Quote:
Originally Posted by HOWITZER
There is an inherent fallacy that the global economy as an entity can be sustained at its growing level of complexity by alternative energy sources. The problem is not the production of the energy, it's the consumption. Environmentalists want to squeeze the pinch point (energy supply) to force change, but it won't address the biggest problem of all: we consume more energy than we can afford (both environmentally, and resource depletion wise).
It's absolutely mind-blowing the amount of energy that goes into building one car, or powering the network to sustain a cell phone, or building a road/building. As we build more elaborate things the energy need will increase to both support these new complex things, but also the old things.
|
Not only that, but putting new versions of the old things in emerging economies. We take for granted things like reading by a lightbulb when the sun goes down, or having a refrigerator for perishable food, or having a washing machine that will work in our homes instead of going to a filthy river. LOTS of people in the world still live to this standard, and want what we have. Not to mention the fact that despite us having all of these things, we still aren't satisfied and are driving for more innovation to improve quality of life, and to have that high quality of life for an extended period of time. IT ALL NEEDS ENERGY.
The other fallacy is that somehow renewables will be cheap, reliable and have minimal environmental footprint because the fuel is free. If people only understood what goes into delivering our energy, or the true nature of the demand. Energy isn't just the gas you buy, or the light you turn on some of the time. Its the energy to make sure your gas is available to buy, or that your car is a thing made of aluminium and not wood, or that your iPhone is a thing and can use the internet, or that a hospital will be available to you when the sun isn't shining and you can live in a city.
Renewables are expensive, unreliable, will have a huge footprint and have a tremendous amount of radioactive and chemically toxic co-product when made. None of the promoters of this "grand solution" seem to take that into account and discuss a serious plan for addressing these problems.