3 ms·

" It took nature some hundreds of millions of years to accumulate so much easily usable energy" You're thinking in terms of an epoch.. namely our current one.

" It took nature some hundreds of millions of years to accumulate so much easily usable energy" You're thinking in terms of an epoch.. namely our current one. Energy sources change over time. Oil is just the latest incarnation. Nuclear is the next, obvious solution, when fools who don't actually understand it get out of the way. There is enough known Uranium deposits to power the world for 100's of years and this is assuming: A) ancient, inefficient reactors (we have made so much progress, but not allowed to build newer things, and can do even more), and B) we haven't used any new fancy techniques or explored for more Uranium in 50 years. Your bit about Oil is a little wrong (we don't know what 1/2 is): we keep finding new deposits. Using new tech (indirect drilling, undersea, deep digging, Oil Sands, more efficient extraction) we keep moving back 'peak Oil' they keep telling us we're supposed to be at. Eventually we will, but something better will be available by then. We could go Nuclear today and wipe out Co2 emissions and cut energy costs by more than 50%. Probably more. Fusion is maybe not that far off. When the Nuclear and Fusion revolution take off - the 'Oil' era will look to people living in that era as 'wood burning' looks to us now - totally arcane, inefficient and 'low power'.

acqq 10y ago
Do the proper research, the nuclear option is much less promising as the proponents claim (again, "wishful thinking" not the facts). Again not under the assumption of zero growth that they use. Check the real numbers and the technologies known to actually work, and see how long the "growth" is physically possible. That's our subject: the possibility of continual growth. And do watch the video.
- jomamaxx 10y ago
  "Do the proper research, the nuclear option is much less promising as the proponents claim" I agree that Nuclear Tech today has problems, but we haven't made real investments in 50 years. Do you realize how far airline, rail, and road safety has come in that time? I firmly believe that if we put as much $$$ into Nuclear - as we have in Solar - that we'd be way past the safety problems. Also - there is absolutely no physical limit to 'growth'. Yes - commodities are limited and so is space. But we are making better use of both at an exponential level. As some things become scarce, the prices rises, we figure out how to better make use of them. My friend: Plastic. Plastic did not exist 100 years ago. It was not 'on the horizon'. Nobody was even dreaming of it. But imagine life without plastic. We couldn't make a thing without it! So 'plastic'. A single, new, and unforeseen innovation that fundamentally changed everything. And that's only one of many innovations of that era. What is the next 'plastic'? Will we be able to simply forge metals or other minerals as we need them in a fusion reactor? If fusion ever works - this is within reach. Fusion means not only cheap energy, put possibly the ability to make many elements on the periodic table like Star Trek. Again - the possibilities are unlimited. As long as we don't wipe ourselves out, this will go on forever. That said - we measure 'growth' in dollars, and we don't measure dollars in anything :). I suppose you could make the comparative value argument for real growth, and that it depends on 'happiness' or some sort of intangible. At least in classical economic terms - growth will go on ad nauseum.
  - acqq 10y ago
    Ever considered what plastic is made of? Ever tried to read why the fusion rectors don't work? Ever asked some who knows physics if "forging metals in a fusion reactor" has any scientific sense? The possibilities are unlimited only in unsupported dreams.
  - acqq 10y ago
    I've had to remember: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSxihhBzCjk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSxihhBzCjk

acqq 10y ago

Do the proper research, the nuclear option is much less promising as the proponents claim (again, "wishful thinking" not the facts). Again not under the assumption of zero growth that they use. Check the real numbers and the technologies known to actually work, and see how long the "growth" is physically possible. That's our subject: the possibility of continual growth. And do watch the video.

jomamaxx 10y ago
"Do the proper research, the nuclear option is much less promising as the proponents claim" I agree that Nuclear Tech today has problems, but we haven't made real investments in 50 years. Do you realize how far airline, rail, and road safety has come in that time? I firmly believe that if we put as much $$$ into Nuclear - as we have in Solar - that we'd be way past the safety problems. Also - there is absolutely no physical limit to 'growth'. Yes - commodities are limited and so is space. But we are making better use of both at an exponential level. As some things become scarce, the prices rises, we figure out how to better make use of them. My friend: Plastic. Plastic did not exist 100 years ago. It was not 'on the horizon'. Nobody was even dreaming of it. But imagine life without plastic. We couldn't make a thing without it! So 'plastic'. A single, new, and unforeseen innovation that fundamentally changed everything. And that's only one of many innovations of that era. What is the next 'plastic'? Will we be able to simply forge metals or other minerals as we need them in a fusion reactor? If fusion ever works - this is within reach. Fusion means not only cheap energy, put possibly the ability to make many elements on the periodic table like Star Trek. Again - the possibilities are unlimited. As long as we don't wipe ourselves out, this will go on forever. That said - we measure 'growth' in dollars, and we don't measure dollars in anything :). I suppose you could make the comparative value argument for real growth, and that it depends on 'happiness' or some sort of intangible. At least in classical economic terms - growth will go on ad nauseum.
- acqq 10y ago
  Ever considered what plastic is made of? Ever tried to read why the fusion rectors don't work? Ever asked some who knows physics if "forging metals in a fusion reactor" has any scientific sense? The possibilities are unlimited only in unsupported dreams.
- acqq 10y ago
  I've had to remember: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSxihhBzCjk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSxihhBzCjk