which type of home energy is cheaper? electric, gas, or oil?
87369
Generally speaking Natural Gas has been the cheapest for the past years. However now with the electric heat and air at 90% effeciency the centeral heating is the same cost to run as gas, and in some cases less with a well insulated home.  Energy for the stove is still less costly with gas. The Propain Gas costs more than Natural Gas. Heating Oil is a low cost now, but does not have the efficiency of the modern highly efficient electric heat pump centeral heat and air. Even cheeper is to put individual gas heaters in each bedroom and one in Living room and Kitchen. Zoning like this saves the most on home energy.Do not forget that summer will come and Air conditioning is needed aswell.Therefore a combined Airconditioning and heating system of high efficient electric is the best solution for modernization. Seperate gas heaters is the cheapest heat.
2627
I could suggest several considerations.  First P=IE, that is Power equals the electrical current (I in Amperes) times the voltage (E in volts).  Current is like the flow of water in a pipe and voltage is like the pressure causing the water to flow.  If you use the water to drive a hydraulic piston (say to hoist an automobile for repair) you can use either a small piston and high pressure or a larger piston and lower pressure.  Which is more cost effective?\n\nIn the United States, electric power is delivered to neighborhoods using three wires (three phases) strung along telephone (power) poles.  Only two of the wires are led to a single residence but the neighborhood must use all three wires to balance load on the wires.  Within a house electricity passes from only one wire (phase) to ground or earth to light a lightbulb which uses 110 volts.  The clothes dryer that needs far more power is connected between two of the supply wires (two phase) and to ground to supply 220 volts.  A machine shop might connect a very large motor to all three supply wires to obtain even more power at 440 volts.\n\nSix volts or even 12 volts DC in an automobile circuit can be touched with little danger.  It is less dangerous to accidentally touch a 110 volt AC wire than a 220 volt source and 440 volts is most dangerous.\n\nTherefore, the selection of voltage depends in part on safety and then on the size of the job to be tackled and also economic factors.  The higher the required current, the larger the required wires using expensive copper.  Increasing the voltage reduces the needed current and reduces the needed copper to do a given job.  The higher the required voltage, the more expensive the required electrical insulation will be.  Engineers must determine the best trade off of many factors.
1168671
Well, in some cases (like solar cells) the cost can be prohibitive. Retrofitting a house with enough solar energy to participate in a buy-back program can cost $35,000, which would mean (at the current pricing structure) a 20-year ROI. Most folks in the US move every 5-10 years, so you would never realize that "payoff".\nIn other cases, like biodiesel and ethanol, the distilling process can take almost as much energy to produce, overall, as it will harness. Sure, you get portability with the non-fossil liquid fuels, but the energy to make the stuff still has to come from somewhere else, and right now, that means coal, nuke, or oil power primarily (at least in the USA).\nOther disadvantages include unreliability, slow recharge times, limited range, and limited performance when compared to fossil fuels. Even wind power (which is fairly cost-effective) is not terribly reliable, depending on a variable power supply (wind). If generation points were distributed more broadly around the country, there might be more reliable average generation, but a still day still means "no power." \nThere is no doubt that "renewable sources" are a possibility, but the state of the art right now is about at the "finger painting" level.
488548
Depends so much!  Are you paying for gas and/or electric?  Do you need to pay to heat your water?  How big is your place?\n\nI am really cheap on the electric-- my bill is usually 25 bucks a month (two bedroom) and gas (to heat) has varied from 10 (summer) to 50 (winter).\n\nI plan on an average of 50 bucks.  \n\nActually, the best way to do this is to find the place you're interested in.  Then you find out what gas and electric companies the prior tenant used.  Then you call and ask them the averages and highs/lows.  They can give out this information to help you plan.
242183
The average all electric home in America uses 2 kW per hour. The 26,000 kW per year is about 3 kW per hour. So we are giving you 50% more than the national average usage. The peak demand for most homes usually does not exceed 10-15 kW. Since the generator will produce 30 kW, peak demand will not be a problem. In fact, the transformer the supplies electricity to your home is probably rated at 30 kVA (kilovolt amps) which is the same thing that the generator will be able to produce. Since the average usage for an all electric home is 2 kW and the generator products 30 kW, it actually produces enough energy to service your average demand and 14 of your neighbors.
1053174
If you mean greatest source as in overall production then solar shall be your answer hands down.  If you mean, greatest in the sense of coming from one place as a power plant, then one should answer fusion. And we should not discount used vegetable oil diesel vehicles.  The smell of cooking french fries on the highway is one generations to come shall savior..he..he.
195139
A flex fuel car. the gas is generally cheaper but harder to find. The engines are regular engines and no expensive hybrid batteries to replace. Or they have the clean diesel cars now too.
162289
My dad in Australia has converted his car to run on Liquid Petroleum Gas. It has halved his costs every time he fills his tank. See the link below for more info.
423132
It all depends on the area where you live. Like people in Florida would benefit most from Solar energy. People living near dams would benefit more form water energy. Wind energy would benefit people who live in the mountains. It all has to do with the geography of the land. But dealing with fuel options... I'm stumped!
1146837
way too cheap\nwe've all gotten used to cheap energy\n\nwww.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net
197817
To answer your primary question, it just needs to be less expensive than fossil fuels...oil in particular.\n\n1.  Very few "direct" renewable sources are available non-stop.  A few would be tidal power, geothermal power and hydroelectric power.  There are many "indirect" sources, such as biofuels (ethanol, biodiesel, methane) which are the process of extracting energy from materials.\n\n2. Nothing is really practical (at this point) to compete.  Oil is still too cheap.\n\n3. Storage either in liquid fuel form or conversion to electricity offers the two easiest ways to move large amounts of energy.\n\n4. There's many viable technologies available today, but they are under continuous refinement to make them better, more efficient, less costy, and ultimately, more competitive\n\n5. This one is always fun.  Wind and hydroelectric don't pollute, but one is blamed for killing migratory birds and the other is hated for destroying habitats surrounding rivers.  Both offer the most promise as the next best source of energy compared to fossil fuels.\n\n6. Well, this depends on whether the consumer is in an energy rich or energy poor area.  If you live in an area where there's ample sun, good wind, and/or rivers you can dam up, then you're living close to where you can produce it.  If you can't produce enough energy from the sources immediately available to you, then you will either need to conserve more or import it.\n\n7. Politicians are likely only going to back solutions that prove to be overwhelmingly beneficial to their constituents.  You will get corn belt pols that back ethanol for the obvious positive economic impact that it will have on their areas.   Likewise, wind in areas that it could prove beneficial.\n\nThere is no one magic bullet for every energy need, that needs to be understood.  Some sources will win over others, based on the application and its availability.  But until oil gets more expensive (like over $100 per barrel) then most alternative sources just simply can't economically compete with today's renewable harnessing technology.
131248
Consumer economy. Gas has historically been much cheaper than any other source of fuel. When it's price rose in those countries, only THEN did they move to alternative fuels. Same goes for what will happen here. Gas has priced itself out of our market now.
100433
As far as:\ncost\nsafety\nreliability\nmaintenance\n?\nregarding:\nappliances\nheating\nrefrigeration\n?\n\nGenerally, surprisingly enough, people in your area have this pretty well figured out for the region. <They just copy good engineers work> If you are spending money, call six contractors and ask for an informal demographic profile of the area. Ask them what you should do.\n\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=gas+vs+electric
1088720
Energy is power. Without oil, no economy and army can survive.
788942
Your question leads us to try and come up with what creates energy and that is not going to happen.\nI suppose you are asking what conversion processes exist and which is best for your needs or the needs of the general population.\nThe energy in fossil fuels is converted to heat and the most popular source is coal because it is least expensive.  That heat energy from coal is then converted to electricity at most power plants.\nThe energy in petroleum is converted to kinetic energy in your car's engine.  Since we buy millions of barrels per day, one can assume it is the most popular.\nThe energy coming from atomic fusion is the greatest energy used on the planet.  We get it from the sun.  We can capture that energy and convert it to electricity too.  Not only is it our planet's greatest source of heat, but also is the greatest source of light.  Given the number of people sunbathing at the pool, one can assume it is the most popular, too.  Atomic energy can also be pulled from uranium and turned into electricity or used to destroy entire towns.  One is popular, the other is not.\nPlease add some more info to your question.  It is too vague for me to answer well.  Just as minootoo points out, the pros and cons of ALL sources of energy is beyond the scope of this forum.
1600
I work for a natural gas co. W.V.& would haveto say electric is the easiest to install & maintain. Natural gas then lp would be alot cheaper to heat with
335846
Power Consumption is the rate at which you use power (watts).\nPower used in your home is measured in killo-Watt hours and is priced as $ per KW-hr used. \n\nSo at $.40 per kW-hr rate and you use 300 kW-hr in a month then your cost would be $.40 x 300 = $120\n\nnote: killo = 1000