Alternative energy vs fossil fuels

Which one can stay the longer running planet earth?

Which one can run planet earth?

Coal,oil and natural gas.These are the items that run our planet today. But it cant stay that way forever.One day we will run out of all of these items...what then? We cant just sit there another million waiting for some more! We have to take action. Oh dont worry, there is another way... 

PROS

"Our position on the question;Can alternative energy effectively replace fossil fuels; is clear. Renewable energy, can and indeed must replace both fossil fuel and nuclear power as quickly as possible if the world is to avoid the catastrophic effects of runaway climate change. Page 12 of the summary report of the 2nd edition of the Energy Revolution contains this statement;The amount of energy that can be accessed with current technologies supplies a total of 5.9 times the global demand for energy.The remainder of the report spells out how we believe the world can set off down the path to a clean energy future, within the current political and economic constraints . "[W]ind power is coming of age. In 2007, some 20,000 megawatts of wind were installed globally, enough to power 6 million homes. Sadly, most wind power manufacturers are no longer American, thanks to decades of funding cuts by conservatives. Still, new wind is poised to be a bigger contributor to U.S. (and global) electricity generation than new nuclear power in the coming decades. As I have written earlier, concentrated solar power could be an even bigger power source, and it can even share power lines with wind.That means we can realistically envision an electric grid built around renewables: electricity with no greenhouse gas emissions, no fuel cost (and no future price volatility) and no radioactive waste" "Our position on the question ;Can alternative energy effectively replace fossil fuels?; is clear. Renewable energy, can and indeed must replace both fossil fuel and nuclear power as quickly as possible if the world is to avoid the catastrophic effects of runaway climate change. Page 12 of the summary report of the 2nd edition of the Energy Revolution contains this statement:;The amount of energy that can be accessed with current technologies supplies a total of 5.9 times the global demand for energy; The remainder of the report spells out how we believe the world can set off down the path to a clean energy future, within the current political and economic constraints."


Works cited

http://alternativeenergy.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001244

CONS

"In the next few decades world economies will require hydrocarbon liquids from oil, coal, natural gas, heavy oil, oil sands, and enhanced oil recovery. Sugar cane ethanol is also practical, but volumes will be limited. Other biomass liquids are uncertain. Corn-ethanol is an energy & environmental loser, and cellulosic liquids are not yet practical.""Although wind, solar, biofuels and nuclear all compete with fossil fuels as sources of primary energy, their contribution to the world’s total energy demand is limited because they are more expensive than fossil fuels – and in the case of nuclear, limited by waste and disposal concerns…While we recognize the risks of climate change we also conclude that the world will continue to demand oil and gas for a majority of its primary energy supplies for many decades to come." "The wind doesn’t always blow and sunlight isn’t always striking every solar panel. Renewable energy desperately needs a very big battery, a load leveler. Without some form of energy storage, renewables are physically limited to less than a twenty percent share of the grid. At twenty percent, renewables are more of a headache than a resource for a grid manager. Electricity storage tools are expensive. Very expensive. Too expensive to justify on their own or at societal scale." "Although wind, solar, biofuels and nuclear all compete with fossil fuels as sources of primary energy, their contribution to the world’s total energy demand is limited because they are more expensive than fossil fuels – and in the case of nuclear, limited by waste and disposal concerns…While we recognize the risks of climate change we also conclude that the world will continue to demand oil and gas for a majority of its primary energy supplies for many decades to come.""The wind doesn’t always blow and sunlight isn’t always striking every solar panel. Renewable energy desperately needs a very big battery, a load leveler. Without some form of energy storage, renewables are physically limited to less than a twenty percent share of the grid. At twenty percent, renewables are more of a headache than a resource for a grid manager. Electricity storage tools are expensive. Very expensive. Too expensive to justify on their own or at societal scale."

works cited:

http://alternativeenergy.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001244

My summary...

I am a pro in this subject...I think that fossil fuels should be replaced by alternative energy. Because one day we will run out of oil, coal, and natural gas . And I think that alternative energy will be the perfect energy replacement. The best part is that America will be a much more greener place.With most of our pollution gone, our air will be cleaner and much more better for our environment. Section 17 of the Texas bill of rights bests supports my answer. "It states that taking, damaging, Or destroying; property for public use;..." Like say some one has lived in a house for many years there whole life. And one day some one says "hey you have oil under your house...we need you to move out and go and live some where else" How would you feel? I personally would not be too happy? but that's just my opinion... what's yours?