Please answer this question scientifically.
My answer is of course energy from oil at 100% sure 😊.
oil and gas have varying environmental impacts which have unfavourable impacts on the health of not only humans but the universe at large. with the excess carbon emission which is an undesirable GHG into the atmosphere, the health of humans and the planet is being challenged. Solar energy which is renewable and sustainable is energy gotten from the sun. it is safe and has little or no carbon emission when captured with photovoltaic panels.
.
in summary, solar energy is safe for humans
Sorry brother Victor, but solar energy is very dangerous for human next years. Oil energy is the safest, and CO2 is not dangerous as you think.
Solar energy is more safer and best for human,, compare to fossil fuel (oil and gas),, according to cop26, conference of Paris and 2050 carbon emission goals uk.. international countries have focus on reduction in carbon emissions from 2 degree to 1.5 degree, due to its adverse effect globally. Using UK as a case study,, the department of transport (Dft), UNCCC and centre for climate control (CCC), have strongly focus to reduce all carbon emissions throughout uk,, such Wales, northern Ireland, and England.. by 78%,, both in industry, health sector, transport sectors.. by phasing out all fuel and petrol cars,, through the introduction of plug-in vehicles, battery electric vehicles, and e-scooter, ebike and the host of others.. to support the cop26 agreement on the reductions of carbon emissions.. Solar energy is more sustainable and needful globally compare to fossil fuel..
Encouraging active travel,, and behavior change,, is also a method of reducing carbon emissions..
How ever globally transport contribute more than 70% of carbon emissions and pollute the atmosphere.. through the use of fuel, petrol and diesel.. gotten from fossil fuel oil and gas.. inconclusion
The answer to this question is solar energy. It has been well researched and Published in literature that fossil fuel consumption contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emission (GHG), thereby polluting the environment and hence coursing harm to humans and animal life. But solar energy on the other hand, is environmental friendly because it does not contribute to greenhouse gas emission, and hence harmless to humans and animal life.
Both fossil energy (oil and gas) and solar energy have advantages and disadvantages when it comes to human safety.
Fossil energy can be dangerous if not handled properly, as oil and gas extraction and transportation can lead to leaks, spills, and explosions that can harm both people and the environment. In addition, burning fossil fuels releases pollutants into the air that can have negative health effects, such as respiratory problems.
On the other hand, solar energy is generally considered safer than fossil fuels because it does not produce harmful emissions or pollutants. However, there are still risks associated with the manufacturing and disposal of solar panels, which can involve the use of hazardous materials.
In terms of long-term safety, solar energy is generally considered more sustainable and less likely to cause harm to future generations. Fossil fuels are a finite resource, and their extraction and use can have significant environmental impacts, such as climate change.
Ultimately, the choice between fossil energy and solar energy will depend on a variety of factors, including the specific context, energy needs, and environmental considerations. It is important to carefully consider the potential risks and benefits of each energy source before making a decision.
You can read more in the below article:
Article Solar energy development in the GCC region – a review on rec...
I have worked in the industry for 20+ years. I have the privilege of working in all types of energy product. Coal is dirty and yes, produces CO2 but it is stable. Gas clean but depends upon sources that cause damage by drilling and fracking. It is also easy to trip and lose the units due to loss of gas pressure. Nuclear is very clean and must dependable. It is just the horror show for end of life rod disposal. Everyone thinks Three Mile Island or Chernobyl. Solar is not very dependable with cloud coverage. It takes a LOT of acreage. Let us say one million panels for 180 mw is almost a thousand acres. Wind turbines also depend on the weather.
So it is choice but the new generation of "no coal" needs to read of the benefits of clean coal. Power Magazine is a wonderful source that may assist you. My favorite saying is
"If you don't like coal, unplug your electric car".
I think that the problems with all types of energies are mentoned correctly. Just to add that fossil fuels not only produce CO2, but also can end in several decades, starting from oil. As for solar and wind energy, supply is random and it requires a lot of land. Yes, we have negative experience with nuclear energy at present (Chernobyl, Fukushima), but it has a chance for future with technoligical improvement, like reaction of fast neutrons, that can utilize presently unused U238.
Looking at this more generally, the overall threat to mankind seems to be CO2 related.
I would think that this is what will be globally catastrophic if not reversed.