Abstract
Background: Energy is a fundamental requirement in economic growth and is directly related to almost all aspects of global development. The global energy demand is increasing daily due to the expanding economy, industrialization, and population growth. Countries have adopted the trend of renewable energy over non-renewable energy due to the sustainability of renewable energy sources. Bloom energy server is a renewable energy source that utilizes solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) technology to convert fuel into electricity through an electrochemical reaction with high efficiency and without combustion. Oman, however, still relies on non-renewable energy sources, namely oil and gas. Countries continuously apply the most efficient and cost-effective energy sources with the other different energy sources available.
Objective: This paper aims to investigate the different available energy sources, both renewable and non-renewable and compare them and the bloom energy server and make conclusions that Oman can adopt.
Methods: The methodology used was a comprehensive literature search of the Google Scholar database, ProQuest database and Google search. The energy sources investigated are SOFC, solar power, wind energy, hydropower, crude oil energy, coal energy and natural gas. The variant energy sources were compared based on the following parameters: capacity capital cost, reliability and availability, sustainability, lifetime, environmental concerns, efficiency, and long-term cost-effectiveness.
Results: Results showed that renewable energy sources are superior to non-renewable energy sources. Of the renewable sources, SOFC was the most reliable, hydropower the most efficient with the longest lifetime, and solar and wind energy provided a long-term, cost-effective energy option.
Conclusion: In conclusion, perhaps bloom energy servers are not the best option for Oman, but the adoption of renewable energy sources is strongly urged.
Keywords: Solar power, wind energy, hydropower, coal energy, crude oil energy, natural gas.
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1557/mrs.2019.209]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117641]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75602-8_8]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.20517/energymater.2021.03]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ente.201800743]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2004.03.031]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1809426115] [PMID: 30397145]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.02.001]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/476/1/012088]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ese3.239]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00027-014-0377-0]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJESM-07-2019-0012]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-051012-145344]