I know man, man if e stat ion

For each of us, the universe is different. A homeless man may view the universe as unfair, hard and tough. A rich man may view the universe as a lovely place full of luxury and pleasure. Both of them are viewing the same universe, it is just different because of their perceptions of it and their life experiences.

This is a fundamental key to understanding, to know that how you perceive the universe is how it is to you. If you feel it is full of fear and hatred, then it will be. If you think it is full of love and happiness, it is.

We are all obsessive compulsive

Nothing we can do or say will change anything
Can you change anything yes some thing, ever thing and nothing

Mmm

rick ps i like this site

Thorium at least is cleaner than Uranium nuclear power.

Some estimates (? accuracy) are that if the world did truly try and run on Uranium based Nuclear power - there'd be Peak Uranium within a decade. But others may know better on that. Still obvious downside risks of the stuff as Iran showing at present.

From my reading of the internet the past 10 years on this issue, there are answers - but time is short to do the big shift.

"Who Killed The Electric Car?" is a doco that shows vested interests and inertia in the public and political imagination are our biggest threats.

The Australian CSIRO solar research dept has said since the mid 1990s that Australia could power its grid with 50km x 50km of solar-thermal power stations in the desert. The latest technology seems to have reduced the area needed to 30km x 30km even with increased national electricity needs over that time. The CSIRO says such a system would take 15 years to build and be cheaper than coal power plants before then.

Once up and running the maintenance cost is mainly in feather dusters if it doesn't rain enough. No mining, transporting raw materials etc etc to worry about.

As detailed on the ABC Radio National "Rear Vision" program - the Howard govt. closed down this nation's main solar R&D centre as one of its first acts of office and credible evidence was presented suggesting the hand of Big Coal. Sounds like conspiracy - but big money at stake so presumably so, though rationalisations to appease consciences probably were also at play.

Solar Thermal power can power the world with current technology. Heat storage and Chemical storage - eg fractionating Ammonia into Hydrogen and Nitrogen and recombining to make Ammonia - means turbines get driven overnight and through a cloudy day or even three. Spreading the STP or CSP (Concentrating Solar Power) stations around - like near Katherine, Mt Isa, Dubbo, Mildura, Pt Augusta, Kalgoorlie etc means the national grid is well served and it is unlikely to be cloudy everywhere for days on end.

Direct Current undersea cables can theoretically export electricity to nearby nations.

CSP stations could fill the Gobi desert, arid areas of India, Pakistan, southern Russia, central Asia, the middle East, North Africa, Spain (where big ones are being built), Greece, southern Italy, the Kalahari, Peruvian desert, Mexico, south western USA (where big CSP stations are providing a lot of local power already), Texas etc.

Photovoltaics add back up to day time peak energy needs.

Wind and Tidal/Wave can add to especially to regions at high latitudes.

As for transport - electrification and lots of light rail.

Electric car technology is as old as Henry Ford and the model-T. Current battery technology and capacitors to multiply battery efficiency and time length means sports cars like the Tesla and SUVs like the 150mpg intercity driving or zero petrol/gas ever for inner city commuting AFSTrinity Xtreme Hybrid SUV are purchasable right now.

Hydrogen fuel cells are on the horizon and would work in well with solar-electric power to fractionate and store the hydrogen.

So all is soluble - if we use some imagination and take on some panic that the fossil fuel age is coming to an end.

Tar Sands and Shale OIl have to be boiled to make crude oil equivalent - where's the energy for doing that? From burning lovely natural gas. If we try to solve the oil crisis that way we will burn up a century's supply of NG in just a couple of decades. Using NG like that is what Matt Simmons (oil exploration magnate) calls "turning gold into lead".

Other solutions may be oil from algae - see Sapphire Energy - the risk here (though just what crossed my mind and may be nothing to worry about) is if GM algae that spews out crude oil ever got into the environment and married other algae - would oil slicks destroy the planet's water supply and manifest in our garden beds?

Biofuels from agricultural land cause Peak Food in no time flat - and are thus no option in an ethical or for a politically stable world.

But if we wait for Fusion we may have no cheap enough energy left to build the reactors.

And if we wait to long to build the solar-electric global energy system we also may not have enough fossil fuel energy at any usable price to do that either.

The transition needs to begin yesterday.

http://www.theoildrum.com is a good site, but not the only one, for info re all the above

Economic reality is dictated by margins, ie. the bottom line, which determines what thrives and what starves. Innovation occurs because the deemed return makes it the best alternative from within a portfolio of investment opportunities; any incidental benefits for society at large is inadvertent by-product. Capitalism killed off the electric car because it's introduction threatened to cannibalize existing markets and make the holistic scenario a less profitable commercial reality. The existing system is set up to strangle competition; why else would you need government intervention to mitigate monopolization? Redefining the architecture of energy derivation will take enormous investments in capital infrastructure from a consensual international community. Has anyone recently checked the progress of Doha, NAFTA and the Kyoto Protocol?

Speaking of biting off more than one can chew, incumbent corporationns with serious vested interests in the current system of energy provision will most certainly lobby hard and fast against any development which erodes their economic prospects. If sustainability had been profitable, it would certainly have taken roots by now. Instead it has been given the perfunctory and systematic lip-service under the guise of corporate social responsibility. The case may be different 150-200 years from now when the depletion of fossil fuel reserves no longer offer the viability of economies of scale. There's still plenty of resources unde the current setup to last several lifetimes. The captains of industry won't be undermining their own food bowl by flirting with ideas which could plunge their wealth of assets into disarray.

You don't get rich by making things free - especially energy.