XPost: alt.philosophy, alt.politics.socialism, alt.politics   
   From: plato5@dreft.org   
      
   mark.evins@gmail.com wrote:   
   > On Jul 4, 1:39 am, boras  wrote:   
   >> mark.ev...@gmail.com wrote:   
   >>> On Jul 3, 8:08 pm, Roger Johansson  wrote:   
   >>>> On Jul 4, 12:34 am, tg  wrote:   
   >>>>> Well Roger I think you are missing the matter of energy. We are like a   
   >>>>> rich child going through the inheritance of fossil fuels, which is the   
   >>>>> only reason there are all the things you talk about. I know that in   
   >>>>> one Scandanavian country ( you know this stuff better than I do I'm   
   >>>>> sure) they plan to get all their electricity from wood in the near   
   >>>>> future, but we are not all so lucky as to have such a renewable   
   >>>>> resource. Please consider this in your analysis; there is no abundance   
   >>>>> even of food without the use of fossil energy, and the associated   
   >>>>> disturbance of our metastable climate mechanisms.   
   >>>> I am educated as an electronics engineer, and this includes a lot of   
   >>>> knowledge about physics in general, math and some chemistry.   
   >>>> I know the physical and technical limitations we are dealing with, and   
   >>>> our possibilities to produce more energy are practically endless.   
   >>> um...  no.   
   >>>> The powerful oil industry has downplayed and sabotaged the development   
   >>>> of other sources of fuel, to keep the price of oil high, for example   
   >>>> they have spread a lot of scare propaganda about nuclear energy.   
   >>>> Today we have many choices like wind and wave energy, solar energy,   
   >>>> fast growing forest energy, etc..   
   >>> There came a time in England when so much wood had been consumed that   
   >>> it was a high crime to cut wood. The land was nearly barren of trees.   
   >>> A visiting Cardinal reported back to Rome that the people of England   
   >>> were so poor that they burned rocks as fuel.   
   >>> That was coal.   
   >>> Coal produced much more energy than it's production consumed, and it   
   >>> was thus a cheap source of fuel.   
   >>> Oil was even better.   
   >>> But a funny thing happens to natural resources. They run out. We've   
   >>> reached the point where it's beginning to cost as much to produce fuel   
   >>> as the fuel itself provides. The demand increases but the production   
   >>> can't. In fact, shortly it will begin to fall behind, then further   
   >>> behind, then even further...   
   >>>> The fact that nuclear power plants are shut down for no good reason at   
   >>>> all is a sign of the fact that there is absolutely no lack of energy.   
   >>>> We have a couple of totally modern nuclear power plants in my country   
   >>>> standing still instead of producing Gigawatts of power.   
   >>>> But the producers of energy want to keep the price of energy high,   
   >>>> like the producers of anything under capitalism, that is the reason   
   >>>> why we are not producing a lot more energy in many different ways.   
   >>>> Wind and wave generators outside the coast of Alaska could produce   
   >>>> enough energy for several east coast cities, for example.   
   >>>> We could also tap into the hot center of the earth, pump down water   
   >>>> and get high pressure overheated steam in return.   
   >>>> Wind generators in the carribean and outside the southeast coast of   
   >>>> USA could suck energy out of the hurricanes and at the same time   
   >>>> decrease the damage done by the hurricanes.   
   >>> One problem of all of these technologies is that it costs more (in   
   >>> energy) to produce the machines than the machines produce.   
   >>> Solar power is not sufficient to smelt the ores necessary to make the   
   >>> equipment to generate the power.   
   >> The French use solar power to smelt metal.   
   >> They made a solar furnace.   
   >> A German factory is using the energy from solar panels to produce solar   
   >> panels.   
   >   
   > Cite?  I can't find anything which discusses these.   
   >   
   >>> Windmills are hazardous to wildlife on top of being unable to produce   
   >>> enough energy to make the machines.   
   >> 20% of the electric energy is made by windmills in Denmark.   
   >> Within the next 20 years it should raise to 50%.   
   >   
   > Which doesn't address the problems of fabrication using the produced   
   > energy nor the hazard to wildlife, nor the acreage necessary to have   
   > enough windmills to produce the electricity.   
   >   
   >>> Bio fuels are useful, but as the demand for the biofuels increases the   
   >>> cost will necessarily rise as we'll be turning food into machines and   
   >>> thus competing with ourselves for the food and fuel.   
   >> Efficiency comes here in to play too.   
   >> Those factories that produce bio fuels are getting more efficient.   
   >> 90% of the houses in Greece use solar power for hot water.   
   >> It work 10-10 1/2 months a year.   
   >   
   > More efficient doesn't address the raw material problem. How much land   
   > goes to growing food to use as fuel?   
   >   
   >>   
   >>> As oil disappears, so will the various chemicals and polymers produced   
   >>> from petroleum and it's byproducts. This will inevitably result in a   
   >>> higher energy cost to transport the food/fuel, to produce the food/   
   >>> fuel (agribusiness relies on fertilizers made from petroleum).   
   >>> Medical costs will rise as the materials of the trade become more   
   >>> expensive due to the scarcity of petro-chemicals and plastics and etc.   
   >> I visited once a farmer who was growing biodynamically grown food.   
   >> His apples were the biggest and were testing great.   
   >> Compost can be used to fertilize the fields.   
   >   
   > Scale is the problem. Where do you get enough compost (or manure) that   
   > is rich enough to fertilize a 4000 acre farm? It wasn't until the   
   > production of synthetic (petroleum based) fertilizers that the   
   > massive, single crop factory farms became possible. Prior to that, it   
   > was smaller farms, crop rotation, and the local market.   
   >   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>>> Outside coasts which are eroded we can put wave generators which suck   
   >>>> the energy out of the waves, to get electricity and decrease the   
   >>>> damage done by the waves.   
   >>>> There are so many technical possibilities that we have no reason at   
   >>>> all to worry about a lack of energy.   
   >>>> Technically there are no limits, all the rest is politics.   
   >>> There are limits. Only so much of any commodity is ever available for   
   >>> any demand. So long as supply outstrips demand, there is growth. Once   
   >>> demand outstrips supply, there is regression. If you turn all our food   
   >>> into fuel, what do we eat then?  Once the artificial fertilizers are   
   >>> gone, how do you grow all that food to begin with?   
   >> Compost and manure   
   >   
   > Um... cite?   
      
   I was watching the German TV Deutsche Welle   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)