Wind energy is not better than water energy. They are both very similar in that they are:
* free (after the initial cost of the turbines)
* sustainable (they won't run out)
* renewable (they are still there tomorrow even if we use them completely today) If there is no wind, then the wind turbines don't turn to provide electricity. This can happen quite often, unless the turbines are placed where the wind blows non-stop all year round.
If there is no water, then the water turbines don't turn. This will happen only rarely if the turbines are placed in the best position. Using ocean waves and tides will be more reliable than rivers which can dry up in droughts.
The kinetic energy in wind can be changed to electrical energy through wind turbines and wind farms. Most electrical energy now is produced by burning fossil fuels. So any other way is known as 'alternative'. Wind energy is also called 'renewable energy' as it will still return even after we have used it.
The Wind still blows when its cloudy, but both have disadvantages of different climates and latitude/longitude of regions.
Wind turbines don't use up any fuel, so they don't have any exhaust. Since they don't use any fuel, there's no fuel used preparing fuel for them either.
Fossil fuels ends soon and not all countries have reserves. Also nuclear energy pollutes less than burning fossil fuels.
The burning of coal emits more carbon dioxide than any of the other fossil fuels.
Alternative fuels, also known as non-conventional or advanced fuels, are any materials or substances that can be used as fuels, other than conventional fuels. Conventional fuels include: fossil fuels (petroleum (oil), coal, propane, and natural gas), and nuclear materials such as uranium.Some well known alternative fuels include biodiesel, bioalcohol (methanol, ethanol, butanol), chemically stored electricity (batteries and fuel cells), hydrogen, non-fossil methane, non-fossil natural gas, vegetable oil and other biomass sources.
No.
Fossil fuels are worst than hydroelectric power because when they are burnt to harness their energy, they release CO2, a greenhouse gas, this enhances the effects of global warming and as once fossil fuels have been mined and burnt, they are gone and will not reacumilate again for millions of years whereas hydroelectricity doesn't burn any carbon, releasing no CO2 and hydroelectricity's original source of power will never run out, making it much more efficient.
it is way better than fossil fuels
it is better than fossil fuels because it is better for our environment and it will last way longer than fossil fuels. :)
No. Alternative energy means energy sources other than fossil fuels.
hydroelectric energy is free to the fuel fossil
greener, but unimaginably more expensive.
No,because the trees are limited and used for oxygen.
Fossil fuels-including coal, natural gas, and oil-are formed from the fossilized remains of prehistoric plants and animals, and fossil fuels provide about 95% of the world's total energy. Alternative fuels are better for the environment and often better for the economy than fossil fuels. Learn about the controversies and conservation plans surrounding fossil fuels, and explore the alternatives.
wind is a renewable energy source ,while fossil fuels are nonrenewable .
Coal IS a fossil fuel
solor energy
Nuclear fuel has a higher energy density than fossil fuels.
it is less damaging to our environment, specifically the ozone layer, causing global warming. also wind is renewable. so in many cases, wind kicks fossil fuel's butt! Wind power is a better option than fossil fuels because wind is free,obviously, but fossil fuels takes over 60million years to form into coal to burn. .Its a clean energy .Reduces greenhouse gases and pollution .Fossil fuels can make people ill