Coal Power vs. Solar Power
Every time we hear of another mining tragedy, we cringe and ask ourselves “why are we still using coal for energy?” Coal energy has been around for centuries, and is still less-expensive to produce than solar or other alternative energy sources. Despite this, it is a dirty fuel that pollutes the air, water and land. In addition, it also creates a high amount of waste that must be disposed of.
The good news is, however, that with each new discovery and advancement in solar technology, we are growing closer to putting the use of coal behind us once and for all. After all, would you relish the idea of spending day-after-day in the dark recesses of the earth when you could be working in a clean, bright solar plant above ground?
In 2007 alone, over 50 new coal-fired plants were cancelled or delayed because of growing concerns over global warming and transportation costs. January 18, 2008 Los Angeles Times article. Coal fuel currently provides over 50% of our electricity nationwide. If we slow production, what are the alternatives? Nuclear fuel is still quite controversial, and natural gas is not reliable, so that leaves alternative power sources such as wind and solar power.
Essentially, we need a lasting solution to our energy problems. No “quick-fixes” will suffice any longer. We have the needed technology, more resources just need to be focused on making solar power more affordable and sustainable for homeowners and businesses. We have clean, replenishing replacements for the fossil fuels, why not be doing all that we can to further their usage and development? For far too long, alternative energy development has been hindered by political roadblocks. Be sure to let your voice be heard; contact your local and state officials and let them know what the desires of their constituents actually are. At the same time, work to incorporate solar energy into your own home.
Posted on August 14th in Solar Electric, Solar Information by Anna.
December 27th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Dream on. Solar is inefficient and dependent on abundant sunshine. Much of the USA is quite cloudy during certain times of the year. Coal is far lest costly and reliable and the upper midwest states like Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin is heavily serviced by coal plants. The infrastructure is in place and it would be disastrously costly, not to mention foolish and dangerous to dismantle it in favor of costly and experimental technologies.
This says nothing of the hoax upon which the “alternative energy” green movement is based. Man made global warming is merely the invention of politically motivated scientists that have succeeded in whipping up media attention. Anyone with a High School education knows that the Earth has been significantly warmer and cooler in the past 5000 years, much of which preceded the Industrial Revolution when mankind began emitting increased carbon into the atmosphere.
There is no correlation between carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and temperatures recorded on earth.
So the bottom line is, solar is costly and unreliable, but “greenie weenies” are forcing it on us through environmental legislation. They don’t care about the cost to human beings, they are only concerned with their “religious” cause to “save the planet”. In their twisted logic, its ok if people freeze to death in places like Wisconsin now for lack of coal fired power plants, so that the Earth doesn’t warm-up from C02, thus making Earth better for all of mankind and animals.
I have no problem with any alternative energy source that is cleaner. We all want a clean environment. However, the technology must be developed and found to be at least as efficient before it is forced into the market place.
Higher energy bills that result from environmental laws that force power companies to use “alternative” energy production technologies are nothing more than a tax implemented in favor of the political desires of crypto-Marxists dressed up as Environmentalists and Climatologists.
December 29th, 2009 at 10:01 am
what about oil vs coal energy
January 21st, 2010 at 5:33 am
Santa Anna sounds like one of the most ignorant people on the planet.
January 31st, 2010 at 4:17 pm
I like the solar idea but its true that it is not reliable in some areas in the world or parts of the year…if they figure out how to contain solar energy fo long periods of time THAT would be the enviromental discovery of the 21st century – or at least one of them.
March 3rd, 2010 at 11:49 pm
Responding to Santa Anna when she says “Anyone with a High School education knows that the Earth has been significantly warmer and cooler in the past 5000 years, much of which preceded the Industrial Revolution when mankind began emitting increased carbon into the atmosphere.
There is no correlation between carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and temperatures recorded on earth.” This isn’t true I am in high School now and I know more and she is partially right. Yes the Earth has been significantly warmer and cooler in the past 5000 years and yes the temperature was going up before the industrial revaluation but because of the Industrial Revolution has made it worse. We have added to the effect. And yes there is correlation between Carbon dioxide and the temperatures on earth. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which is necessary for life on earth. Without the green house gases the planet would be too cold for anything to live. But we have added green house gases to the atmosphere and green house gases absorb and radiate heat back to earth. Now what it’s supposed to be is 50% of the heat escapes back out of the atmosphere and 50% gets radiated back but we’ve changed that by adding Carbon dioxide to the atmosphere along with other greenhouse gases more of that heat gets radiated back. And this isn’t global warming the more accurate term is global climate change for all of you saying how the East cost got all that snow and so Earth couldn’t possibly be warming because of that. But actually with the earth warming it could send us into an ice age. This makes no sense you say thats what i thought at first but then i discovered the reason for it, by the earth warming that means the oceans warming which mean that warmer water would eventually make its way to the ice caps and when it gets there it melts the ice making the oceans temperatures drop significantly lowering the earths temperature over all hence causing an ice age. Now even if this didn’t happen there are other possibilities which might just happen along the way of the ice age. First off when something gets warmer it expands so if the oceans got warmer they would expand which would mean rising ocean level flooding low lying coastal areas. Weather patterns would change, rainfall patterns would change so much would happen i can’t even remember it all. Also when you say solar is dependent on abundant sunshine thats not true, solar panels even work on cloudy days it has been proven and there are so many areas such as California when it is sunny most of the time which means you can crank out lots of energy from them. Also form what i know this information is a little shaky though i’m not sure coal I don’t believe is the safest area to work in and it would create jobs if you try to set up more renewable energy sources. And with a lot of things you can make things more energy efficient there fore not needing as much coal. And those in the North wouldn’t freeze energy would be provided for heating systems which can be made more efficient thus not needing as much energy of any kind.
May 5th, 2010 at 9:32 am
Santa Anna, I just want you to know that I posted this on facebook and read it to my friends, and we all had a good laugh at your uneducated views. Thanks for the entertainment
July 19th, 2010 at 8:37 am
So to the uniformed intellectually stunted people who feel that solar power is somehow inefficient. Germany, who is the world leader in solar harvesting, has the climate of Astoria Oregon. Since I know you have no idea what that mean because you are ignorant of most things in the world I will inform you that Astoria’s climate is cloudier than Seattle or Portland.
August 25th, 2010 at 7:16 am
It’s the environment stupid!
The issue isn’t global warming, the issue is that we are approaching a maximum sustainable population of 9.5 billion in 2050.
Health care benefits are out of control as we spend our life savings & social benefits to prolong life.
At the same time, all around us people poison our resources necessary to sustain life.
That reminds me of a movie where John Candy was playing racquet ball while drinking a beer and smoking a cigarette. You laugh and cry for the guy.
Why not use polluted lands for solar energy? You can’t grow food or live on them.
Many of the polluted locations are where we live and work. Here’s an article on Coal Ash Spill Locations: http://articles.pvsolarsalestraining.com/articles.php?CoalVersusSolarPower
Everyone needs food, shelter, clothing & energy to live now and in “retirement”.
If not you, who? If not now, when? Good luck to you Santa Anna.
September 22nd, 2010 at 12:57 pm
There is a correlation between greenhouse gasses and temperature, but if we look at it from a historical perspective (not including the time since the industrial revolution, and most of the man made pollution), does it make sense that temperature was controlled by the amount of CO2 in the air, or that the amount of CO2 in the air was affected by the temperature. To me it seems like a more logical that the temperature would cause changes in the amount of CO2 in the air. The amount of heat would change the amount of animals that live or die, and how much oxygen is produced by the trees etc. Now we have unnatural amounts of CO2 and other gasses in the air/atmosphere, and the heat has risen, but if it had followed the same correlation it had in the past the temperature would be MUCH greater then it is now.
While I agree that there is probably some effect from the amount of greenhouse gasses on temperature, I personally think we were already in a warming trend and we may have contributed to the warming trend, only time will tell how much was caused by us.
On a totally separate note, people seem to have it in their brain that if someone does not believe in global warming, that they are against the environment. Regardless of how much/if global warming occurs, we should stop polluting the earth. I personally am happy that people believe in global warming whether it is true or not because it has helped spur the green movement.
September 22nd, 2010 at 2:37 pm
JoYu, I think you nailed it on the head in your last paragraph. Despite ones belief on “global warming” it is important that we cut our pollution (smog is still bad, whether it’s causing warming or not) and why not make moves toward renewable resources? We don’t have to worry about them running out (another debate for/against “peak oil”) and, arguably more important, we don’t have to depend on foreign countries to supply our demand (feeding money into the hands of questionable leaders, such as in Iraq and Venezuela).
September 26th, 2010 at 1:44 pm
Here’s the bottom line: Fossil Fuels are going to run out and they pollute, killing animals and people alike without prejudice. Either we correct and learn from our mistakes now or there won’t be a human race in a hundred years. It’s not only about saving the planet from us, the Earth will survive us. It’s about saving it so it’s still habitable for us to live on.
October 21st, 2010 at 12:27 pm
[...] there is a few people who aren’t. Coal companies. Check out this article written on August 14 about the battle between coal and solar energy. As the article states, more [...]
January 5th, 2011 at 4:24 am
[...] does all this have to do with solar energy? Almost everything, in that it is indicative of this country’s gradual turning away from a pollutive energy past and [...]