[extropy-chat] Forbes Magazine on Robotics

Martin Striz mstriz at gmail.com
Mon Aug 21 16:29:28 UTC 2006


On 8/20/06, Keith Henson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:

> >High altitude wind power is sufficient to supply the world's energy
> >needs, according to many estimations.

> The engineering problems for this are *worse* than a space elevator and
> hundreds of power satellites.

I disagree that it is /worse/.  Many things are hard until they are solved.

> >Other than that, energy needs will be met with resources available
> >locally: hydroelectric where rivers are available, solar at low
> >latitudes, etc.  With advanced photovoltaic technology, every building
> >could be energy self-sufficient.
>
> I agree with you, but I think you are talking post nanotechnology to do
> it.  I don't see this inside what can be done pre singularity.

I think this can be done NOW, without transhumanist technology like
nano or AGI.  It takes a combination of alternative energy technology
AND new efficiencies so that we cut energy consumption at the same
time.  It should be enough to be wasteful, instead of really, really,
really wasteful.

> Do you understand the EP model of wars?

Yes, but the model that you like to tout only accounts for a
percentage of the variance.

Also, I don't believe we will face the energy blight that you suggest,
so the subsequent argument is moot.  It really depends on when Peak
Oil happens.  In the worst case scenario, it happened on 5 December
2005 (or somewhere around there -- they calculated it to the day).  In
the best case scenario, we have 50-100 years, so if the experts know
anything, your probability distribution is somewhere between there.

But oil won't just dry up overnight.  It will decrease along a low
slope over decades as the oil fields we find become smaller and
smaller (by necessity it's easier to find the biggest ones), and the
cost of extraction will increase.  We have some empirical data on how
far supply has to drop below demand before catastrophe occurs.

In the early 1970s, when OPEC decided to cap its oil production,
supply fell behind demand by about 10%, and the price of gas
quadruped.  In California, when natural gas supply fell about 10%
behind demand, the cost of NG also  quadrupled.  We can conclude that
supply only has to fall behind demand by about 15% before we reach an
economic catastrophe.  That would happen about 20 years after Peak
Oil.

So even in the worst case scenario, we have another 20 years.  But
looking at the probability distribution, the *most likely* time of
Peak Oil is in about 20-30 years, which gives us 40-50 years within
which alternative energy must take over.

That's probably enough time, but we shouldn't be sitting on our hands
at this point.

--Martin



More information about the extropy-chat mailing list