I think this is the beginnings of an economy based on perpetual growth and fossil fuel energy running headlong into geological energy constraints. Basically I see an undulatory downward path for the rest of my life. From here out, I think any rallies in our economic condition are going to be met with spiking commodity prices that knock us right back down.
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 3:43 pm Post subject: Re: "The era of cheap energy is over"
cube wrote:
Gerben wrote:
cube wrote:
I'm simply saying the argument that it takes 10 years to build a nuke plant is a stupid argument. It's suggesting that nuclear power cannot be scaled up within a reasonable amount of time which is false. *points to previous chart of French electrical power*
I'm not convinced.
I've already mentioned that the USA is for all practical purposes bankrupt.
There's no point in debating something you don't have the money to buy anyways, so this is a mute issue. IMHO
It ain't bankrupt yet. We're seeing the effects on our currency that war, tax breaks for the wealthy, kickbacks to agribidness, etc... In other words ventures that have no quantifiable return on investment have. If, and to a certain extent when, we stop these then we stop the outflow of wealth from the government. There's the capital required to build said nukes. Hell, for the cost of the Iraq war so far we could've replaced all of our coal power with nukes, or just added 'em and phased coal out, as well as provided no interest loans and free fuel to those who were interested in purchasing small efficient EVs ala the Aptera. Clearly, for all the administration talks about weening us off oil, they don't care, at least enough to do anything about it. In fact, most of their moves have implied the opposite. _________________
Joined: Dec 06, 2005 Posts: 875 Location: Stopped at the border.
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 3:54 pm Post subject: Re: "The era of cheap energy is over"
The only problem I have with nuclear is maintenance in a lower order world. It isn't something that the 'git'r done' people can just go and do, now is it? You can't find a handy Mexican to do it for peanuts either. No, much of what America has defined cheap energy to be all about only works when the kind of thing that you rely on to provide the crack pipe can be done by pretty much interchangeable people. Nuclear as part of a mix that provides a solution I can see, provided that the mix includes some high level of conservation and reorder into a somewhat powered down state that is sustainable. If you can't do that it will just be even worse when the uranium runs out. _________________ "Hope encourages men to take risks; men in a strong position may follow her without ruin, if not without loss. But when they stake all that they have to the last coin (for she is a spendthrift), she reveals her real self in the hour of failure."
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
We're seeing the effects on our currency that war, tax breaks for the wealthy, kickbacks to agribidness, etc... In other words ventures that have no quantifiable return on investment have. If, and to a certain extent when, we stop these then we stop the outflow of wealth from the government. There's the capital required to build said nukes. Hell, for the cost of the Iraq war so far we could've replaced all of our coal power with nukes, or just added 'em and phased coal out, as well as provided no interest loans and free fuel to those who were interested in purchasing small efficient EVs ala the Aptera. Clearly, for all the administration talks about weening us off oil, they don't care, at least enough to do anything about it. In fact, most of their moves have implied the opposite.
