CreateDebate


Debate Info

16
18
Renewables Fossil fuels
Debate Score:34
Arguments:27
Total Votes:40
Ended:01/01/11
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Renewables (13)
 
 Fossil fuels (14)

Debate Creator

BUNNIES4545(28) pic



This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.

Which form of energy is better- renewable or fossil fuel?

I know I've done something like this before, but this helps to get some facts. Thanks, all!Cool

Renewables

Side Score: 16
VS.

Fossil fuels

Side Score: 18
Winning Side!
1 point

Renewable obviously.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that anything in high demand and infinite is better than anything finite. It's Americans and large corporations with investments in finite energy sources who's slowing the process down. If everybody worked towards a renewable energy source they could easily come up with something far better than fossil fuels. Working together makes a brighter future. Smile kids!

Side: Renewables
BUNNIES4545(28) Disputed
1 point

According to US World News and Report, fossil fuels are ample enough to last us 200 years. Fossil fuels are also cheaper, are doing amazing in generating electricity throughout the nation (About 65% of the US's electricity is powered by fossil fuels, such as coal), and coal mining, oil mining, etc. helps for a better economy, since the one we have currently sucks. So, you can see that life does not revolve around renewable energy.

Side: Fossil Fuels

Well, looking at different set numbers, fossil fuels and natural gas account for almost 75%.

For those who think that renewable energy is easily going to replace fossil fuels needs to wake up from their pipe dream. It is going to be at least 100 years before we use 100% renewable energy for all uses. The technology isn't there. Wind Power has been fiddled with since the late 19th Century.

Side: Fossil Fuels
1 point

Renewable energy one day could possibly replace fossil fuels. There are plenty of fossil fuels that could easily run out at some point and really muck up the environment and cause pollution. I know right now we cannot easily replace all our original fuel sources to renewable energy, but we can do it on a pretty small scale. I'm for Nuclear fission and energy, but only if they can find better ways to reduce their waste. Until then, I'll try to remain realistic about our current energy situation.

Side: Renewables
2 points

Solar cells use toxic chemicals, similar to the ones used in manufacturing silicon chips for computers. Also, wind turbines kill up to 10,000 to 40,000 birds a year with their hazardly spikes. Therefore, renewable energy does treachorous damage to the planet and the world itself may end in 2012, for that reason only!

Side: Fossil Fuels
0 points

Solar cells use toxic chemicals, similar to the ones used in manufacturing silicon chips for computers.

A standard coal-fired power plant emits 2,249 lbs/MWh of carbon dioxide, 13 lbs/MWh of sulfur dioxide, and 6 lbs/MWh of nitrogen oxides 1.

Also, wind turbines kill up to 10,000 to 40,000 birds a year with their hazardly spikes.

The word is hazardous. We submit that is a small price to pay.

Therefore, renewable energy does treachorous damage to the planet and the world itself may end in 2012, for that reason only!

Both statements are so incredibly false that we cannot in the spirit of seriousness address them. Are you joking?

Side: Renewables
BUNNIES4545(28) Disputed
2 points

Well, according to EnvironmentalEngineering.com, the gas that coal emits can easily be taken out of the process of generating coal into electricity.

Plus, where are all your facts, mister? I got my facts from credited sources, yet you have no proof!!!!

Side: Fossil Fuels
BUNNIES4545(28) Disputed
2 points

Oh, and by the way, I was just kidding about the world will end in 2012. Take a joke for once, geez.

Side: Fossil Fuels

Renewable energy is immensely more expensive than fossil fuels. If there was no subsidies for renewable energy, it would simply not exist because the free market simply rejects expensive and unreliable energy source, but the government insists and forces citizens to pay for more expensive energy.

Side: Fossil Fuels
Bohemian(3860) Disputed
2 points

New technologies usually are expensive. The Commadore 64 was an 8-bit computer that originally sold for $595. Now what can we do with computers for a fraction of the price? Over time technologies become cheaper. The hope si that if we invest in these renewable energies they will pay off in the near future. Fossil fuels will only ever increase in price as their overall quantity can only decrease. If they become too expensive our Nation's infrastructure could collapse. This is why renewable sources are so important.

Side: Renewables
1 point

Agreed, renewable energy will be cheaper over time because investment in research and development will allow for cheaper and more efficient and reliable sources of energy; however, government is simply unable to fund this expensive technonolgy through subsidies due to a limited budget. Subsidies are hiding the true cost of renewable energy.

Therefore, in a free market, private investment is the most effective way to create renewable energy for the future where new wealth and net job growth is created instead of government transferring wealth through subsidization.

As for Nation's infrastructure, it is reasonable that we can agree to disagree on what it is.

Side: Fossil Fuels
0 points

We are screwed no matter what. It is impossible for us to stop using fossil fuels completely and renewable energy is a joke.

Fossil fuels are in every product we use. There is no product on the market that is fossil fuel free. As we know fossil fuels are a finite resource and since we have passed peak oil, oil production will never be that high again, no matter how much money we throw at it. Energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Let's look at alternative energy:

Electric cars are a joke. Sure they give off less emissions, but 7 gallons of oil go into every tire. Oil is also in the paints, plastics, resins, glass etc.

Wind power is also a joke. Where is the power going to come from if the wind isn't blowing? Wind turbines usually need to have a coal fired electric plant to produce electricity when there is no wind. Wind turbines are produce in factories and they and the machinery run on electricity which comes from coal. Then you have to ship the turbines out by truck, ship or plane all of which use gas.

Solar power is also a joke. Solar panels need to be manufactured in a factory which will most likely run on electricity produced uncleanly and again the solar panels need to be shipped. With wind and solar power the electricity generated has to be transported great distances through large copper wires, some electricity is lost during transportation. Plus the copper for the wires has to be mined which is also a dirty process.

Nuclear plants offer clean energy, but they are expensive to construct and maintain. Nuclear fuel has to be mined which is a dirty process, and once it gets too old it has to be stored. If there is a leak, that can cause an environmental disaster. Not to mention the trucks used to transport spent nuclear material all use gas or diesel fuel.

Hydrogen fuel cells are very expensive and the process to get the hydrogen gas involves burning coal. Some people want to store the CO2 under ground but there is not an effective way to do so. Again the factories at which fuel cells would be produced will most likely be run on coal in order to keep the cost of the fuel cell down somewhat.

Side: we're screwed either way
1 point

We are screwed no matter what.

Nuuuuuuuuucleeeeeeaaaaaaaaaarrrrrr........

Side: Renewables
BUNNIES4545(28) Disputed
1 point

Nuclear energy is the energy formed from the nucleus of an atom. The waste it emits can be stored in a facility that keeps it from harming the environment. Really, once you look at the statistics, nuclear energy isn't all that bad.

Side: Fossil Fuels
Bohemian(3860) Disputed
1 point

That won't happen people are too afraid that there will be another Chernobyl-like incident.

Side: Fossil Fuels
trumpeter93(998) Disputed
0 points

There is no single answer for fuel. We have to use a combination of all fuels including fossil fuels until we find something new.

I forgot biofuels!

Biofuels typically need to be farmed. Farming is a very unclean process. All of the farm machines use gas. We use petro chemical fertilizers and herbicides. Then the finished product needs to be harvested with another machine. Then it is shipped to a processing facility and then shipped to stores. A large biofuel industry would mean clearing away more forests to make room for crops suitable for biofuels.

Side: we're screwed either way