Whats the "Greenest" way to produce electricity?

[DC]

What is the Greenest way to produce Electricity?

 

[NewtonTrino]

Conservation.

 

[Arrow]

I don't know but always enjoy this blog which is about green and conventional energy production - what works and what does not.

http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/blogs/rsquared/

 

[KingMerv00]

Matter-Antimatter annihilation.

If you mean now or the near future, I'd say:

Solar but it's weak.
Nuclear but it's expensive.
Fusion but it's always 20 years away.

 

[Wowbagger]

Fusion but it's always 20 years away.

And, it will always be 20 years away.

 

[Complexity]

Matter-Antimatter annihilation.

If you mean now or the near future, I'd say:

Solar but it's weak.
Nuclear but it's expensive.
Fusion but it's always 20 years away.

The problem with matter-antimatter annihilation as an energy source is that you need to collect or create antimatter, and it is very rare.

I'd say fusion. Obtaining the fuel is much more energy/cost effective.

 

[Myriad]

Organic free-range electric eel farming perhaps?

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[macdoc]

OP - all you need

http://bravenewclimate.com/category/tcase-series/

 

[arthwollipot]

Wave/tidal? What's the whole-of-life CO2 cost on that?

 

[Furcifer]

What is the Greenest way to produce Electricity?

Hydro. We've tapped most of it, but there is a little more yet. I'd like to see someone challenge falling water as the greenest source. GO!

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

There was a recent study published here in Ontario by (possibly) the forest industry (I was listening to the radio with only half an ear) that proved that the burning of plant materials to produce steam and then electricity was the best. As long as you replace the plants with new ones, the process is CO₂ neutral.

 

[arthwollipot]

Hydro. We've tapped most of it, but there is a little more yet. I'd like to see someone challenge falling water as the greenest source. GO!

The problem with hydro is that you have to build big dams all over the place. Not sure how carbon-neutral that process is.

 

[Furcifer]

The problem with hydro is that you have to build big dams all over the place. Not sure how carbon-neutral that process is.

Not always. Granted, most of the "easy" stuff has been exploited, but in terms of "green" hydro has everything beat hands down. Even the worst of the worst doesn't harm the environment as much as nuke. It's simplicity in motion, it's such a beautiful thing hydro. Even tidal, while not conventional "hydro" is still a form of hydroelectric. Awesome.

 

[Furcifer]

There was a recent study published here in Ontario by (possibly) the forest industry (I was listening to the radio with only half an ear) that proved that the burning of plant materials to produce steam and then electricity was the best. As long as you replace the plants with new ones, the process is CO₂ neutral.

Last I heard OPG gave up biomass. Lambton is going to stay open burning coal. The UN doesn't want us burning biomass that could otherwise be edible, but growing biomass that isn't edible is a loss leader. You can't pay to ship it across the world, but you can't burn it. So it stays in the fields as fertilizer and that's the end of it.

 

[manofthesea]

Hydro. We've tapped most of it, but there is a little more yet. I'd like to see someone challenge falling water as the greenest source. GO!

I vaguely remember watching a television show that stated a standard lightning bolt could power a city of 500,000 for at least a few months.
All we need to do is tap it and store the power.

 

[Ladewig]

What is the Greenest way to produce Electricity?

Depends on how much you need. If you want to power a flashlight, one of those little crank models is the greenest.

As for large scale, I will leave the statistics to the professionals, but I think the answer depends a great deal on local geography and weather conditions.

 

[KingMerv00]

Depends on how much you need. If you want to power a flashlight, one of those little crank models is the greenest.

Nah. Produces CO2.

 

[Ladewig]

Nah. Produces CO2.

Not if you hold your breath!

 

[Furcifer]

I vaguely remember watching a television show that stated a standard lightning bolt could power a city of 500,000 for at least a few months.
All we need to do is tap it and store the power.

Months? I'd have to do the math on that, I think it's more like hours but yah, there's serious energy in them there clouds.
Personally, I don't think I'd want to be the guy trying to wrangle that bronco. A big kite and a yottafarad capacitor and away we go! You first

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Last I heard OPG gave up biomass. Lambton is going to stay open burning coal. The UN doesn't want us burning biomass that could otherwise be edible, but growing biomass that isn't edible is a loss leader. You can't pay to ship it across the world, but you can't burn it. So it stays in the fields as fertilizer and that's the end of it.

Sorry. I'm not quite following you. The idea was to grow biomass (trees) that was not edible, close to the conversion plant. I'll try and find the paper tomorrow if I get a chance.

ISTR wrt Lambton was they were experimenting adding X% of something to the coal. I'll take a look for that info too.