[extropy-chat] 'a process of non-thinking called faith' 2 (2)

[Robert Bradbury]

On 11/24/06, Thomas <Thomas at thomasoliver.net> wrote:
>
>  We don't need the oil.  We have hydrogen.  The Grand Oil Party has
> overstayed it's welcome.  Immediate withdrawal is the obvious course when
> your hand is on a hot burner.
>

While I do not have a problem with the conclusion (because one could reach
this conclusion based on arguments that it might save more lives).  *But*
you cannot make the conclusion based on the argument "We don't need the oil.
We have hydrogen.".

Let me make this very clear -- both assertions are false.

First, one can claim "We don't need the oil" if you *only* if in the same
sentence you are willing to claim an "acceptable" decline in economic growth
which would result from a doubling or a tripling of oil prices over periods
of 2, 4, etc. years.  A decline in availability of one of the fundamental
energy resources would have severe economic consequences.  What is unclear
at this point is whether an elimination of all oil output in Iraq could not
be compensated for by other oil producing nations.  If oil production
declines, there will be short term negative impacts throughout economies
around the globe.  You cannot make such a claim without in the same breath
citing studies showing those impacts would be "insignificant".  (I doubt
such studies, if they exist, would be generally accepted.)

Second, "We do *NOT* have hydrogen."  We do not have the manufacturing
capacity.  We do not have the distribution facilities.  We do not have the
fundamental energy production capacity.  We do not have the consumers.
Anyone making such a claim has been sold a fantasy and they do *not*
understand the fundamental mechanics of enegy production, distribution and
consumption.  Yes, in an ideal world hydrogen might be a better way to
distribute an energy source but in reality it is a hard problem and we
aren't anywhere close to solving it.

So please make the arguments on a basis that the costs (Nx## $billion/year)
do not justify the potential lives saved, particularly when taking into
account the lives lost.  Arguing this on the basis of other commonly put
forward justifications (related to energy) demonstrates the lack of
knowledge and understanding on both sides.

Robert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061124/78c46212/attachment.html>