Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
2. That we have such difficulty maintaining our energy structures is revealing
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 06:41 PM
Jun 2013

Laws of physics; you will never be able to eke out more productivity than was initially invested. Never. Our current system may create the illusion, but all we're doing is burning through the collected productivity of millions of years; think of the selfish child who uses power of attorney to blow through their parents' savings accounts, that's us.

We're nearing a point where it will take more energy to extract fossil fuels than they will provide in return; and schemes like biofuel will have similar results, and may in fact end up being even more expensive in terms of energy; they will certainly not pay for their own infrastructure!

The only certain methods of gaining energy stability is to utilize our current fossil fuel resources to create the infrastructure for constant - if slower - sources of energy. Either we collect and store energy output in the same way that carboniferous plants did all those millions of years ago (solar power) or we tap into other forms of stored energy (geothermal.) Secondary sources such as wind and wave power (both solar in origin) will remain "niche" gap-fillers, and the environmental destructiveness of large-scale hydroelectric power should preclude it as anything but a very minor and local input.

No matter what, we're going to hit a point where our current world of easy travel and global energy networks is going to fail; maybe not completely, but it will have to slow down. And this will have a very bad effect on the way we operate. The 7.5 billion people on the earth are largely reliant on the easy transportation provided by pillaging the "solar bank account" of coal and oil. Take that away, or diminish it, and the after effects will be... very unpleasant.

But it sadly seems unavoidable. The current system is simply not sustainable, and it cannot be shored up for very long. All that can happen is that it crashes. That cannot be avoided. The question we face isn't how to stop the crash, but how to shorten the fall. The less infrastructure we have in place for alternate energy paradigms, the farther the fall - and the farther the fall, the harder the crash at the end.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

So they found out how to make gas? RobertEarl Jun 2013 #1
You can bet that if there was a buck to be made from algae today, they'd be making it. GliderGuider Jun 2013 #3
Heh RobertEarl Jun 2013 #4
I'm not greenwashing Exxon. I know exactly what they are. GliderGuider Jun 2013 #8
Greenwashing was not the correct term RobertEarl Jun 2013 #9
We're cool then. GliderGuider Jun 2013 #11
True ....... oldhippie Jun 2013 #16
Yes, of course RobertEarl Jun 2013 #19
And this RobertEarl Jun 2013 #20
As long as it makes you feel good ..... oldhippie Jun 2013 #26
You do this every time RobertEarl Jun 2013 #29
I'm sorry ...... oldhippie Jun 2013 #30
Exxon is just a business. Laelth Jun 2013 #12
This message was self-deleted by its author GliderGuider Jun 2013 #13
That's a clear and sane position. GliderGuider Jun 2013 #14
No argument from me, really. Laelth Jun 2013 #18
alarming ignorance pervasive poopfuel Jun 2013 #15
I very much appreciate your interest in educating me. Laelth Jun 2013 #17
you're welcome. Start with the website alcoholcanbeagas.com, plenty to see there. Links, etc poopfuel Jun 2013 #23
Ethanol wercal Jun 2013 #27
good post poopfuel Jun 2013 #41
That we have such difficulty maintaining our energy structures is revealing Scootaloo Jun 2013 #2
Sure we are. RobertEarl Jun 2013 #5
It's not magic Scootaloo Jun 2013 #7
I smell a paid blogger here poopfuel Jun 2013 #24
Oh please... NickB79 Jun 2013 #28
Beg pardon? Scootaloo Jun 2013 #31
Sorry but you're wrong kristopher Jun 2013 #32
Energy and carbon are two different things Scootaloo Jun 2013 #33
It's possible, but difficult, to have a closed carbon cycle. GliderGuider Jun 2013 #34
Are you for real? kristopher Jun 2013 #35
Yes, I am Scootaloo Jun 2013 #36
You don't have a point - you're wrong. kristopher Jun 2013 #37
The part where you carry the two, I suppose Scootaloo Jun 2013 #38
Not a problem kristopher Jun 2013 #40
You'd figure that they would jump on this. Indyfan53 Jun 2013 #6
They will RobertEarl Jun 2013 #10
I saw a presentation by Matt Simmons a few yrs. back, w. a sentence that nailed it . . . hatrack Jun 2013 #22
Exactly. n/t poopfuel Jun 2013 #25
I predict algae fuel manufacturing will find its sustainable place in agriculture kristopher Jun 2013 #21
Here is more information from Bloomberg Socialistlemur Jun 2013 #39
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»After $100 Million, Exxon...»Reply #2