XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science   
   From: YourName@YourISP.com   
      
   In article , Robert Bannister   
    wrote:   
   > On 24/01/2014 12:17 pm, J. Clarke wrote:   
   > > In article , robban@clubtelco.com   
   > > says...   
   > >>   
   > >> On 24/01/2014 4:25 am, Rod Speed wrote:   
   > >>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)  wrote   
   > >>>> Doc O'Leary wrote   
   > >>>>> Greg Goss  wrote   
   > >>>   
   > >>>>>> Modern North Americans just cannot fathom the scale of a horse-based   
   > >>>>>> society.   
   > >>>   
   > >>>>> s/horse-based/sustainable   
   > >>>   
   > >>>>> And, sadly, the problem isn't just limited to North American.  The   
   > >>>>> majority of sci-fi hand waves abundant energy into the future, but   
   > >>>>> the reality is that, so far, that appears to be the hardest hurdle we   
   > >>>>> have facing us.   
   > >>>   
   > >>>> Only hardest in a political sense. There are designs for (relatively)   
   > >>>> inexpensive and easily-manufactured safe nuclear reactors which   
   > >>>> wouldn't require the super-billions of dollars or the many, many years   
   > >>>> to construct, but NOOKYOULAR PHEEER! pretty much kiboshes those.   
   > >>>   
   > >>> I doubt it will if energy does become hard get.   
   > >>>   
   > >>>> Solar power has come a **LONG** way in the last 20 years, and the ONLY   
   > >>>> real hurdle it has left is storage.   
   > >>>   
   > >>> That is no hurdle now with national and sub national   
   > >>> grids and others that are close to that like the EU etc.   
   > >>>   
   > >>>> If someone figures out a high-density storage medium,   
   > >>>   
   > >>> We already have, pumped water.   
   > >>>   
   > >>>> or is willing to install 2-3x base capacity so that the "storage   
   > >>>> medium" is synthesized hydrocarbon fuel of some sort,   
   > >>>   
   > >>> I doubt that will ever make sense.   
   > >>>   
   > >>> The most that is likely is that for the most convenient   
   > >>> transport fuel once natural gas and coal seam gas is   
   > >>> no longer economic as a transport fuel.   
   > >>>   
   > >>>> the energy issue would be settled pretty well.   
   > >>>   
   > >>> It already is if you don't mind using coal and brown coal.   
   > >>>   
   > >>>> Farther into the future you have SPS, which has the advantage of no   
   > >>>> interruptions of service and no losses due to atmosphere or clouds.   
   > >>>> And the standard designs avoid the MICROWAVE DEATHRAY!!! problem.   
   > >>>   
   > >>> Cant see solar power satellites being viable myself.   
   > >>> Bet we use safe thorium nukes instead. MUCH cheaper.   
   > >>   
   > >> Denmark and Spain now produce well over 25% of their total electricity   
   > >> with wind power and that is set to increase.   
   > >   
   > > Bear in mind that the total power consumption of Denmark is tiny   
   > > compared to that of, say, the US.   
   >   
   > So is the amount of space for wind farms.   
      
   I don't know what country it was, but I have seen pictures of wind   
   power towers standing off shore out in the sea. You can also put them   
   on the roof of buildings (or just inside Government buildings ...   
   there's enough hot air in those to power sixty planets!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)