Letters to the Editor
-
What If the Earth NEEDS All That Oil - Part Deux
Minnesinger5 says:
"What if the Earth needs all that oil?"
Very excellent question!
I've had that very thought myself, especially when considering the Earth as a living organism...Gaia.
If you consider the Earth as Gaia, what purpose do human beings serve? As it stands now we have become a cancer...a terminal, malignant parasite with no conscience. No soul. No true spirituality. The "religious" beliefs of the millions on Earth, whether Christian, Muslim, Jewish etc., have created nothing but endless wars, destruction, pain, heartache and millions and millions of deaths. Not to mention the total environmental destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan with our use of depleted uranium munitions.
If the human race does not make an evolutionary leap in CONSCIOUSNESS very soon by realizing that RELIGION is the cause of our collective "cancer" on the planet, I do believe the human race will be forever doomed.
-
Maintain our advantage
Most of the conservation programs simply trade off one form of energy for another. The Bush Ethanol program is the biggest boondoggle in the history of energy technology. Rising grain prices are now the catalyst of famine, and the political destruction of Mexico, which fits nicely into the Bush plan for a single North American government.
There is really no way Americans can overconsume the worlds food supply, but they could easily consume more than their share of energy. And that's a good thing. American culture warrants the use, including superior medical, business, and transportation technology.
Even with America's profligate energy consumption, you can breathe the air in most cities, unlike the air in Bejing. Air quality in the U.S. is improving, and will continue to do so.
Those who suggest we can live off the electricity from a few solar panels are aging hippies and green freaks. There is no way the average American will keep their quality of life with less electricity.
The real question is how are we going to keep it coming, with more expensive oil. America may not be the dominant military, or economic power, but American culture remains the envy of the world, and is ascending, with an electronic entertainment and communication network which binds the most advanced culture in the world to everyone else in the world. Its absolutely imperative we maintain this advantage. The next energy technology will be created with the older fossil fuel economy. Use it or lose it.
-
Romm's solution is based on a false premise.
Romm's solution is based on the false premise that nuclear energy is carbon/greenhouse gas free. This is propaganda from the nuclear industry. The fact is that nuclear energy is fossil fuel dependent.
A significant amount of the greenhouse gases and CO2 produced in the Ohio Valley region and subsequently the eastern U.S. comes from the enrichment of uranium that is used as the fuel for nuclear reactors. Uranium is enriched at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant at Paducah, Ky and at the Portsmouth OH plant in Ohio, both on the Ohio River. The process at Paducah alone uses more electricity daily than the city of St. Louis...all of it produced by two huge coal fired electric plants nearby. The same is true at Portsmouth.
Moreover, when the U.S. banned the production of CFCs in response to the growing ozone hole in the upper atmosphere, the only exception made was for uranium enrichment. Uranium enrichment now accounts for over 95% of CFC releases in the U.S.
And this doesn't even take into account the fact that nuclear reactors are heavily dependent on large amounts of fresh water for coolant. A problem already becoming self evident in the Atlanta GA region of the southeast where the choice is coming down to water for nuclear generated electricity or for drinking.
Despite his credentials Mr. Romm has not done his homework. To suggest nuclear energy as a solution to our energy woes without taking into account the entire process including the problems incurred from mining, enriching, dwindling supplies of uranium and intractable wastes produced by nuclear energy is just as short sighted as continuing down the path we're already on.
-
Dream On
You're dreaming. There is no way that humanity can end it's addiction to oil and coal. This is simply the economic and political reality. Global warming is inevitable, as is overpopulation, competition for increasingly scarce natural resources, terrorism, and nuclear war. I don't know if humanity can survive, but given it's boundless stupidity and folly, i wouldn't count on it.
-
nature is self correcting
yes, all these folks who are worried about the climate getting out of hand don't understand that natural feedback cycles serve to keep the climate in normal bounds, despite temporary deviations.
for instance, this current relatively cool, low carbon dioxide, few million years in the history of a world that was, for most of the time, ten degrees warmer on the average with three times as much carbon dioxide, will soon return to its normal hot state; people are just nature's way of getting all that carbon that was buried during the carboniferous era out from underground and back into the air where it belongs. then, having played our role, our usefulness over, we can peacefully become bit players in the biosphere again.
-
Romm tells us
that "the big question" is how we accelerate the use of plug-in vehicles. That's not the big question. The big question is how we make capitalism compatible with the environment. Capitalism requires ever higher consumption to survive. Without that we have steadily accumulating inventories which produce steadily declining prices which produce steadily declining wages which produce steadily increasing inventories. Repeat sequence. Keynes solved that problem by showing how redistribution of income downward enhanced the ability of the economy to consume what it produces. But what Keynes didn't foresee is what is happening now - an all-capitalist world of 6 billion people all consuming at greater and greater rates. Nor did he foresee the disappearance of vast portions of our natural resources like oil and fish.
The big question is what to do about the collision between capitalism and the environment. It's one few have asked and none has answered.
-
America NOT the dominant military power??!
Aveutter says:
"America may not be the dominant military, or economic power..."
Really? Well, shivvy me timbers!!
If the United States is not the dominant military power on Earth then I'd really love to know who the hell is?!
Perhaps Israel? (Since Israel/AIPAC rules our executive and legislative agenda).
Pray, tell me Aveutter?