or gas indirectly are systems that use electricity. And where does the electricity come from? That’s right, they come from power stations that are powered by oil.
As oil is a non-renewable resource, using of oil in huge quantities have been a growing concern among many nations. The question is, what happens when the oil runs out? Then what are we going to use to power our heating systems? As oil becomes more and more scarce, and demand continues to increase, there is only one way that the price will head – upwards. Then again, what happens if we can no longer afford to use oil to heat up our homes?
These are lingering questions at the back of everyone’s mind, one that has no simple solution. However, some people have already started to come up with innovative ideas to overcome these challenges.
Conceptually, the heating problem is a simple one. You need three components in the entire system. One, you need to have a way to convert a renewable energy source into electricity. Two, you need something to store the electricity in. And three, you need a system to convert the electricity into heat energy, which is then transferred throughout the house.
The last part is the easy part. It’s the first two components that most people can’t overcome.
For the first component, you can use solar panels or wind turbines to tap into natural sources of energy – the sun and the wind. Such energy sources are infinite and can go on forever and ever. Also, they are a Free Energy source. That means if you have a system that taps into these energy sources, you can save a lot on utilities bills.
To trap Solar Energy, you will need a few solar panels. How many you need depends on the amount of energy you want to tap. The same goes for wind turbines. The energy is then converted into electricity, and stored in batteries. Now you can use the electricity to help you heat up the home.
The entire system sounds really costly to setup because of the mention of solar panels and batteries. Also, some people think that the setting up is complicated, so they don’t even try. But there is help readily available for those who bother to look and try things out. You can always invest in a DIY guide on how to create power from the sun and the wind.
If you set up the system yourself, you save on installation costs. Once the system is up and running, you now have an environmentally friendly house that saves you money month after month.
Gen Wright
http://www.articlesbase.com/diy-articles/power-your-home-with-solar-energy-and-wind-698571.html
Philip L says:
U.S. Nuclear power – more pros and some cons?
Location to residential areas: They could be built on the same location to replace conventional coal and oil power plants. Nuclear plants don’t not pollute the local air.
Terrorist attack: Unlikely- they were designed during the cold war to withstand nuclear missile attacks.
Nuclear waste disposal: U.S. has plenty of unpopulated areas for this. Not the greatest solution, but better than having Florida underwater in a few hundred years due to global warming.
Electromagnetic radiation: no more that current elctric power plants.
Solar and wind energy are not feasable since neither would provide suffieceint power to heat your home and drive your car. With Nulcear both would go electric.
Zebra4 says:
I think Washington state provides an excellent agreement with your points here–especially after their recent sustained blackouts due to not having nuclear power plants.
References :
glassnegman says:
Hello =)
Whatever the downsides of Nuclear Power, we must address them at once, and replace all fossil fuel burning electric plants as soon as possible.
The "few hundred years" you speak of is no longer realistic for the polar ice caps to disappear. It seems likely within this coming century…maybe within 50 years……
Wind farms are taking their place nationwide. It makes good sense, where possible, but we could never supply all of our power from wind, and reduction in consumption is not a realistic goal. Of course we make appliances more and more efficient, but at the same time, we keep adding "gadgets" to our "necessities" list. The end result is that our power consumption increases. 75 years ago, 25 amp service was sufficient in all households. 50 years ago, 100 amp service was sufficient. Now, our "standard" is 200 amp, but that is becoming insufficient in many cases. Yet governments talk of "conservation" as a plausible means of reducing greenhouse emissions?? I don’t hardly think so….
Russia has opened many waste storage facilities for Nuclear wastes. They have more unusable land than anyone else in the world. They also need the money. I don’t really see waste disposal as a serious issue any longer. Russia also has the capacity to "reprocess" nuclear wastes into low-grade fuels. We have never developed this technology. This sort of "nuclear recycling" can help boost Russia’s economy, while reducing the amount of waste that has to be stored over the long term.
Namaste,
–Tom
References :
magpiesmn says:
the problem will become self evident if you understand what happens when you put AC voltage around a DC battery. Then compair what the earth looks like voltage wise compaired to the power generators we make on it. Also nuke plants make alot of super heated water that has an effect on global warming too.
References :
Nobody K says:
The problem with nuclear power is that it is unsustainable. Nuclear power relies on uranium which is being mined out rapidly. At current rates, uranium will be gone on this planet in less than 50 years, and if we build a bunch more nuclear power plants that number would drop even more. In order to replace oil, the U.S. would have to build at least 1,000 more nuclear plants costing $3 billion dollars per plant. That’s huge. Then there’s the task of replacing all the gas powered vehicles out there with electric powered ones. That conversion process would take many decades and we would be out of uranium by then.
On the subject of nuclear waste, I believe nothing justifies dumping it into the ground. That’s just as disgusting as global warming, and I wouldn’t choose between those two evils.
Oil is going away quickly too, and nothing can replace it. No one will be using oil in 40 years because it will be too expensive to extract in that time. Without oil this industrialized world of 6.5 billion people will stop running. I look forward to this. Industrialized civilization is an ugly world.
References :
Gabe says:
Let me preface this with I LOVE green generation and promote it.
However, I power up 20% of Virginia from nuclear powered generation. We operate as base load plants. That means we are always at 100% power. Why? Because even with the cost of all the regulatory required oversight, training and licensing, engineering and security measures; we are simply the Lowest cost producer of electricity in the industry. Yes, this includes the cost of storage for our waste fuel. One day the Federal government will make good on the promise of a final storage place and our cost per Mega Watt Hour will go down even further.
(P.S. there is no such thing as super heated water…its steam and we don’t release it, some places may evaporate a lot of water in cooling towers but it comes right back when it rains)
Recap:
Nuclear plants cost less to operate than fossil plants.
Nuclear plants cost less to build (per unit of electricity generated) than renewable sources of the same capacity such as solar or wind.
Nuclear plants can produce much larger amounts of generation in the same environmental area as a wind farm/solar plant.
Nuclear plants have higher capacity factors (more likely to be making electricity) than most other plants.
Nuclear plants do not affect the environment around them such as some hydro power networks.
Waste nuclear fuel storage has a smaller footprint than your trash, is less hazardous than your medical waste, and once in its final resting place can never be more dangerous than a big hunk of hot steel.
References :
Don’t believe me come on down and I’ll give you a tour.