Solar: Pro - some sunlight every day, can be mounted discretely
Con - not much sun in the UK, panels get dirty
Wind: Pro - massive subsidies
Con - the wind is unpredictable, doesn't work when it's calm or stormy, massive turbines spoil the landscape, turbine noise can upset neighbours, chops up bats and birds, need massive concrete bases, need backup power stations, CO2 used in construction and transport, towers can fall down and blades can fly off. The UK wind farm subsidy scheme was developed by Ed Milliband, followed by Chris Huhne!
Tidal/Wave: Pro - Predictable, low profile, lots of potential (water being much denser than air)
Cons - high capital costs, needs more research
renewable's are worse than useless, but a godsend for politicians - they can build the wind farms, (making rich landowners richer), and screw the local community, and be seen to be doing something about the environment. Its all about gesture politics, nothing to do about global warming. Nuclear is currently the only chance the human race has to avert climatic disaster. 7 bn ppl is 2 many.
The main problems are apart from hydro, are they are often not available when you need them, you either have to wait for daylight weather or monthly influences, even with Hydro you need rainfall.
Whereas fossil fuels are on tap available, whenever you need them, If we can ever come up with an efficient means of storing energy them, then they might become worthwhile.
That is more than a mouthful Found a link you might find useful enough so you can do your own homework http://www.buzzle.com/articles/renewable...
these include: solar energy, hydroelectricity, wind power, wave energy, tidal energy.
