Text 1156, 135 rader
Skriven 2006-06-01 15:29:00 av Robert E Starr JR (1602.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Atheists: America's m
=================================
* * * This message was from Paul Harper to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <c5au7215jvi9j0eei10nboadkejqd72uht@4ax.com>
@REPLY: <4e4tu7F1bfpnnU2@individual.net>
On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 17:47:43 +0000 (UTC), "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I suppose it depends on who you mean by "We."  Increase home heating costs 
>by 20-30% and some people will significantly suffer.  It's not the power 
>companies that absorb the cost.

"We": How about starting with the US and Western Europe. That covers
the majority of the wealthy countries on the planet. "We" can afford
it.

On a more local level, "we" is everyone. The very concept of social
engineering an anathema to people used to the idea of looking after
themselves first and others last. (I'm not having a go at you here, in
case of any misunderstanding!). We are going to have to accept that
there is a price to pay for the confortable existence we have, and we
are going to have to recognise that we have, in no uncertain terms,
been living on the cheap lately.

The days when it is acceptable for energy companies to make billions
of <insert currency name here> profit every year while doing little or
nothing about the problems they cause have to be limited now.

I would even go so far as to say nationalise them (or in the case of
us here in the UK, re-nationalise). Take them into genuine public
ownership, take the grasping shareholders out of the equation and do
the job properly. Make all energy companies, by law, non-profitmaking.

>There are a number of technologies that can be used to help...and they 
>should be...but none of them are a universal panacea.  How many solar panels 
>or windmills would be needed to power NYC?  How many birds would be killed 
>by the windmills (apparently a significant problem in areas they are 
>deployed).  Most of the technologoes that can help work on smaller scales.

<smashes head into desk> No more birds are killed by wind turbines
than would be killed by cars on roads, by aircraft or by other birds.
It is a NON ISSUE!!  That whole story is utter fallacy.

>It's fine and correct to say that we should do more. We should....but 
>specifically ... who should do what? At a national or international level, 

International won't work. It's been tried, and narrow national
interest gets in the way. It will have to be, initially, at a national
level by an enlightened few acting as leaders and examples.

>what technologies are you saying should be used?

On the basis that it's a proven technology, Wind initially.
Developments in tide and wave power are coming shortly, so when they
do, bring them in. Fission is the only acceptable form of nuclear
power (IMHO), but even with the newly-announced reactor programme in
Southern France, it'll be decades before that becomes a viable
proposition.

>At a private level, what should be used? 

All manner of things. Private wind turbines can be used - they're
expensive at the moment, but there is a junior school in my county
that runs virtually all of its electrical equipment using a turbine in
the school field - and it's not a huge one either. Hot water - stick a
couple of black-painted radiators on the roof and there you go. No
nasty photovoltaic cells, though as I said elsewhere, the manufacture
of these is improving, so maybe they'll be acceptable soon.

>Are people to be compelled to use them and how much does it 
>cost each person?

Further more - recycling. Here where I live, we have a collection
every week - but only for recycleable material: glass, tins, plastics,
paper, garden rubbish. Non-recycleable stuff is collected only every
fortnight.

I'd go further. Only collect non-recyclable once a month.

Doesn't cost people anything except a little time.

>Do we know how much energy can really be produced by <pick whichever 
>trechnology you wish>?

Well, taking wind power, the UK will be generating 10% of its
electrical needs using renewables by 2010 and 15% by 2015. We are
ahead of schedule in terms of installations to meet this target and it
wouldn't surprise me to see us hit 20% by 2015..

In my view, the aim is too low, and the timescale too long, but it
*is* a step in the right direction. A recent survey of UK people
showed 83% in favour of wind power, which is encouraging.

>Not just estimates by proponents, but hard numbers. 
>What are the trade-offs (there are always trade-offs)?  Specifically how 
>much more will it cost and who will pay?  It's great to talk in abstract...I 
>was asking for something more concrete.

http://www.bwea.com/ref/faq.html

>Until someone proposes a *specific* plan and does the analyisis...it's just 
>good intentions.  I'm not aware of anyone that's done this.  I may have 
>missed it, but if it were as simple as you suggest I would think a specific 
>plan would have been proposed and touted.
>
>If someone were to do the science and a real feasability and cost/benefit 
>analysis and came up with something tangable that could be debated ... then 
>I think there'd be a real chance for public debate and some kind of action.

I tend to find cost/benefit calculations more useful when the
"benefit" side of the equation is phrased as the negative of "what is
the cost of *not* doing this?".

So: what's the cost of carrying on as we are and doing nothing at all
(or no more than we are)?

With sea levels going to rise (bye bye NYC, London, Singapore, Hong
Kong and most coastal towns and cities), climate going to change
(shifting wheat production to Greenland or the Sahara depending on
which way it tips) and the like. What's the cost of that?

Sure, easy to dismiss as flights of fantasy and hyperbole, but the
detractors will be the first to complain when the waves start pouring
over their thresholds.

Paul.
-- 
. Bill Maher: "Tulips aren't flowers, they're gay onions"
. A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
. Is there a moron carrot above?  Have you replied to it?  Are you sure?
. EMail: Unless invited to, don't; it's likely to be automatically deleted.
                                                      
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)