One of the main problems of the new millennium is the energy supply. What to do?
The argument is often not clear, but we see can be explained. First the problem must be divided into two: how to get energy, and what is spent on energy. From the latter question, I explain my analysis of the facts.
The energy is often wasted, used badly. Just look at how we waste every day with energy appliances on standby lights on forgetting, or simply having appliances with high energy consumption. Not to mention that local light pollution, roads, etc., producing the night. It should be from an early age to get used to a culture of cutting wasteful (This is where you should cut on the waste), and energy use for the community should be rethought.
As for how the different aspects must be analyzed, but first things first! Meanwhile, by connecting the first example of the model is wrong. We always think that a greater consumption we want something that gives more power, and the model is a big and powerful central source by the people. Wrong. In case of failure in the central region, thousands of people are affected, while the model is to be installed is a range for each part (house, street, etc..), To form a network, such as the Internet. By connecting these first two arguments should be efficiency and energy independence.
entering the last part you can already see from these first steps for a practical energy solution is the use of forms of energy such as solar, wind, etc.., Rather than a nuclear power plant, gas, coal.
Now look at the history of energy since 1800. The coal and gas are very outdated because they pollute a lot with the emission of CO2. Then we moved to the first generation of nuclear power, replaced by the new generation. The difference is that the former do not provide any security to the central part of the plant, while the second is a concrete sarcophagus that covers part of the risk of melting. The problems of nuclear power are many: 1) a first for any problems there may be a radioactive leak from the plant (and these incidents do happen every year), 2) the problem of waste, there is no place on earth where you put them, and it takes thousands of years in order to neutralize, 3) there is still a small percentage (which, although small, is not trivial) is that level of serious accidents happen, Chernobyl-style, making the area radioactive for thousands of years above the average (with all its consequences), 4) the consequence of point 2 and 3 is not economically agree (in fact the private companies that have invested long life, the States are in debt to the world and there is no assurance on nuclear power). 5) We also would like a building of thousands of plants for countries like Italy to ensure a total coverage (all risk of terrorism before, not counting the above). These forms of energy listed have a defect: they are limited. Also looking at Italy, they nonetheless create a dependency on a foreign state to have the raw material (uranium, coal, etc..), So do not even count the factor of economic independence. Continuing with the story switched to biomass, which are based on incinerators to burn waste for energy, and they are unlimited as long as humans continue to produce waste. They have a problem burning waste results in the emission of dioxins, dangerous for humans! So what did we get to the renewable and clean energy: solar, wind, geothermal, hydro, etc.. Are unlimited and do not produce pollution. The problem is that it slowed primarily by business people who tend to obscure the sources in the market (but lately the price drops), and which do not produce much energy, so they are made in large scale (going back to the discourse of ' energy in the form of network and independence the problem is almost solved). Finally there are the usual rumors and stereotypes such as polluting the panels for their disposal, that the wind ruin the environment, etc.. The point is that these problems are minor, meaning that the pollution caused by energy production in the previous cases, while the problems are not related directly to energy. I explain with two examples and conclude the post: 1) for the disposal of waste already exist photovoltaic solar panels that do not produce waste and are therefore 100% recyclable, 2) wind turbines that are made with a special design that are made useful and nice.
I hope I was clear!