Emily Mellinger
Geothermal Energy for Green Data Centers
by: Zen Kishimoto
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, data center power consumption doubled from 2000 to 2006, and will most likely continue to double about every five years if we don’t do something to slow down the consumption. We talk a lot about using renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power, but what we have not considered is geothermal energy, that is the heat produced deep within the Earth. Companies are known to avoid using certain types of renewable energy because of the cost, but geothermal energy is not as expensive as other renewable energy sources. In this course we talk a lot about looking for different ways of doing things to benefit our environment more, well this is one of those ways. Geothermal energy is much safer than nuclear energy and is very abundant where it is available. I know that I feel guilty using too much electricity in my house sometimes, so it would be great if I knew that the company supplying my power was using a cheaper and smarter renewable energy source. Populations around the world are growing rapidly and more and more people are using large amounts of energy, so if there is any way for us to be able to use more energy from renewable sources rather than nonrenewable ones we need to take advantage of that. That is why geothermal energy is another solution to add to the list of ways to slow down the waste of energy around the world.
Kelsey Salembier
The Red Faces of Solar Skeptics by Nancy Folbre
In previous years, solar photovoltaics has been viewed as a "boutique fantasy," feeling that it costs more than it's worth. But in today's world, solar-powered energy has improved environmentally and economically which threatens power source companies who use fossil fuels and nuclear energy. The price of solar panels decreased by 60% and have made the same amount of energy as some nuclear plants. More companies are using solar panels and now with a shorter payback period, middle class families can now afford them. Now that public subsides are given to solar-energy users, the cost for solar panels and decreased. But the US still fund nuclear power plants construction, even after plant disasters have occurred, like in Japan. Solar photovoltaics are still cost effective in Europe even though demand is mostly driven by economics instead of receiving subsidies. Actually unsubsidized solar energy has been able to supply as much as 18% of Germany's, Spain's, and Italy's energy. The use of photovoltaic technologies has been used by households to power air conditioning and other utilities, as wells being invested in by Google, Apple, and Microsoft. Public support for solar power has reached its goal which causes development to continue to increase. Solar installations have created many more jobs (143,000 in 2013) from being relatively labor intensive. Carbon taxes more be more successful in promoting solar power than subsidies, but for now it's the appropriate action. Overall solar energy is becoming more affordable as well as many a greater positive impact on the environment.
Haley Signorelli
Coal gasification: The clean energy of the future? By: Richard Anderson
Coal is the world's main source of power, providing a quarter of our primary energy and more than 40% of our electricity. Coal is a very cheap source of energy but burning fossil fuels is terrible for the environment. In order to prevent the pollution caused by burning fossil fuels, a method called coal gasification was created. Instead of burning the fossil fuel, it is chemically transformed into synthetic natural gas. The National Energy Administration has plans to produce 50 billion meters of gas from coal by 2020, which is enough to satisfy more than 10% of China's total gas demand. However, coal gasification actually produces more carbon dioxide than a traditional coal plant. The International Energy Agency said, "It can be a nice solution to local pollution, but its overall carbon intensity is worse [than coal mining], so it is not attractive at all from a climate change point of view". The industry claims that the coal can be accessed “cleanly” by pumping oxygen and steam through a small hole into the coal seam to produce small, controlled combustion. The actual coal is converted from a solid state into gas. The hydrogen, methane, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide is then siphoned off through a second hole. In the long run, this could relate to all of us because pollution will slowly decrease making the air healthier for us to breathe. In class we discuss how to make the environment healthier and what we can do to stop or prevent pollution which is exactly what coal gasification is trying to do. I think that this is a great idea to take the place of burning fossil fuels. Even though it may not be as successful as some people think, I think it would be worth a shot to try to slow down pollution in any way possible.
Sara Callahan
Production of corn ethanol as an automotive fuel source should cease By: Mark J. Perry
Throughout the years, ethanol energy from corn has been shining a very positive outlook on the overuse of energy and global warming in our environment. However, recently, ethanol energy may not be the best type of energy. In this article, the author emphasizes that ethanol's effects may outweigh out its benefits. According to the Automobile Association, ethanol E15, 15% alcohol and 85% gasoline, has detrimental effects on the car’s engine and cause failure. If a car’s engine fails, it can have costly effects on consumers, or worse, can cause fatal accidents if something goes wrong with the car while driving. This raises the question of whether Congress should repeal the use of ethanol energy from corn, and it most are leaning towards repealing.While ethanol is energy efficient, it takes copious amounts of it for it to work effectively. This raises the question of whether ethanol should even be considered an alternative fuel source. Would fossil fuels be any worse? It takes time and money to extract ethanol, and now currently has effects on our car’s engine that may outweigh the benefits. This relates to me personally because every day I drive to school, if my car was running on that energy I would be scared that something could happen to my car, or cause me to get in an accident. This relates to the topics we’re discussing in class because we are always researching alternatives that do not pollute the earth and use less energy. Well, if this alternative source may end up being worse, then more research has to be done on other alternatives that can be used.
Discussion Questions:
1. After reading the articles, which energy resource do you think is the most environmentally friendly?
2. If solar energy has become cheaper and is safer for the environment, why do you think that so many people don’t use it to power their homes?
3. So many power companies don’t want to use safer energy because it is more expensive, would you rather pay an energy company that saves money or saves the environment? In other words, is it more important to think about how we will be affected right now or in the future?
Works Cited
Anderson, Richard. "Gas from Coal: The Future or
Fantasy?" BBC News. BBC, 14 Apr. 2014. Web. 18 Apr. 2014.
<http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26921145>.
Folbre, Nancy. "The Red Faces of the Solar
Skeptics." The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 10 Mar.
2014. Web. 18 Apr. 2014.
<http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/10/the-red-faces-of-the-solar-skeptics/?ref=solarenergy>.
Kishimoto, By.
"Geothermal Energy for Green Data Centers." Geothermal Energy for
Green Data Centers - AltaTerra Research. AltaTerra Research, 30 Mar. 2009.
Web. 18 Apr. 2014. <http://www.altaterra.net/blogpost/288668/63061/Geothermal-Energy-for-Green-Data-Centers>.
Perry, Mark J. "Production of Corn Ethanol as an
Automotive Fuel Source Should Cease." AEI. American Enterprise
Institute for Public Policy Research, 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 18 Apr. 2014.
<http://www.aei.org/article/energy-and-the-environment/alternative-energy/production-of-corn-ethanol-as-an-automotive-fuel-source-should-cease/>.
I think geothermal energy is the most efficient out of all the types mentioned. Unlike solar power, it is more readily available since the heat can be found within the earth, even at night, while solar energy can only be collected during the day. Geothermal energy is fairly new and renewable, which provides it an advantage over oil or coal which are limited. Also, geothermal power is confined to a plant while solar energy uses large solar farms, which are exposed and more prone to damage. Unlike fracking, it can be done on shallower surfaces five to ten feet deep and requires no unnatural pumping of chemicals. Overall, it is a clean and sustainable energy source, which should see more use in the future.
ReplyDeleteI think that nuclear power is the type of energy that we should pursue, because I think our world could come to rely on it as we phase out use of coal, oil, natural gas, and other traditional forms. Nuclear power is safer than ever as new technologies allow plants to be almost foolproof and safe from terrorist attacks and human error. Although the capital initially needed may be hefty, I think the benefits far outweigh the miniscule negatives. The reason why this type of power is not prevalent is because of public fear which is misled and special interest groups. I think this type of energy is where our future resides.
ReplyDeleteI think that there are a few reasons why people do not commonly use solar energy. For one, the initial cost of a solar panel is pretty large, even if panels are becoming cheaper. Another reason might be because they are big and not that aesthetically pleasing. The main reason though, I think, is that people are just not used to them yet and do not really care about the environment as much as they should. It is more normal to just get your power from the power company like everyone else; solar panels probably do not even cross the minds of people buying new homes.
ReplyDeleteThe most environmentally friendly energy resource is probably geothermal or solar. In terms of application geothermal is the better option. This is due to the fact the the Earth will always be hot so extracting energy is always gonna be available. Where as during nights and days of low sunlight, solar energy is not going to be easy to come across. Geothermal is much more reliable and in terms of availability more abundant. Both have close to no bad by products, although geothermal plants can potentially have carbon dioxide emissions. Although geothermal has some pollution tied to it, it is in no way close to the pollution created by natural gas production. In conclusion, solar is the most environmentally friendly options, while geothermal is the most efficient.
ReplyDeleteRegarding question 2, I think that there are a few reasons why people don't commonly use it to power their homes. I think that the largest part of that is education. People know about solar energy, but not enough to seriously consider using it to power their own homes. If they knew of the benefits solar energy reaps, it would become more popular in residential areas. Another thing preventing people from powering their homes with solar energy is media. The media often shows large business and corporations who converted to solar energy. People don't make the connection between those businesses and their own homes, and don't consider solar energy when weighing their options. If mass media made more of an emphasis on solar energy use in residential areas, it would become more commonly used to power homes.
ReplyDeleteThe world continues to use non-renewable resources to run their countries. Resources like coal, fossil fuels, and natural gas are non-renewable and they arent very environmentally friendly. Although they are the main source of energy used throughout the world, we should take steps in using clean renewable energy. Energy made from wind and solar power would be the best solution. These things never go away so the energy would be very abundant. It would also be very efficient. Steps in making it easier to get this energy should be taken so this can replace unhealthy energy resources like fossil fuel.
ReplyDeleteI think power companies need to balance electricity bills and conserve the environment at the same time. Therefore I would like power companies to mainly use safer energy but still use fossil fuels as a back up and and a means to balance the cost of electricity. This way we have fossil fuels for a longer time and the price of electricity would not be too high.
ReplyDeleteI think there are several reasons for people not commonly using solar energy as their main power source in their homes. One reason being that the initial cost to install the solar panels tends to be very expensive. Another reason that it might not be used often is because people aren't very aware of its benefits and because its not common everyone tends to stick with the same kind of energy that has always been used. In regard to question 3, I believe that at the rate our country is going at with destroying the environment we need to focus on the future. I would much rather pay a company that is doing good than saving themselves money. With so many environmental issues on the rise it is important to consider what we will need for the future and adjust accordingly now.
ReplyDeleteOne of the main reasons people are not transitioning to more environmentally friendly energies is due to the accessibility and lower costs of using fossil fuels. This is due to the fact that for many decades fossil fuels have been the main source of energy and our entire society is built to maintain that tradition. In order for people to change they are going to need to find ways to push these new energies onto people and make it a worthy change.
ReplyDeleteI think more people arent switching over to solar power due to the lack of awareness and start up costs also the amount of panels you would need would take up space on your roof or yard. The start up costs for buying the solar panels is significantly more then continuing to use fossils fuels. Solar Energy is not as commonly known as fossil fuels. The amaount of solar panels it would require for you to power your house could be too many to handle.
ReplyDeleteI personally believe the environment is more important than saving money because when you think about it on a larger scales you really are saving a lot more by helping the environment than be keeping a few extra dollars in your pocket. Keeping the world a livable place ought to take higher priority in both the consumers and the business's eyes. We need to starting looking to what we will have in the future if we continue how we consume energy now. Right now that isn't a bright future and there needs be more done to make sure that we can save the future of our world. Would you rather save money when the plant will too far gone to use that money, or not have extra money but still be able to breath the air and drink the water?
ReplyDeleteI would rather pay a company that saves the environment. By trying to save a few bucks companies are only thinking short-term. We must learn to think long-term, instead. If companies are only focused on cutting costs and saving money, the money they are saving will be worthless in the end if the environment is deteriorating. There will be nothing left to spend money on. By taking measures to help save the environment, we would be conserving resources for not only present but also future use.
ReplyDeleteThe reason why solar energy isn't as common is because of the expensive start up costs. One solar panel costs more than $200 to install land will not reduce costs immediately. When solar panels can become more energy efficent, then solar power will become the standard.
ReplyDeleteI think that people are hesitant to switch to solar power energy generators because they are more expensive, and we have a cheaper source of energy that is working right now. I believe though, that the more informed people are about the pros and cons of using the solar power energy generators, the more people will slowly start to switch over. The environmental benefits prove to be far better in the long run and the fact that it's a renewable resource makes the startup cost worth the investment.
ReplyDeleteI think the main reason people are less willing to use solar power energy is due to the start-up costs of solar panels. People are unaware and not educated well enough on the topic to know the long term benefits of solar power energy and how worth it the start up costs are compared to fossil fuel energy. Solar panels can also be a lot more effort to maintain and they take up a lot of space if you were to buy enough to power everything you need. Also I would rather pay an energy company that save the environment than a company that saves money because if we don't start thinking about the future and start making changes as soon as possible, we could face some serious issues environmentally and economically. These issues could even occur in our lifetime if we're not careful.
ReplyDelete