Alternative energy sources that use the natural power of the wind, waves and sun are too expensive and complicated to replace the coal, oil and gas that we use to power our cities and transport.
To what extent do yo agree or disagree with this opinion ?
Give reason for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Write at least 250 words.
Some people argue that the coal, oil, and gas which is functioned for existence of cities and transport is cheaper and easier than using the natural power of the wind, waves and sun as an alternative energy sources. As long as the natural resources is potentially available, I strongly believe that alternative energy of using natural power needs much money and difficult operational, but governments will keep to process the fossil fuels as the sources of renewable energy.
In the operating of natural power plants, most of the governments allocate much budget because they have to employ the engineers with well-paid to build it machines and to maximize the usage of the wind, waves and sun. For example, recently UK has spent cost roughly $ 1,300,000 per MW for a utility scale wind turbine. In a wide range of citiziens, it will require much more funding to supply the energy from it. Therefore, total costs for installing a commercial-scale wind turbine will increase significantly that depends on demand.
In spite of the natural energy have a pontential to be energy resources, those will not be sufficient to fulfill the energy necessities. In this modern era, people have been reliance on advanced technology that we know it needs the energy to be able to use. As a result, the governments should provide the energy as much as needed. Apart from the natural resources as alternative energy sources, the government should manufacture the fossil fuels too.
To conclude, it is evident the governments expend much funds to supply energy which is produced by the natural power plants. However, it is impossible for now to abandon the fossil fuels as it is primary of the energy sources for cities and transport.
To what extent do yo agree or disagree with this opinion ?
Give reason for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Write at least 250 words.
Some people argue that the coal, oil, and gas which is functioned for existence of cities and transport is cheaper and easier than using the natural power of the wind, waves and sun as an alternative energy sources. As long as the natural resources is potentially available, I strongly believe that alternative energy of using natural power needs much money and difficult operational, but governments will keep to process the fossil fuels as the sources of renewable energy.
In the operating of natural power plants, most of the governments allocate much budget because they have to employ the engineers with well-paid to build it machines and to maximize the usage of the wind, waves and sun. For example, recently UK has spent cost roughly $ 1,300,000 per MW for a utility scale wind turbine. In a wide range of citiziens, it will require much more funding to supply the energy from it. Therefore, total costs for installing a commercial-scale wind turbine will increase significantly that depends on demand.
In spite of the natural energy have a pontential to be energy resources, those will not be sufficient to fulfill the energy necessities. In this modern era, people have been reliance on advanced technology that we know it needs the energy to be able to use. As a result, the governments should provide the energy as much as needed. Apart from the natural resources as alternative energy sources, the government should manufacture the fossil fuels too.
To conclude, it is evident the governments expend much funds to supply energy which is produced by the natural power plants. However, it is impossible for now to abandon the fossil fuels as it is primary of the energy sources for cities and transport.
