First of all, I too am a college student. I'll be graduating in less than a year with a degree in Electrical Engineering. As you can imagine I have a good deal of knowledge on this subject by now.
Here's what I think should be done:
1. Electric vehicles are not an ideal solution at all. The efficiency of current lead-acid batteries is terrible. They have improved little since electric vehicles were first tried - in the 1900 - 1910 period. They are FAR too heavy and current charging/current rectification systems waste a lot of energy as well.
2. In the past 10 years or so advances have been made in permanent magnets and the efficiency of steam turbine power plants as whole. (This would include gas/coal/oil/nuclear, etc.) Natural gas plants in particular are relatively efficient. Building them right now is not a bad idea.
3. Much research is being done (and more money should be allocated to do) work in the areas of fuel cell and fusion power. These methods of energy conversion rely mainly on hydrogen, which can easily be extracted from water. Current fuel cells are not very efficient and are very heavy, but their only exhaust product is pure water. Given some time (within the lifespan of the above gas plants) they should be much more efficient and lighter/smaller. If you pair fuel cells up with electric motors (permanent magnet advances, mentioned above, give you more powerful motors with less weight), you have a nearly perfect solution.
Fusion power is the next logical step in powerplants. Some research has been done in this area in the UK, but much more needs to be done to make this a practical option. Fusion (not to be confused with fission) is when you force hydrogen to combine into helium, generating enormous amounts of energy. (Think H-bomb.) Once again, the fuel is easily created.
4. Wind and solar power are currently not really viable options. Too little power is generated for the costs of the materials used to contruct them. Sure, wind and solar energy are free, but the energy used to constuct the power plant is not. Current methods for collecting solar energy require HUGE amounts of land space for mirrors or solar cells. In addtion these plants can only be placed in remote locations (like a desert) where it is rarely cloudy. The cost of servicing and maintaining these plants is also very high. (Mirrors/solar cells don't clean the dust of themselves.) You must also consider that because location is everything, new roads and power lines must be made to service the plant. Wind power suffers from similar limitations. It is expensive and requires a lot of land. The wind is also not present all the time, so if large portions of our nation's energy came from wind it could be a disaster if there is no wind on a particular day.
Hydro power also suffers if there is a drought (like now in the Pacific Northwest). It is a "clean" source of energy as far as air polution, but there are drawbacks in that large areas of land are swallowed up to create reservoirs. Fish are also affected. Perhaps the worst thing is the potential for disaster should a major dam fail. (These dams don't have infinite lifespan you know.
) Have any of you heard of China's 3 Gorges Dam? Do you have any idea how many lives would be lost if this thing were to burst. (It is built across an active fault line you know. Large dams have been known to cause earthquakes as well.
) Several million lives would be lost if this dam were to ever fail, in addition the loss of property would be a catostrophic blow to the nation's economy.
Well, I've got work to do, but I may write more later.
------------------
bloom25
-MAW-
(Formerly of the)
THUNDERBIRDS
