Re: Runaway Global Warming Possible!

From: jacob navia (jacob_at_jacob.remcomp.fr)
Date: 01/28/05 

Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 22:31:53 +0100

Coby Beck wrote:

> Why are so many people so eager to swallow such a cockamamie idea, that
> there was no wealth before oil and there can be no wealth without it?
>

Because Bush's fortune comes from oil, and the seven
sisters rule the world.

> If this is a sincere position, well then such a person is faced with only
> two choices:
> 1. live in as much luxury as possible, polluting and destroying the
> environment, until the oil is gone, then live in poverty in a reeking, foul
> mess for the rest of human history or:
> 2. live in poverty now, while there are still forests and animals and air to
> breathe.
>

You got the alternative wrong dude.

The only alternative is:

Scrap oil and use solar energy. We need much *more*
energy than what oil can deliver, and we need a 100%
non-polluting source: the local fusion generator
delivering in a second more energy than we could
use in a century.

Just use the sun dude. It comes up every morning, for
free.

No fumes, no noise, no burning.

JUST USE THE SUN.

We have to *increase* our energy consumption, so that
there is enough for each human being.

We can do that using non-polluting sun energy, and
make a richer society than an oil based one.

Sun powered electricty plants do not pollute at all.
They are scalable at will. We could build 100 000
of them and total pollution would be still zero.
They do not burn anything, there is no associated
fuel to transport and no necessity to pollute the
oceans with fuel spills. The sun powered centrals
do not produce any toxic fumes nor any by-product
since there is no combustion!

Remember when we discovered wood as fuel?

That was quite an improvement. We build fires,
and fire helped us to go to colder places.

But it didn't cut it, we needed more energy.
We replaced it later with coal.
It had more energy per Kg, and allowed
the industrial revolution to start.

But coal, didn't cut it either. We needed much more
energy, and so we replaced most of it with oil,
because the energy needs were much bigger.

The next step is before us. And now either we do it
or we go to hell, trapped in a runaway weather
change that we started with wood.

We have to get rid of this primitive technology and
use a scalable technology that doesn't pollute at all.

Technically this is an old hat. There are already
demonstrated all kinds of solar turbines running
smoothly. Wind can be used, photovoltaics, and many
many others!

Hydro-electric energy can be used from the tides,
there is a power central like that in Bretagne
producing electricity smoothly since 40 years.

Most of the equipement is very stable since there
is no fuel burning. In 40 years the central was
disconnected once for maintenance.

The technology is simple and robust, and can
be multiplied at will. Tides happen in many places.

We are surround by enormous quantities of energy
we could use without polluting anything.

And the energy waste could be stoped. Just
increasing the isolation factor and lowering the
heat losses of refrigerators, improving light bulbs, etc
would reduce the energy consumption without
impact the living standard. If you use a clever
designed bulb, that produces much more light per
watt you have the same confort as someone that
uses a lot of power with a badly designed bulb
that uses only a few percent of the energy to
make photons.

We need a new technology: reliable, advanced,
non-polluting.

But to create that we have to change ouselves,
and that is the most difficult part.

Quantcast