[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')o make steel from iron perhaps, but a carbon source is needed to first make iron from iron ore. You have to have a high carbon "reductant."

[MonteQuest]

Let's shift this debate into an arena possibly not so rife with unknowable hypotheticals.

How much of this technological complexity can we maintain in a world that soon will not have fossil fuels in cheap abundance? Will the core remain complex and the outer fringes less so?

Will there be motorsports? Private autos/planes/boats/toys?

Can we grow the food and the biofuels for some soon-to-be 9 billion people while experiencing global climate change, and at the same time, not lose the biodiversity so critical for a stable ecosystem, service the debt and avoid economic meltdown, and avoid global conflict while doing so?

Seems to me to be a very tall order.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', ' ')Monte, perhaps you didn't notice in skimming the link, but the Sadoway report was published in 1995, 10 years ago.

[Dezakin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'L')et's shift this debate into an arena possibly not so rife with unknowable hypotheticals.

How much of this technological complexity can we maintain in a world that soon will not have fossil fuels in cheap abundance? Will the core remain complex and the outer fringes less so?

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'L')et's shift this debate into an arena possibly not so rife with unknowable hypotheticals.

How much of this technological complexity can we maintain in a world that soon will not have fossil fuels in cheap abundance? Will the core remain complex and the outer fringes less so?

Will there be motorsports? Private autos/planes/boats/toys?

Can we grow the food and the biofuels for some soon-to-be 9 billion people while experiencing global climate change, and at the same time, not lose the biodiversity so critical for a stable ecosystem, service the debt and avoid economic meltdown, and avoid global conflict while doing so?

Seems to me to be a very tall order.

[GHung]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '?')??

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GHung', 'W')ayback Machine? (WABAC) What would Professor Peabody say? That population growth as enabled by copious uses of fossil fuel energy, is the underlying problem as said energy becomes short in supply => Fewer humans is the result. Sherman agrees!

[onlooker]

Have to agree with P, the Green Revolution was all about fossil fuels

[onlooker]

yes, the Monocrops that supply so much food around the world like grains, are particularly vulnerable to pests because of a lack of biodiversity. Some good points P, which I was not aware of.

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Subjectivist', 'T')he Green Revolution of the 1960-79 period didn't have much to do with fossil fuels, for the most part the intensive wheat breeding that took place in Mexico with dedicated hard work by scientists cross breeding strains.

[Tanada]

Post peak unless we act sensibly there will be a period of unpleasant events likely to include a great loss of human lives. However no such extreme period is a permanent condition. After a period of time, could be decades or possibly even a couple centuries, things stabilize as the elites of that generation seek stability over all else. After all if you are Elite and seek to remain Elite then your goal is to keep things stable so your position does not drop lower in the social order.

With stability comes the ability to plan for longer than the next harvest or next season, a skill our current Elites seem to have thrown away in favor of quarterly earnings reports.

This thread demonstrates that with some pretty low levels of technology, circa 1944 levels to be specific, humans can manufacture fission energy delivery systems. It doesn't require vast sums of high tech equipment, the USA did it in 1943-44 doing all the research and development from scratch and first principals. Even in the gloomiest scenario for the future the Elites are not going to destroy all the knowledge of what exists today, which means in the post peak world moving back up to fission based energy systems only requires applying knowledge, not creating knowledge from experimentation to discover how the universe works. Even Homer Simpson was able to explain the basics of what fission reactors do if not how they do it.

With 1943 level technology all those tens of thousands of tons of spent nuclear fuel already stored in scores of locations around North America and hundreds around the rest of the world can be chemically recycled into new fuel. They are just sitting there like the biggest banked energy supply you can imagine for the day when people can turn away from the insane radiation phobia levels of today and accept real science. You and I may be long dead and gone by the time that happens, but the longer that spent fuel sits in storage the less dangerous it is for our descendants to recycle it into new fuel. Therefor if the cowards who refuse to accept reality today succeed that just means our descendants get the benefit after the interregnum.

On the other hand if they grow up and accept reality some time in the next few decades the worst of the low energy die off period can be avoided. Either way, sooner or later, fission will be the primary energy source of our civilization.

[GHung]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')herefor if the cowards who refuse to accept reality today succeed that just means our descendants get the benefit after the interregnum.

[GHung]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '&')quot;I'm likely the only person on this board who spent years sleeping less than 50 feet from a reactor core, and really don't give a hoot if someone calls me a 'coward'. That shoe simply won't fit."

You seem okay for the experience? Have there been any long-term effects?

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GHung', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')herefor if the cowards who refuse to accept reality today succeed that just means our descendants get the benefit after the interregnum.

[GHung]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GHung', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')herefor if the cowards who refuse to accept reality today succeed that just means our descendants get the benefit after the interregnum.

[Tanada]

Fortunately not everywhere is as cowardly as the USA. France, Russia, China, India all deal with spent nuclear fuel in a reasonably intelligent manner instead of using a blizzard of lawsuits filed for political reasons to engage in paralysis rather than moving forward technologically. The USA was once the world leader in nuclear technology but thanks to the pseudo-environmentalists who oppose fission under any and all scenarios this leadership was ceded decades ago.

The good news is the rest of the world is in most cases not as cowardly as the leaders of the USA. Even though they have had bad experiences the Japanese are still operating a larger nuclear power percentage for their civilization than the USA ever achieved. Russia has a respectable fleet and is expanding it, India is doing the same and the Chinese have now taken over the leadership role in nuclear technology and are becoming quite successful because they let Engineers do the Engineering instead of lawyers and politicians.