Story Comments

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

That in itself if not a BAD thing.

Energy is like a CURRENCY, in that it is exchangeable for many other things!

For example, if we had MUCH MORE ENERGY available at economically favorable prices, we could actually launch whole industries that could be tremendously beneficial but which are currently prohibitively expensive to implement. Probably the prime example would be the production of much of the FOOD for human consumption by means of HYDROPONICS and AQUACULTURE --- if one could but afford to run the GROW LIGHTS and MACHINERY. It could be produced in GROWING CENTERS located NEAR to the cities where it is consumed, under CONTROLLED conditions that could be much more readily kept free of PESTS and DISEASE-CAUSING ORGANISMS if it were not subjected to the vagaries of NATURE and put at risk by the whole process of TRANSPORTING the finished product clear across the country from California.

We have, and have LONG had the basic TECHNOLOGY! (Remember all those exhibits you have been seeing ever since you were a kid
whenever you visited Disney World??) We know HOW to do it --- we just can't AFFORD to apply what is known until we can supply enough ENERGY sufficiently cheaply.

And THAT sort of thing is the reason why we need to get OFF of our "fossil-fuels"-based energy diet. What we REALLY need is THERMONUCLEAR! (And that IS indeed coming --- the ITER is now UNDER CONSTRUCTION, at Cadarache, in FRANCE. Why not HERE, do you suppose?? Or even MORE to the point, how come what I am saying here comes across to probably the VAST preponderance of most of those who may be reading these words as sounding like some kind of "pie in the sky" Utopian rhetoric?

I guess no one ever bothers to Google "I.T.E.R".

Well, TRY that, folks. You might LEARN something!

0 Replies