I think it's great that fusion power is a potential and viable alternative to fossil and fission but there's a key detail in there: the test reactor project is for 35 years on a reactor costing billions of euros with a 500MW output.
One point of "The Long Emergency" is that most people don't even know about or aren't taking the oil crisis seriously. Even if we had 50 more years of oil (which we don't) that would put it just beyond what the test bed for large scale fusion is slated for.
Another big point is the cost of converting everyone from fossil to fusion energy. Fusion plants aren't free - you need massive amounts of energy and resources to build them. My take from this is that it will only be after it is too late to reallocate these resources to fusion plants that people will even begin to take notice that their quality of, and even number of their very lives have begun to dramatically decline.
[ QUOTE ]
I think its important to understand that even though this article tries to make it sound like a crisis is around the corner that is simply not the case.
It was my understanding that with out current usage - which is extremely high - we would have another 50 years before things would have to change. I actually seem to recall it being 100 years (with current usage) before we physically ran out of the stuff, but regardless
[/ QUOTE ]
The point of the article isn't about actually running out of oil, but about what economists call 'peak-oil' which is basicly speaking the point where the 'production' of oil reaches its all time top. It is a bit hard to explain, and I am not an expert on economics, but basicly this will (combined with the allways rising energy need, and the rising energy costs to get that 'leftover' oil, by drilling deeper and deeper) catapult the cost of oil up quite a bit, and it will only rise (quickly) from that point on.
So it isn't about depleting the oil (at least not in the short run) but about not beeing able to afford large quantities of oil.
Solution: Get the lazy, corrupt, oil loving, war provoking, arctic drilling, pretend christian texans out of government positions. Replace them with individuals that are pro-alternative fuels.
Replies
One point of "The Long Emergency" is that most people don't even know about or aren't taking the oil crisis seriously. Even if we had 50 more years of oil (which we don't) that would put it just beyond what the test bed for large scale fusion is slated for.
Another big point is the cost of converting everyone from fossil to fusion energy. Fusion plants aren't free - you need massive amounts of energy and resources to build them. My take from this is that it will only be after it is too late to reallocate these resources to fusion plants that people will even begin to take notice that their quality of, and even number of their very lives have begun to dramatically decline.
Frank the Avenger
I think its important to understand that even though this article tries to make it sound like a crisis is around the corner that is simply not the case.
It was my understanding that with out current usage - which is extremely high - we would have another 50 years before things would have to change. I actually seem to recall it being 100 years (with current usage) before we physically ran out of the stuff, but regardless
[/ QUOTE ]
The point of the article isn't about actually running out of oil, but about what economists call 'peak-oil' which is basicly speaking the point where the 'production' of oil reaches its all time top. It is a bit hard to explain, and I am not an expert on economics, but basicly this will (combined with the allways rising energy need, and the rising energy costs to get that 'leftover' oil, by drilling deeper and deeper) catapult the cost of oil up quite a bit, and it will only rise (quickly) from that point on.
So it isn't about depleting the oil (at least not in the short run) but about not beeing able to afford large quantities of oil.
Smokeless coal. What a joke.