So because it was brought up in a previous blog post of mine, I thought Id bring up a new debate to the engineering world, and that is the discussion of green energy. There is a lot of political push for eco-friendly technologies, and energy production is a huge part of it. In the next 50 years we are looking at growing to a population of 9 billion. To put that in perspective, the estimated population cap is around 10 billion. How are we supposed to provide for that many people and still keep the planet clean? Obviously the consideration of eco friendly energies is a valid point, but we need to understand the efficiency behind each of these energy sources before we can consider them to be a solution.

Lets start with the three obvious ones, in order of efficiency. First of the bat, we have the almighty hydroelectric power. This is arguably the most efficient machine man has built (next to that magical steam engine if you read my lasts post ), given that it requires nothing but the flow of water. This flow can come in different forms, but lets start with hydroelectric dams. Hydroelectric dams are pretty dam cool, given they are naturally resupplied by the earths water cycle. This means we maximize the amount of energy produced, because we have near unlimited resupply to the input of the dam. The issue is that we have already dammed every river that is possible to build a dam on. The other form would be to harness tidal motion in oceans and oceanic currents. This is a very inefficient method of creating energy, as you would have to cover the entire Gulf of Mexico in buoys before you have enough energy to power a city. Ocean current turbines are a better solution, but these too lack the efficiency required to power a small city.

Wind energy! Something that has been used almost since the dawn of man. Its a simple concept, efficient in theory for powering small areas, but when we get to a larger scale, things become much more interesting. If we were to power the entire US of A on wind energies, we would have to cover both North and South Dakoda in turbines (assuming the standard turbine that is in use is utilized, switching to a space efficient Vertical Tower Turbine would change this statistic.) While the space exists to do such a thing, the price is not very reasonable. the cost to build that many turbines would be more than the cost of the energy they produce.

Last but not least, that illusive solar energy. This is the only way of generating electricity without a generator, which is truly a marvel in itself. The only problem we encounter with solar energy, is that it is big and HOT. Enough panels in one area could actually melt the energy pylon, and this is often why not all panels are put in perfect alignment to the energy pylon. Also the amount of space needed for one of these things is monumental, not even to mention the cost.(Again, this is assuming a reflective solar power plant, which is the highest efficiency plant we have.)

So we have these green energies that are nice for the environment, but not so nice to our wallets. While there are some efficiencies and bonuses to these energy solutions, the benefits do not outweigh the costs.

So what these were the facts, but where do you stand in the discussion of green energies, are they worth investing in and developing? Or should we go in a different dirtection entirely? Post your thoughts below!