Should plans to fight global warming prioritize solar energy?

  • I support prioritizing solar energy to combat global warming because it has no pollution or side effects.

    Solar energy is the cleanest source of power available. There is no pollution, no reliance on wind and no obstruction of rivers. The sun shines everyday. Solar cell technology is getting advanced enough to store daylight generated power for use through the night. Also, solar cells are getting advanced enough to harness sunlight even on cloudy days. It's never cloudy across the whole country all at once, either. A national solar network could mean energy independence.

    Posted by: FlakyHerb64
  • Reducing carbon emissions by using solar energy should take place, because the sun provides a vast amount of energy.

    Solar energy should be used to fight global warming. While current efficiencies are low, enough sunlight falls on the earth every hour to power it for a full year. This is thermodynamically free energy and should, therefore, be taken advantage of, in terms of freeing ourselves from carbon emissions. Also, this type of power has many venues for its use.

    Posted by: NauseatingAbdul53
  • Plans to minimize the effects of global warming are a temporary fix. We need to invest into more effective energy resources and clean energy, such as solar energy.

    Global change is natural. The only part that isn't natural is the part that is affected by the CO we humans produce. Hypothetically, to try and solve global warming would literally mean finding an effective energy alternative. That alternative is solar power, so it must be prioritized. They go hand and hand, but solar power is the future and trying to 'fix' global warming is just delaying the inevitable. All non renewable resources run out eventually.

    Posted by: JitteryAlfredo39
  • Among other renewable energies, solar should be one of the top, because it is very clean and renewable.

    Solar energy should be a priority for renewable energy and a cleaner environment. Solar panels can easily be placed on roofs (a traditionally "dead space"). This enables homes to self-power using a portion of their own property that had traditionally been unused. While solar power is not the only option for generating cleaner energy that will not damage the environment, I feel it is very important to harness this energy since we can effectively do so.

    Posted by: C0nrKentros
  • Yes, because solar energy is a renewable and readily available power source.

    Solar energy offers advantages of ready availability and constant renewal, so it should be prioritized in our quest for energy alternatives. Harnessing the sun's power only makes sense, because it could be so easily utilized to heat water and homes, for instance. Once solar panel technology improves and gets cheaper, the benefits will increase tremendously.

    Posted by: Th4Fire
  • I agree with prioritizing solar energy in the plans to fight global warming because it's a 100% clean and a safe way to get energy compared to the old methods using electricity produced by a nuclear plants and/or coal driven energy plants. It is also les

    Solar energy is not only 'earth safe' and green, but it's also important for your own economic well being since it's cost free. All you have to do is invest one time expenses to install the equipment for solar energy collection that meets your energy requirements and you start producing energy with no cost. Then after three or four years of using solar energy, once your investment has been paid off in a manner of electricity bills and hot water bills, you will start going in surplus by getting free energy and preserving our planet.

    Posted by: B3rtFully
  • Most available solar energy can be harnessed more to fight against global warming which is caused by some other forms of energy.

    Solar energy is the most available form of energy. Efficiently harnessing the solar energy can decrease energy demands. Also solar energy can be harnessed easily by using solar panels. It can be also used for solar water heaters and for solar cells. So it may decrease the global warming caused due to some other devices and other forms of energy.

    Posted by: C0bbGrand
  • Our petroleum resources are on the edge of extinction.

    It's time to look for alternate renewable sources of energy and through that step only we can reduce global warming. The sun is the source of all energy. It is easily available also, so it can be effectively used.

    Posted by: HillyHero
  • Solar energy should be a priority along with other environmentally sound tactics.

    Harnessing solar power as well as wind and wave power is key to a less harmful energy policy in the future. Personally I believe the future is in wind and wave technology. Solar power can certainly supplement these especially in the third world or developing countries. Solar panels can be cheap and easy to install in these countries which are typically in sunny dry locations around the World.

    Posted by: 5h035Bow
  • Solar energy offers the greatest potential as an alternative to the burning of fossil fuels

    On a daily basis the sun emits more energy onto the Earth's surface than civilization could possibly use. It is clean, and will last for billions of years. Photovoltaic technology doesn't yet make it possible to collect the wattage per dollar cost to make it economically viable on a large scale, but progress is steadily being made. A big boost of research dollars into photovoltaics would bring down the cost of solar panels to the point where solar energy can compete with carbon-based fuels and provide the solution to global warming.

    Posted by: GLawrence
  • We don't need solar enegy

    No, solar energy is not the key to reducing emissions and fighting global warming. While it is a step in the right direction, as it stands alone it cannot solve the problem. Human beings are going to have to stop producing such large amounts of waste. This in combination with such solutions as solar energy will be the key to fighting global warming.

  • Solar energy is a good free alternative, but prioritizing it may miss better alternatives.

    Solar energy is a great alternative to fossil fuels. It is effectively free and gives off no emissions once constructed and active. Prioritizing solar energy then seems like a key to fighting global warming, but there are reasons to avoid it. Besides its being expensive and very variable depending on location and weather patterns, prioritizing one alternative over another may cause people to miss better alternatives that could have come along. It is best not to prioritize, but instead to explore and experiment with all possible alternatives.

    Posted by: KnownEvan
  • Plans to fight global warming should not prioritize solar energy, because efforts to date have proved to be ineffective and costly.

    A perfect example of the failure of the solar energy movement is the recent demise of Solyndra, a company that produced solar panels. Despite receiving at least 475 million dollars of 2009 stimulus money in an anticipated exchange for creating many jobs, the company only managed to add 585 positions to the market, and went out of business entirely, earlier this month.

    Posted by: 54nf0Iss
  • I do not agree with prioritizing solar energy, because this country has enough to focus on as it is.

    There are many different ways in which we can help the environment that cost much less than building solar plants all over the country. Recycling incentives should be equal in every state. Only a few states offer cash for glass bottles, and the cash incentive for aluminum varies by location as well. The research and costs associated with solar energy efforts are beyond what our already overstretched budget can handle right now.

    Posted by: ExoticCletus60
  • Energy Density

    Solar energy simply has insufficient energy density to be a competitive source. Get it cheaper and come up with a cheaper more convenient way to store the energy than batteries, and it might in time be viable. Right now it's just a pipe dream, economically.

  • Plans to fight global warming should be multi-faceted, without a single priority.

    Global warming is a major concern for the world right now. Increased global temperatures can lead to rising sea levels, altered weather patterns, and have major effects on flora and fauna. To combat global warming, a number of different actions should be pursued. Solar power can help reduce use of greenhouse gases, however solar alone is likely insufficient to meet our energy needs. Additional alternative energies should be pursued, while also trying to decrease waste by making technologies more efficient. This multi-lateral approach is much more likely to improve global warming issues.

    Posted by: MiIBoot
  • solar is too fickle and too limited to be the highest priority

    Even in the best locations, solar power only shines half of the time, during the day. In much of the world, from clouds to rain to poor atmospheric quality, the solar cells have less than ideal output even during daylight hours. And many areas in the equator are densely population, limiting developable sites. One cannot reasonably expect solar cells to gain traction in the Arctic, when the greatest demand for power is when there is no sunlight. When winter strikes and the heaters go on, solar cells have limited sunlight - and that is assuming they are not covered in snow. Even places like Spain's dry plains with large solar developments have had to build gas-fire plants to meet peak demand periods when solar power was not enough to meet their demand. While solar energy is a viable component of meeting the world's energy need, especially for low demand purposes like evening lighting and school zone signs. But it cannot meet the majority of our needs, thus should not receive prioritization.

    Posted by: Pir4And
  • Plans to fight global warming should not prioritize solar energy over wind, as both have real and practical applications.

    Choosing only solar energy as a means of providing fighting global warming would be a mistake. This in no way underestimates the value of solar energy; indeed, it is very useful and applicable in both large and small projects. However, wind is equally valuable and may actually be more applicable in many instances. Producing wind turbines may be less polluting and disruptive to the environment than solar and easier for the average person to install and understand.

    Posted by: vempyrik 66

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.