3 ms·

> it's hard to see how we ever would have been able to create the modern forms of renewable energy in the first place without fossil fuels as an intermediate te

by radley 7mo ago

> it's hard to see how we ever would have been able to create the modern forms of renewable energy in the first place without fossil fuels as an intermediate technological phase. That wasn't the point. It's clear that fossil fuels are a phase, one that can't last forever because they're finite. At some point they'll run out. But long before that can happens, we're more likely to transition away. Perhaps not completely, but to the point that they're something like whale oil.

fpoling 7mo ago
Mills using water as a source of energy are known for thousands of years. If oil, natural gas or even coal would not exist, that and wind energy would be used on much bigger scale. Then a solar power station using thermal solar could be built like 200 years ago. And nuclear energy would be eventually discovered.
jaggederest 7mo ago
Thank you for stating my thesis better than I could, exactly right. I think they were (and to some degree, especially as a feedstock, are) essential to escape from the energy poverty of e.g. the late 1700s. I just think we could have transitioned away at the turn of the previous century, or the turn of this century, and saved ourselves a lot of pain. The fact that they are still widely used as nominally primary energy (actually stored secondary energy) is a little disappointing.
- crazygringo 7mo ago
  > I just think we could have transitioned away at the turn of the previous century... and saved ourselves a lot of pain. I mean, that's a hugely provocative statement that needs to be backed up with some level of analysis. You need to look at all of the industries and products that would have become impossible, and what the ramifications of that are. Even today, you're basically proposing that entire industries, such as long-distance air travel, effectively disappear. And that sea shipping effectively regresses to sailing ships? I can't even imagine how one could begin to perform an even remotely plausible analysis, given how much each industry relies on other industries, and how difficult it would be to estimate how other technological advances would have developed instead.

by radley 7mo ago

fpoling 7mo ago

Mills using water as a source of energy are known for thousands of years. If oil, natural gas or even coal would not exist, that and wind energy would be used on much bigger scale. Then a solar power station using thermal solar could be built like 200 years ago. And nuclear energy would be eventually discovered.

jaggederest 7mo ago

Thank you for stating my thesis better than I could, exactly right. I think they were (and to some degree, especially as a feedstock, are) essential to escape from the energy poverty of e.g. the late 1700s. I just think we could have transitioned away at the turn of the previous century, or the turn of this century, and saved ourselves a lot of pain. The fact that they are still widely used as nominally primary energy (actually stored secondary energy) is a little disappointing.

crazygringo 7mo ago
> I just think we could have transitioned away at the turn of the previous century... and saved ourselves a lot of pain. I mean, that's a hugely provocative statement that needs to be backed up with some level of analysis. You need to look at all of the industries and products that would have become impossible, and what the ramifications of that are. Even today, you're basically proposing that entire industries, such as long-distance air travel, effectively disappear. And that sea shipping effectively regresses to sailing ships? I can't even imagine how one could begin to perform an even remotely plausible analysis, given how much each industry relies on other industries, and how difficult it would be to estimate how other technological advances would have developed instead.