i am sure there are many alternative source of energy.
215057
you're probably refering to the middle east.  I am not a subscriber to most theories on why american troops are there.  I don't think bush did it for the money; he did it as an economic attack on china.  China's growing economy and mass of people makes it  a huge threat to the american way of life, both economically and physically.  Their mass growth is highly dependant on oil, more so than our economy is.  Doubling, or tripling the cost of oil is a very effective assault on a massive country's growth while only lightly affecting america's economy.  That is, how many people do you know who have stopped driving?  An extremely low number of people have even reduced the amount they drive...  Prices of construction, shipping, and other things we take for granted have risen only very slightly.  Using oil is very basic in the technological chain, but to a county still essentially developing it's value is 10 times what it is to a fully developed country.  It has so much to do with politics and so little to do with oil...\n\nWhy we don't switch.  While it is a good point that the oild companies profit from not switching, it's so much more complicated than being a conspiracy of big oil companies against the country.  The cost of converting to an alternative fuel source would be large, incredibly large.  Keeping away from everything else that uses oil, big parts of idustry, and sticking only to transportation.  Every single car, truck, bus, bulldozer, some planes, in america would have to be replaced.  Ok, not too bad, could be done in 15-25 years.  But every person would have to accept the change and people in general don't like change.  Also, every single fueling station would have to change over, which is in the range of trillions of dollars in cost.  The technology must be established, accepted, and actually implemented.  On top of that, the entire country would have to agree as to which particular energy source we switch to; that's very difficult in it's own right.  This is a subject which can barely have the surface scratched on yahoo'o format.  It deserves, and has received, thousands of articles much longer than I care to write and much more technical than I can even pretend to understand without studying them in detail.  It's not a simple thing for a country which is entirely dependant on oil to just up and switch to something else.
302381
Also this is possible.
651676
i gues.....um.......Electricity
107746
yes some of them are even solar light powered
508214
There are enough renewable natural resources on this planet to sustain twice the current population.
466475
Yes. That is why there are thousands of Materials in the world.
641
environmental - alternative energy
75772
how about looking at wind generators online and seeing how much power they generate.
116307
I agree. for 10 pints.\nevery country can have this energy in good way.\ni think that iran wants that for producing electricity and other kind of energy.
667459
So far, there's not enough demand to warrent the extra cost of developing alternative energy sources.  In order to stop using oil (for power) we will need to find cheaper ways of getting alternative energy or become much more motivated to do so.
423138
There may be something of use here.
218590
both r developing contries.......both has enormous potential in the realm of energy.it's high time to put aside the differences and get moving.........
130255
It is too bad that they have not been developed to their capacity. It is a concept whose time has come. Nuclear energy should be another alternative to fossil fuels, however too many crazies block that. But we need to cut our independence to oil so that the oil company's do no have such a death grip on us.
72701
Some resources we use are renewable and some are not. True renewables include energy sources like wind and solar. Sort-of renewables include water, food and firewood. Although these can be tapped or grown to satisfy demand, aquifer draw-down and soil erosion can limit how great a load can be sustained. All material resources need to be used wisely, not wastefully, since most resource use usually entails waste products, expense and disposal of unused material. Nonrenewables can be either reclaimable, like metals, or expendable (nonreclaimable) like petroleum. A reason for special care in consumption of expendables is that the supply is limited. Once used up, they're gone for good. \nReclaimables: In the 4.5 billion years of earth's existence, seismic and erosive action changed the distribution of materials in it; many valuable minerals became concentrated into a small number of areas, making them far more practical to extract than if they were more uniformly distributed. This fortunate situation is a one-time happening; if we throw them away they become widely dispersed, so when the concentrated sources run out, we either lose them or we have to collect them some time later at great expense. This is is why we need to recycle aluminum and many other metals including copper, lead, zinc, titanium and even iron. You'd think we'd keep pretty careful control of the more expensive stuff like gold, silver and platinum, but surprisingly a little of that still gets tossed (but less than used to be). Actually aluminum is abundant and not hard to find, but it takes a lot of energy to extract it from its ore, so reclaiming it pays too. \nExpendables: The petroleum we are using up today took many millions of years to form. At the current consumption rate we will use up all the petroleum we can get in 45 years (ref.). After that, we have to have figured out an alternative or we are in deep muck. Currently we have no practical alternative, especially for mobile, "go anywhere anytime" uses like cars. Hydrogen sounds good on the surface, but the only practical way to mass-produce it is from petroleum, losing energy as we do! So if we can postpone that moment of awful truth by conserving fuel now, we have a better chance of developing a true alternative. I hope you're on the side of the future. Your children will thank you.
126410
Do you have a economically viable solution?\n\nMost environmentalist take the cost of repairing all items that this present course of action, and throw out the capital cost of the replacement to declare Renewable Energy & The Hydrogen Economy is viable.\n\nTo make Renewable Energy & The Hydrogen Economy economically viable requires 2 international governments to donate/invest a large enough quantity of land for the private investor to sit up and take notice.  This land will have to be in the right place.  The design will have to change the value of land to subsidize the cost of the infrastructure.\n\nThere donation in effect does the due diligents for the private investor & advertises both the investment and the product.\n\nThis solution has been offered up to both governments and all political parties.  As you might guess they weren't interested in a solution, just patting themselves on the back for actions that have proved worthless.  At best there actions have gotten a few rich enough to pay their utility bills decades in advance to install a Renewable Energy collector!\n\nI started my investigation just to make photovoltaics economically viable.  They never will be directly outside of niche markets.  The amount of energy required to purify & crystlize the silicon means the price of enrgy has to skyrocket after installation for a return on investment, when all capital cost are included.\n\nI'm interested if you think it is likely in your life time to see the end of fossil fuels.  I'm not talking about, because of replacement.  Will the well dry up as more go to the well?\n\nThe 1st World's life style runs on energy both to make us more productive as well as to consume the toys we sell.  Everything is a toy to someone!
128568
probably the most important will be a commercialized alternative to petroleum.
68989
Obviously, don't get that stuff on yourself.  There is also the waste material produced (but all energy production involves waste which is the inefficient use of material in the production of energy).  Finally, remember that no one died at Three Mile Island.