[extropy-chat] Re: Hybrids

[Mike Lorrey]

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > Nuclear submarines surviving may preserve a lot of engineering
> > technology, but one look at the Russian navy yards shows hundreds
> > of such hulks rusting away a decade after they were parked.
> 
> But Mike -- there is no incentive/justification for keeping them
> functioning.  In a post ELE that would not be the case.

But would the CAPABILITY be present to keep them functioning? A nuclear
sub is not an island. It requires a significant shore based
infrastructure to maintain and support. If shoreline communities are
all wiped out by tidal wave action, that infrastructure is gone.

> 
> > The surviving crews would have to fight for food on land, likely
> use their nuclear
> > threat to extort supplies from survivors on land, and use the
> nuclear
> > reactor to generate power for a seaside community they choose as a
> base
> > of operations.
> 
> Hmmm...  I would not think of the nuclear power as a threat but
> as an essential element towards providing the energy (and light)
> necessary to sustain food production.  Also -- nuclear power
> is perhaps not an essential component -- it is difficult to
> imagine that many ELE's would destroy all hydroelectric energy
> production capacity.  Diminish it yes -- probably by a reduction
> in rainfall resulting from less evaporation from the oceans --
> but the infrastructure would probably remain in place.

Nuclear warheads as the new Armored Cavalry would enforce a sphere of
influence. If nuclear subs survive, it follows their nuclear tipped
weapons will survive as well, at least long enough for them to
establish more conventional weapons stockpiles and manned fortresses.
They would then likely be slowly converted to fuel to keep the reactor
going.

(Keep in mind Stephenson's scenario of The Republic of Kodiak being
taken over by a bunch of orthodox Russians with one nuclear sub.) Just
because the world has ended does not end the threat of nuclear
weaponry.

> 
> > This carrot and stick approach would guarantee their
> > survival, but would result in a warlord structured society akin to
> > Afghanistan. Those with technical talent will gradually become
> court
> > slaves to feudal constabularies when the isotopes run out.
> 
> The phrase "when the isotopes run out" suggests that there would
> be a loss of the knowledge that breeder reactors are feasible.

Knowing they are feasible and posessing the industrial infratructure to
produce them are to entirely different degrees of capability.

> Obviously the ability to produce more fuel than one consumes would
> be a significant benefit within power structures -- so I doubt
> a scenario of declining energy resources would develop.

This implies the industrial infrastructure to manufacture a breeder
reactor (nuke subs most definitely cannot be used for such). Since most
nuclear fuel production facilities are located along major waterways,
should we not expect that they would get wiped out by tidal waves
following major river valleys?

> 
> > In fact, nuclear plants would likely become the center of the new
> > civilization (provided they build some capability of running
> > independent of the grid, as most require some input power to
> operate
> > for some reason).
> 
> The above discussion suggests that there would possibly be three
> potential civilization cores -- those centered around nuclear
> vessels, those centered around nuclear power reactors and those
> centered around hydroelectric power centers.  Now which would become
> dominant would tend to revolve around how fast the climate recovers
> to normal rain patterns and how fast reactor based nodes shift
> into producing their own fuel resources.  So long as one gets
> local civilizations into the 100-1000 year longevity framework
> it seems likely that much previous knowledge could be recreated.

Knowing something is possible does not make it so. The pool of
engineering and manufacturing skills required are rather massive. All
these power centers would be good for is to keep the lights on long
enough for the biosphere to start recovering enough to enable
agriculture again. There will be a LOT of ordinance expended in the
mean time, with 99% of the human race spending their lives in an eat or
be eaten, burn or freeze existence, and threatening to eat the 1% that
is not reduced to such an existence.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/