What can we do to combat the energy crisis and plan for future ones?

It's really not that complicated.

With alternate energy technology near it's most efficient, a structure can be built (commercial, residential, whatever) that can provide more than enough power for itself. Then link the stuctures together making them a grid of redundancy. If one structure lags on power, the others can together help to stablize the grid. A 'herd' configuration, if you will.

Right now, we have solar panels with 95% efficiency that can pick up power on a rainy day.

Wind Turbine technology has been proven to be 98% effective in power production.

And of course, people need to shut off their computers when they go to bed.

What many people fail to realize, is that different alternate energy sources are needed in different parts of the USA, as well as different parts of the world.

California might be an excellent location for solar power, except during its 'rainy season'.

Parts of the Southwest, being basically a desert, might be excellent for solar power year round.

The Northeast, and probably the whole East Coast is less suitable for solar power, because it rains, or is cloudy here, quite frequently, year round.

California and parts of the Southwest, would largely be 'desert', if it wasn't for the damming of rivers, to provide a year round water supply. Those dams have the extra benefit of providing what should be cheap electricity.

In the Northeast, where we get more than abundant precipitation year round, rivers are generally not dammed, and instead of providing cheap electricity, they provide shipping lanes - the Hudson River being an excellent example. But NY State, north of the NYC Metro area (north of Peekskill), gets inexpensive energy from the diversion at Niagara Falls. However, most of NY State's population is in the NYC Metro area which gets expensive energy generated by Oil or Nuclear Reactors (Indian Point).

It is insane to have built Nuclear Reactors close to major Metro areas, especially the three Reactors at Indian Point, 40 miles upstream the Hudson River from NYC. If those Reactors were to 'blow', it would immediately affect about 16 million people in the states of NY, NJ and Connecticut. Considering that the NYC Metro area is one of the USA's main economic engines and one of the most affluent areas in the USA, a local Reactor blowout would destroy the USA economy.

So if Nuclear Reactors are to be the source of alternate energy, they need to be built far away from population centers.

One major problem with the USA depending on Solar or Nuclear energy, is that those facilities are best built away from population centers. As Electricity loses most of its energy when transmitted far distances, it is impossible to provide sufficient energy transmitted from low population areas to those areas with high population density. The true solution to that is Super-Conductivity, which unfortunately is not yet feasible.

Super-Conductivity's sister is Super-Magnetism. Super-Magnetism if made affordable and practical, can provide very efficient public transportation by levitating trains above rails. This is to say, Super-Conductivity eliminates Electrical Resistance, making electricity Super-Efficient, while Super-Magnetism eliminates Friction, makes public transportation Super-Efficient.

I have two problems with Nuclear Reactors. One is they are too dangerous to operate, with their by-products too dangerous to store over a long period of time. The other problem is that Nuclear Reactors' waste product is Plutonium which is the main fuel for Nuclear Bombs, and we should eliminate Nuclear Bombs, and not encourage their production with Nuclear Reactor waste.

Using Ocean (and Great Lakes) Tides and Currents to generate electricity, has no dangerous byproducts. The negative side of this source of energy is that it’s only useful to areas near the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf or Great Lakes Coasts. The positive side is that most Americans live near the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf or Great Lakes Coasts.

Using Wind to generate energy is better in some parts of the country than others, but should be highly encouraged where applicable. It is a source of energy that could be used in the Coastal regions as well as many other locations, and windmills could even be built offshore.

Therefore, I think the future of efficient, inexpensive, plentiful energy is the following: Using Ocean (and Great Lakes) Tides and Currents to generate electricity near our largest population centers. Using Solar Energy in the Sun Belt. Using Wind Energy. If using Nuclear Reactors (which I am against), they should only be built hundreds of miles from any large population centers. Our Public Transportation system should be rebuilt using Super-Magnetism and Super-Conductivity. Super-Magnetism and Super-Conductivity would make any source of energy far more efficient, which means we need to invest a lot more in research of Super-Magnetism and Super-Conductivity.

I think I have covered all the non-fuel-burning sources. Ultimately, whatever source of energy is used, electricity can be made much more efficient using Super-Conductivity and Super-Magnetism. As such, I think the Federal Government should embark on a Super-Conductivity/Magnetism project similar in scope to the Manhattan Project, with billions of dollars invested.

We are using far too much energy and taxpayers dollars on our absurd wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That money and energy would be much better used in developing alternate energy sources, and in creating more efficient uses of electricity, in particular Super-Conductivity/and Super-Magnetism.

At this time, the easiest, quickest, most painless way for the USA to become more energy efficient, is to encourage Telecommuting. Telecommuting uses less energy and lot less personal and business expense, in a variety of ways including reduction in physically commuting, and reduction in energy expenses in business offices. Telecommuting also keeps more money in workers’ pockets, and reduces the need for governmental financing of commuter railroads and subways.

I think I have covered all bases here.

Could we not recreate our Department of Energy in the formula of NASA? In fact, is energy not more of a priority to everything except jobs and hearlthcare? If we were to fund the Department of Energy sufficiently to attract the top scientists working in the field of alternative and cleaner energy, is there little real doubt that they could develop numerous viable energy sources and technologies? This would put at least a small number of citizens to work and funnel most of the money spent right back into our economy, all while moving us closer to less expensive and more reliable energy.

The sticking point is what to do with the technology once it is developed, which is a given. The far right pro business demagogues will always scream when government engages in an enterprise, even when it's for the public's best interest. They aspire to claim every opportunity for profit production for themselves, even if it will cost the public more money for their profit margins, all while claiming that private industry can do it better than government. While this may be true in instances, their ultimate motive is always the chance to make money off of the public. And yet, is not energy an issue of national emergency right now. Aren't we all avexed over the goings on in Egypt, because of it's importance to our source of energy?

Well, one solution is to auction off the license to proven alternative energy technology to the private sector highest bidder, with the proviso that the technology is the property of the people of the United States, and all of it's related manufacturing must remain within the United States. This creates the technologies we need, puts people to work, keeps all of our money in our country and provides all of us with cheaper, more reliable and cleaner energy; while still appeasing corporate interests.

COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD.COM

How about driving only when you really have to and consolidating trips?
Or turning off the god damn lights when you leave a room???
One fucking lightbulb produces about one ton of carbon in the atmosphere within its lifetime whether it's incandescent or flourescent.
It's way too late for helpful hints or future technology to come save the day.
We are in a climate crisis people!
I've been waiting for solar homes and cars since the 1960s.
How about we just all stop being such spoiled rotten gluttons?

S O L A R.

What we need to combat the energy crisis is the same thing we need to combat the unemployment/underemployment crisis and that is infrastructure. We burn 900 billion a year on war and weapons of war why not use that money for just one year to build out our solar, geothermal, wind, and wave power alternatives. The following year lets use that next 900 billion to rebuild our roads and add piezoelectric to have roads that charge our cars as we drive on them. These are not scifi impossibilities but merely changes in priorities.

Before we do anything, we must rebuild the infrastructure here. We must require all new construction to use some form of solar or wind for electric. There's absolutely no excuse for the crisis of today. We have known since the gas wars of the early 70's that something had to be done ASAP.
Here in Lakeland, FL, half of our monthly electric bill is "fuel adjustment" costs. Fuel goes up much more quickly than our usage. So, why aren't these utility companies required to use solar.
You get new construction jobs with any infrastructure building. Let's get to it now.

oil is far too valuable to waste on fuel. oil was made twice; 110 million and 150 million years ago at times of extreme global warming. oil production peaked and now it is in decline. there will be no new discoveries, the entire earth has been surveyed.

Encourage Telecomuting.

High speed public transportation.

Harness energy of ocean tides & currents.

Reduce USA Military and end wars in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Implement smart-grid tech so that we don't have to run extra power plants to handle surge capacity at peak hours. Using energy more efficiently will help in our transition to renewable energy sources, as we will not have to maintain a system with such duplication and high peak usage.

The biggest hurdle is our attitude to our energy uses. If we put as much money into alternative energy research as oil companies put into their commercials, the benefits would be astronomical.

Rationing. Only 75 minutes of Fadebook per day.... That'd fix the @$!*%# energy crisis.

Seven billion people is simply too many to sustain in a world that believes Earth is merely a resource to make money and a dumping ground for all our wasteful shit.
Until we figure out how to recycle our shit and use it to power the future we need to use more condoms, have more abortions, ADOPT and realize that our species was never meant to live to 80 on oxygen machines and dozens of drugs.
We are unnatural.

Doing my part to reduce waste by choosing reusable products instead of disposables. Buying products with minimal packaging (including the economy size when that makes sense for you) will help to reduce waste. And whenever you can, recycle paper, plastic, newspaper, glass and aluminum cans. If there isn't a recycling program in your community . By recycling half of your household waste, you can save 2,800 pounds of carbon dioxide annually

Seize the middle east in a bloody handed 50 year war of imperialist petro-conquest ?

Uhm,.....sit and cry quietly while repeating soothing phrases to ourselves under our raw and saddened breath?

Dance naked in the sun,....and refuse to live north of centeral Florida ?

My fave -turn to drugs and REALLY REALLY complex forms of mathematical mysticism ? ( that shit can REALLY keep you busy )

The price of energy has to go up. Sorry, but it does. Along with price increases should also come programs and technology to make people aware of how much energy they are using, and wasting. An iPhone app, for example, that keeps track of how many kilo watt hours my house is using would allow me to target when and where waste may be occurring. Once I figure that out I can then make effort to reduce my consumption, thus negating the effect of a price hike.
I think that more work needs to be done in allowing people to understand what their energy demands truly are. In the same manner that we benefit from nutrition labels, I feel we would also benefit from carbon labels.

More emphasis on investment and marketing 24 hr solar and tidal energy which are both true renewable sources. And a big part of the future regarding energy is conserving water which is also used in many of the dirty and dangerous sources like oil, coal and nuclear which is not reliable in times of drought or heatwaves. Conservation on our part as well is also important and working towards more sustainable investments along with Sustainable Agriculture that moves away from fossil fuels to more agroecological practices. With climate change changing rainfall patterns we may also have to change where we grow food and how it is grown. Energy sources of the past need to give way to the visionary cleaner energies of the future

Nuclear Power, Completely renewable energy. Technology is much improved from the age of meltdowns.