[ExI] massive "green" industrial transformation of the landscape

[Eugen Leitl]

On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 09:04:56PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:

> Just because you haven't heard of him doesn't mean that Jesse Ausebel,
> isn't "a leading scientist" and top drawer.  I've known of his work

Readily admit to that. As you say, it was a rant. At times going
overboard to try bringing a point across.

> http://phe.rockefeller.edu/biblio.php
> Renewable and nuclear heresies
> http://phe.rockefeller.edu/docs/HeresiesFinal.pdf
> Elektron: Electrical Systems in Retrospect and Prospect
> http://phe.rockefeller.edu/Daedalus/Elektron/
> The Evolution of Transport
> http://phe.rockefeller.edu/TIP_transport/transport.pdf

Thanks for those, have begun reading them.
 
> And don't we all agree that nuclear power is surpassingly green, and

Not at all. There are many diverse beefs to have with nuclear power
today: it is centralistic, has a powerful lobby, is heavily subsidized,
relies on scarce ores, has a bad security story, dumps low-level radiactivity
across life cycle, is intensely polarizing, etc. 

In contrast to these, wind today generates 9% of electricity in Germany,
and for the first time this year was visible enough to stabilize electricity
prices on the large-scale realtime electricity market. If you remember, it was
last year that photovoltaics achieved a break-even, albeit briefly, and in
the same market. 

I would put aeolean, passive solar and photovoltaics in the exceedingly
green cathegory. They have almost no additional footprint to the residential
structures they supply.  Especially, if integrated into the structures at
design time, and not added posthaste.

> that the political opposition to same over the past ~3 decades is
> decidedly non-rational?  One doesn't therefor have to be a shill for

Ignoring non-rational components of a feasibility landscape is also
not exceedingly rational. People are afraid of large-scale energy
production, especially from nuclear sources. They readily embrace
small-scale facilities though, especially those they own privately.
Speaking about non-rational (okay, brownouts), feeling in control 
is a very non-rational, and very powerful factor.

(Btw, I've outlawed incandescents in this household (first 3 W
LED spots, now metal halide lamps for the living room), and will
be buying a wood/coal oven next year. I'm thinking about adding
passive solar, though roof alignment, inclination and shading
by trees is suboptimal. A low-voltage PV-charged power supply for
home network and electronics is on the drawing boards, too).

> the nuclear industry to hold and espouse such a position.  In fact,
> considering the anti-nuke pop culture, doesn't professor Ausebel, as
> Director of the Program for the Human Environment, at the liberal
> Rockefeller University, New York, NY, qualify as a scholar with
> intellectual integrity and even a bit of courage?

I might have mispigeonholed the man. He sounded very much like a nuclear
shill, and his comparision was awfully skewed. He was doing precisely what
one would try if one would want to discredit the renewables, and shine
golden light upon the nuclear industry.
 
> Despite the harshness of your earlier "critique", I have every
> confidence you will give the good professor a fair and judicious
> assessment when you've had an opportunity to look at his actual body
> of work.

Possible, but since I'm usually well-informed on renewables it's
unlikely I've overlooked something so critical to require a 
reassessment.
 
> Life is good here, as I hope it is with all of you.

Good for you! I personally can't complain, though the likely impending 
Great Depression has really started to worry me. It's been looming in 
the background for many years, but this year could be it. 

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE