CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:11
Arguments:11
Total Votes:11
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 What is the best source of energy?? (10)

Debate Creator

TRICOM(16) pic



What is the best source of energy??

Add New Argument
2 points

Solar.

How long is a star's lifespan? That's why solar.

Actually, stars' energy comes from fusion reactions. So I'd go with fusion over solar, even though our science and technology is not advanced enough to have fusion reactors, yet.

GeneralLee(134) Disputed
1 point

Because it is never cloudy and stars produce enough light to convert into energy? Do some research man.

Conro(767) Disputed
1 point

"Because it is never cloudy and stars produce enough light to convert into energy?"

Actually, yes. Although, by "stars" I think the OP was speaking of stars in general (e.g. the sun) and solar power. Not power by starlight (at nighttime). Here's a fun little infographic: http://www.landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/AreaRequired1000.jpg

According to the site, the Sahara Desert is 18x the total surface area that would be needed to covered by solar panels to cover our energy needs in 2030 (assuming 20% efficiency, which is rather on the low side). China alone has farmland that is 2.5x the necessary surface area. The U.S. highway system, if it were covered in solar panels, could cover about 20% of the area necessary.

Supporting Evidence: The source of the graphic (www.landartgenerator.org)
nummi(1435) Disputed
1 point

Because it is never cloudy and stars produce enough light to convert into energy? Do some research man.

"What is the best source of energy??" was the debate question and I answered.

You do some research. Obviously you need it.

If you still have trouble understanding then reread my post. There's also something about fusion reactions...

1 point

petrol because it is :

Relatively concentrated and you can travel many hundred km with one full tank of petrol

It is highly available

It is fairly cheap

It is not difficult to make - it just has to be distilled and no waste is produced

It is easy to carry around

It is fairly safe to store

Apollo(1608) Disputed
1 point

petrol because it is :

Relatively concentrated and you can travel many hundred km with one full tank of petrol

Name one petrol-burning power plant. Name one.

It is highly available

Consumption is up. Production is down. Discovery is down. We have hit Hubbert's peak.

It is fairly cheap

You just wait...

It is not difficult to make

It's very difficult to make.

it just has to be distilled and no waste is produced

No waste products?! Is this what they teach nowadays?!

It is easy to carry around

Highly flammable.

It is fairly safe to store

Then why do we see refinery explosions, fires, etc.?

1 point

Atomic. Isolate an area of space and smash atoms together in some futuristic multi-quadrillion dollar vessel, fill up some energy cells, and shoot them back to earth.

1 point

All in all, I think this is a terribly unorganized debate. By source of energy, do you mean to fuel cars with? Or do you mean to create electricity with? No, this is way to ambiguous to be a valid debate.

nummi(1435) Disputed
1 point

All in all, I think this is a terribly unorganized debate.

It is not unorganized. A simple question with a lot of different answers. Are you too lazy to come up with some answers?

By source of energy, do you mean to fuel cars with? Or do you mean to create electricity with?

Fuel cars with? You do know the first car engines were electrical? And that we currently also have an increasing number of electrical cars? That newer and more efficient electrical engines and electricity storage devices are currently being developed? Because "fuel" is far too expensive and becomes more so every year.

Or do you mean to create electricity with?

In our lives electricity is the most important and the sun can provide that for billions of years. Not to mention other clean (more or less) and efficient ways of producing electricity we currently have and are being developed for future generations.

No, this is way to ambiguous to be a valid debate.

Isn't this the point of debating? Having more than just one answer?

It is not way too ambiguous, no such thing when it comes to debating. You seem incapable of comprehending all the possible answers to the question and you seem to not even try.

GeneralLee(134) Clarified
1 point

"Are you too lazy to come up with some answers?"

Probably ;)

"Fuel cars with? You do know the first car engines were electrical? And that we currently also have an increasing number of electrical cars? That newer and more efficient electrical engines and electricity storage devices are currently being developed? Because "fuel" is far too expensive and becomes more so every year."

You missed my point entirely. I don't care about electric cars, my statement was if the "source of energy" we were talking about was a fuel for cars (whether it be gas, electricity, or hydrogen) or a way to generate electricity (whether it be solar, coal, or nuclear power). As you can see these are two completely different debates. That's why I say this was too ambiguous to be valid because there is no was to tell what the creator of this debate means by "source of energy".

So in conclusion, you seem incapable of differentiating between two completely different points.

Electricity is the best source of energy because al of our appliances depend on it.