Re: why not try to find more energy resources


On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, default wrote:

Why give an impractical and sarcastic answer to an earnest, if somewhat
nieve question?

Well it may be impractical due to our human need to selfishly
reproduce in excess - but it damn sure was intended as an earnest
response.

Then I apologise for mis-interpreting your motives.


Reducing the dependence on oil and coal would go a long way to solving
problems but it is probably over simplistic or optimistic way of
looking at things.

Yup, but what else we gonna do? If you don't approach a problem with at least the *hope* that the solutions you try stand a chance of working, then you're defeated before you even start. And these *are* problems that need to be addressed in an urgent and practical manner.


"Every solution contains the seed of other problems."

Cute quote, but not necessarily true. I provide technical solutions to problems for a living. Not everything I've built has led to further problems! ;-)


OK so we have limitless free energy - do we also get limitless free
food land water as a result? Imagine a lot of desalinization plants,
hydroponics, and people and no other animals . . .

Well, you're going off on a bit of a tangent there. Nobody's talking about limitless free energy, just making best use of the resources available to us at the moment - wind, wave, tidal, solar, geothermal, etc., to reduce carbon emissions instead of recklessly wasting our fossil fuel reserves and buggering up the climate at the same time, which is what we're doing now.


If the limitless free energy is in the form of fusion reactors - how
much heat will the reactors themselves add to the ecosystem?

Fusion reactors... BWAHAHAHAHA! Ain't gonna happen. If it ever does, it'll be LONG, long after they could have done any good towards solving the present environmental problems.


How about the environmental impact of building the means to get the
energy? That is an enormous amount of material and would grow as the
population grows. Population growth isn't linear, the world
population has more than doubled in my lifetime already.

Actually, you may have the clue to the solution to the problem of overpopulation right there. Because it's pretty well established that sperm count among males in the "industrialised" nations is dropping dramatically, whether due to estrogen-like industrial pollutants or whatever isn't certain, but the effect is there for all to see. Western birth rates *are* falling, even as we speak. Overpopulation isn't the root cause of the environmental problems that confront us, but even if it was I think it's a problem that will sort itself out pretty soon.


We are in this situation because we never considered the consequences
of the "industrial age."

We still aren't committed to doing what needs to be done - there are
still some idiots that think it is all a scam because they fear the
way it may impact their own lives. AND I can understand that . . .
Whatever a government does to limit fossil fuel use will be costly
complex and probably won't work - like using corn for fuel - probably
costs more now to produce corn than it replenishes in total energy -
cost in dollars and energy - but ADM is fat and happy.

Well, as far as biofuels are concerned, it's an emerging technology and probably needs more "seed-money" than most to see it up and running. Then again, relative costs will always influence priorities but let's face it - the price of fossil fuels... no, that's not quite right... The *cost* of fossil fuels is never likely to go DOWN, is it? As for the rest of the alternative fuel sources, we are in total agreement, and as far as governmental support is concerned, it's all down to lobbying and the *perception* of priorities amongst us - the voters. If we make enough political noise, we *can* get that wind-farm raised. We did it here, in Scotland. Several times. We'll do it again. And so can you.

The whole discussion may be moot if the climate changes happening now
exacerbate the level of carbon in the atmosphere - permafrost contains
vegetable matter which will add to CO2 when it decomposes, warming sea
temps will release sequestered methane from the oceans - time will
tell - water absorbs more heat from the sun than ice - maybe the
mechanisms that sequester carbon naturally can ramp up and dispose of
the XS faster than it is released from natural stocks, and maybe it
won't.

I'm more worried about the methane hydrate hidden under the Siberian Tundra, meself. A LOT more accessible and volatile than the sub-oceanic clathrates. Mind you, could be a viable fuel resource in itself, if we learn to harvest it in time...


To put it in engineering terms it is like trying to adjust the zero
point of a system that has a response time measured in tens or
hundreds of centuries.

Yabbut... once you KNOW you've tweaked the thermostat past boiling point, and the boiler's gonna explode, it kinda makes sense to at least TRY to cool things down a little while you still can, doesn't it?

Cheers,
Pete.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Navys Energy Reform Initiatives Raise Concerns Among Shipbuilders
    ... Navy’s Energy Reform Initiatives Raise Concerns Among Shipbuilders ... The Defense Department in fiscal 2008 spent $16 billion on fuel. ... that amount excludes the costs for transporting and protecting the oil ... more energy efficient in ship construction. ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • Pentagon looks to cut oil use and costs
    ... Pentagon looks to cut oil use and costs ... military's spending amid high fuel costs, ... The Defense Department uses more than four times as much energy as the ... The memo also called for producing or buying renewable energy "to help ...
    (misc.invest.stocks)
  • Re: Amazing New Air Car - Its NOT About the Air!
    ... surviving global warming and WWIII. ... our energy sucking private parts, and of those pesky Muslims that ... fuel then you'll get NOx ... because of our extensive fossil fuel usage. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Tax refund checks
    ... producing it (unless you can get a fusion reaction going - then you've got ... Fuel iz fuel - they all cost resources to produce. ... There's also costs for transporting the fuel to the ship and ... barrels of oil to get this low energy content fuel into our tanks. ...
    (rec.music.classical.guitar)
  • Re: Solar-hydrogen home power system?
    ... >> Amortization or no amortization, fossil fuels will eventually not be ... >make fuel from solar electricity because properly amortized, ... >costs to go to synthesized fuels is just enough more to kill the goose. ... that is one with a good energy production profit ...
    (sci.energy)