Wind energy has become the most-invested-in (by private investors and governments together) alternative energy source for the time being. The great arrays of triple-bladed windmills are being placed all over as “wind farms”, to capture the motion of the wind and use its kinetic energy for conversion to mechanical or electrical energy.

Of course, there is nothing new about the concept of a windmill for harnessing energy. Modern wind turbines are simply are more advanced variations on the old theme. Of course, the drawback to wind energy is…what do you do when there is a calm, still day? Needless to say, during these times the electric company kicks in for powering your home or office. Wind energy is not altogether independent.

Hydroelectric energy is available as a source of alternative energy, and it can generate a substantial amount of power. Simply put, hydroelectric energy uses the motion of water—its flow in response to gravity, which means downhill—to turn turbines which then generate electrical energy. Needless to say, water is ubiquitous; finding sources for driving hydroelectric turbines is, therefore, not much of a problem.

However, hydroelectricity as a source of alternative energy can be complicated and expensive to produce. Dams are often built in order to be able to control the flow of the water sufficiently to generate the needed power. Building a dam to store and control water’s potential and kinetic energy takes quite a lot of work, and operating one is complex as well,and conservationists grow concerned that it. Of course, a dam is not always needed if one is not trying to supply the electrical needs of a city or other very densely populated area. There are small run-of-river hydroelectric converters which are good for supplying neighborhoods or an individual office or home.

Probably the most underrated and under-appreciated form of alternative energy is geothermal energy, which is simply the naturally-occurring energy produced by the heating of artesian waters that are just below the earth’s crust. This heat is transferred into the water from the earth’s inner molten core. The water is drawn up by various different methods—there are “dry steam” power plants, “flash” power plants, and “binary” power plants for harnessing geothermal energy. The purpose of drawing up the hot water is for the gathering of the steam. The Geysers, approximately 100 miles north of San Francisco, is probably the best-known of all geothermal power fields; it’s an example of a dry stream plant.

My friends were set on buying one of these “green” vehicles this year. Both of them were ready to venture off on a new and exciting prospect that seemed to be offered to them through the Honda Civic Hybrid. They loved the idea of doing something good for the environment and they were attracted to the idea of spending less on gasoline.

The government also offers a tax incentive for those who purchase vehicles like the Honda Civic Hybrid. Buyers can save a lot of money by purchasing the new vehicles. However, the tax incentive is not nearly enough to offset the high cost of the vehicles. They are significantly more expensive than traditional cars.

Another drawback is the complexity of the vehicle. Cars like the Honda Civic Hybrid run on two engines that rely on each other to function properly. For example, the Honda Civic Hybrid’s gas-powered engine kicks in when the vehicle is using the most energy, like running uphill. The electric engine kicks in when the car idols or runs at a consistent speed, like during travel on the highway.

The complexity of the vehicles becomes even more intricate because there is a third source of energy that fuels the cars. Vehicles like the Honda Civic Hybrid draw power through the braking system as well, storing energy produced when the cars are brought to a stop. If one of the three complex sources of power breaks, the entire vehicle is brought to a halt because each system relies on the other to function properly.

The costs of fixing a vehicle like the Honda Civic Hybrid are quite costly. Once the vehicle breaks down the owner is faced with a hefty mechanic bill. In addition, the cars are more expensive in general. The savings in fuel costs is not enough to offset the high price of the vehicle, not to mention maintenance costs.

It may benefit car shoppers to wait for the future before buying the car of the future. In fact, after shopping around for awhile my sister and her husband chose to buy a large truck powered by diesel fuel.

The technical name for a fuel cell is an electrochemical energy conversion device. A fuel cell converts the chemicals hydrogen and oxygen into water, and in the process it produces electricity. Other electrochemical devices in use today and for many decades is the familiar battery. The difference between a simple battery and a fuel cell is that all the chemicals are stored inside the battery. The battery converts those chemicals into electricity but eventually it “goes dead” as the chemicals are used up and you either throw it away or recharge it.

On the other hand with a fuel cell, chemicals constantly flow into the cell so as long as there is a flow of chemicals into the cell, the electricity flows out of the fuel cell.

Combustion engines the gasoline engine burn fuels and batteries converted chemical energy back into electrical energy when needed. However, fuel cells should do both tasks more efficiently.

Simply put the construction and materials in a fuel cell release electrons from the hydrogen gas creating electricity and the waste product after the electricity is used to power an electrical device is water, formed with the negative hydrogen and the oxygen.

This reaction in a single fuel cell produces only about 0.7 volts. To get this voltage up to a reasonable level, many separate fuel cells must be combined to form a fuel-cell stack.

One problem with using hydrogen is that it is not easily stored for consumer use. Other alternatives could be natural gas, propane, and methanol gas. The primary objective of using fuel cell technology is pollution reduction. However, the fuel cell is also very efficient. 80% of the fuel use in these cells is converted into usable energy compared to only 20% for a gasoline powered engine and about 30% overall for a battery powered electric vehicle.

There is no question that the fuel cell holds great promise for the future. However, the fuel cell technology must still put together all the pieces of finding the right ‘fuel’ source that is easy to store and deliver to the consumer, efficiency of the vehicle using fuel cells, and the cost for the total package.

Construction will begin in 2007 in Boulder Colorado on a project called Solar Row. The project consists of thirteen homes using only solar power. This will be the first solar home development project in the Boulder area. The design of each home has been carefully set up to allow the home to use and creates its own energy.

Some states are pushing for solar powered housing. California officials are proposing half of all new homes build run on solar energy in within ten years. They are pushing for solar homes to prevent further issues with energy crisis. Three years ago utility customers had difficulty paying their electric bills because of the high cost. Officials plan to give rebates to home builders who agree to install solar panels on new homes. They may offer incentives for installing panels on existing homes as well. Environmental groups are backing California’s proposal as they fill it will encourage other states to follow. It is believed that if many states decide to implement such programs, then the cost of setting up solar power will greatly decrease.

However, many environmental groups aren’t willing to wait around to see what California decides to do. They have taken solar power issues to the legislation. A solar incentive bill has been approved by the Senate. It is still pending with the Assembly Committee. If approved, it would require fifteen percent of new homes being built are complete with solar panels beginning in 2010. The goal would be for the rate to increase each year by ten percent until it reaches fifty five percent.

The building industry opposes the promotion of solar homes. They are against the legislative bill. However, many in the building industry agree that solar homes could lead to economic and atmospheric improvements. The many concern of the building industry is the additional cost to them to meet the solar powered home requirements. If Congress is willing to give them monetary incentives to help reduce these costs, the issue could likely be resolved. It is estimated on average that addition solar power equipment to a home will cost $17,000 to $20,000.