Wind and Sun Beat Other Energy Alternatives

iandoh passes along the news that researchers at Stanford University have completed the first quantitative, scientific comparison of alternative energy solutions by assessing not only their potential for delivering energy for electricity and vehicles, but also their impacts on global warming, human health, energy security, water supply, space requirements, wildlife, water pollution, reliability, and sustainability. Based on their model, they found that the best sources of alternative energy are wind, concentrated solar, and geothermal energy. The worst are nuclear, clean coal, and ethanol-based fuels. In other words, "the options that are getting the most attention are between 25 to 1,000 times more polluting than the best available options."

Comments

Missing option

[pizzach]

Moon energy. I know there must be some way that we can harvest this great natural resource. Maybe attach a rope to it that pulls a gear or burn it or something.

Re:Nuclear

[Shatrat]

Well given that he computes the carbon footprint of nuclear by dragging things like "terrorists could steal the fuel to make a bomb which could be used in a city which would burn and release lots of CO2,"

Man, that's such a stretch my back just popped.

Re:Well of course

[thegnu]

I have seen estimates that it would take a square around 92 miles on the side or 8,464 square miles of solar thermal generation to power the US.

That's really not that big. It's only twice the size of the greater Los Angeles area, for instance.

Fair trade. Let's do it.