[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('orz', ' ')The system that people like Monte see consists only of the earth and the sunlight entering it. In that system, fossil fuels are the most readily available sources of compact energy. On this, I would agree, that we're never going to get energy as "easily" as fossil fuels. However, the fact is there are much more powerful fuels out there, like uranium or thorium or helium, BUT you can't just light these on fire. This is where technology comes in. So the question is, could we have bridge the gap between fire and nuclear energy(and others) without fossil fuels. Doomers say no. I say yes, but over a much longer period, perhaps 1000 years, instead of 200.

But in reality, neither of us can prove either point. So the debate is futile.

[SchroedingersCat]

What it all comes down to is what is your definition of technology and how you would measure its progress. The bronze age was certainly a high tech time compared to everything before it and did not rely on fossil fuels.

There have been many things invented that didn't require fossil fuels to do some amazing things. Slide rules and analog computers. Babbage's difference engine. Making use of mechanical advantage for light manufacturing (step shears, box and pan, etc.) Even hydraulics is a non-hydrocarbon technology. Bio-engineering has been around since the dawn of agriculture.

I think the mastery of fire was the single most important thing that humans have achieved. It enabled all of the technology we currently enjoy. The discovery of fossil fuels just made fire more powerful, convenient and manageable.

Basically, everything we have achieved in the past can be attributed to control of heat sources. Everything we do in the future will be as well.

[orz]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hat hilarity! About 1.5 million BCE Homo Erectus made and controlled fire. Until the advent of fossil fuels, man was not able to move beyond a simple agrarian society.

What "energy source" would we have come up with to bridge the gap?

Wood? If we hadn't had coal, what would we have burned to mass produce concrete, stainless steel, plastics, electronics, computers and all the other myriad materails and equipment that took 40 years to bring together for commercial nuclear power with fossil fuels?

"We can" takes energy. Reality can prove a point.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('orz', ' ')Just because a substantial leap would have to be made does not negate the fact that it would still have happened.
Your point proves nothing. Technology begets technology. Fossil fuels jump started the process. This doesn't eliminate the fact that it could have been done without, and your cynical remarks prove nothing. Seriously, stick with the ecology and stay away from the technology, it's hard to appreciate something you loathe.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('orz', 'J')ust because a substantial leap would have to be made does not negate the fact that it would still have happened.

[orz]

Rudimentary wind farms, waterwheels, biological fuels come to mind. These things don't need massive hydrocarbons to be developed. They also wouldn't provide large quantities of energy, however over a suitable period of time, it may have been possible for more advanced projects to be developed in certain areas.

The very fact that these sources could be utilized without hydrocarbons negates the absoluteness of the fact that advanced tech couldn't have emerged. 1.5 million years without fossil fuels doesn't prove all that much. It takes an advanced society that doesnt revolve around the constant fear of watching ones own skin to even have time to work on technological advancements. Face it Monte, there is no way you can prove definitively that it wouldn't have happened. The question you have asked is not one with a definitive answer, as much as you may be inclined to believe that you are proving that advanced civilization will collapse.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('orz', ' ')[ As cat already covered, numerous mettalurgical advances were made in the bronze age. Is it so hard to vision rudimentary water wheels and wind turbines slowly emerging from this. Or perhaps the discovery that some plants can produce fuel? To cynics like you, I'm sure it is.

[orz]

Furthermore, I would like to add, that barring nuclear war, some government in some part of the globe(I would place my bets on Russia due to their superpower status, ingenuity and not least, their vast stores of petroleum), will no doubt hole up around the remaining hydrocarbons and create a society revolving around renewable resources, so this discussion is moot at best. The flame of modern technology will live on... somewhere.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('orz', 'R')udimentary wind farms, waterwheels, biological fuels come to mind.

[orz]

Yes monte, also, you can build an integrated circuit using a wood stove.

Or perhaps, I was implying that the (did I mention entirely renewable) energy produced by these rudimentary technologies could lead to further advances that would one day generate enough energy to produce the components for nuclear power.

Forgive me, I'm not as prescient as you are at knowing for sure that this is impossible, to predict where the technology would move from there step by step to lead to nuclear power. Hell, if I knew that, then peak oil would be a non issue as any path that these alternative people would take would have to be strictly renewable.

BTW, pigs can fly when launched via onager. And a basic one of these can be constructed entirely from wood and cord. So there you have it.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('orz', ' ')Or perhaps, I was implying that the (did I mention entirely renewable) energy produced by these rudimentary technologies could lead to further advances that would one day generate enough energy to produce the components for nuclear power.

[orz]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')one of these will directly produce temperatures of over 1300 F degrees.

[orz]

Let me do your argument for you:

"Techno-faith is not a solution."

And then my next argument:

"Every line drawn in the sand by a disbelieving society has without exception been crossed by engineers and scientists"

You want a crude solution? How about a gigantic magnifying glass to focus sunlight onto one spot. Crude, ridiculously large, untransportable, nowhere near the industrial capacity we have now, but glass can be created via normal heats as the mesopotamians started using it around the bronze age and the materials are abundant.
It's a starting point.

[Battle_Scarred_Galactico]

"Metals will still exist post oil, but digging them up and trying to extract them will take more effort than can be saved by using them. That is, a waste of effort. We will be limited to salvage, for as long as that lasts."


Don't get me wrong Bwolf, I agree with you. I meant fashioning bronze at an individual level.

[mididoctors]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')
Do some homework on what is required to utilize technology.

[Omnitir]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')cities supporting a million people made out of concrete existed in re fossil fuel times

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('orz', ' ')You are asking me to name a renewable source that could be used for industrial purposes?

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Omnitir', 'F')ossil fuels simply amplified it all, allowing advanced technology, and human populations, to easily boom.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('orz', ' ')I'm not as prescient ... to predict where the technology would move from there step by step to lead to nuclear power

[mididoctors]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('orz', ' ')You are asking me to name a renewable source that could be used for industrial purposes?