Re: End of Cheap oil

From: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
Date: Sat Jul 15 2000 - 08:07:30 EDT

  • Next message: George Murphy: "Re: End of Cheap oil"

    Glenn Morton wrote:

    << While this post sounds incredibly pessimistic, I am optimistic that
     something will be discovered that will allow us to avoid this crisis, like
     the discovery of coal mining allowed the Rennaisance world to avoid an
     energy crisis coming from the deforestation of Europe during that time. The
     failure of our species to find a solution to this problem is too awful to
     contemplate. Whatever it will be, it must come quickly.
    >>

    I did hear one historian a few years ago who was proposing that the fall
    of Rome came about due to the lack of available resources of wood. His
    argument was that the Mediterranean area was the primary region of commerce
    where wood was needed for building ships and chariots, wood was needed for
    refining metal ore in the furnaces, wood was required for making finished
    metal produces such as horseshoes, swords, armour, etc., and wood was
    part of the infrastructure for feeding the population (cooking, heating etc.).
    Gradually, all the cedar trees in Lebanon were cut down: a grove remains
    today of the great cedars that Senacherib boasted of cutting down (Is.
    37.24).
    He (the historian) also suggested that whereas the Romans did conquer
    Britannia,
    Gaul, and the Gothic teritories to expand their resources, the logistical
    problems
    associated with transportation of huge resources to the Mediterranean could
    not
    be surmounted.

    I think there were a lot of reasons for Romes decline, including the more
    usual positions such as lack of representation of the population at large,
    a government whose infrastructure collasped due to immense corruption,
    nepotism, political self interests (note: in Eastern Rome lived under almost
    the same conditions but thrived for 1000 years!). I might even entertain
    St. Augustine who said it was "sin", and perhaps so, but that is a bit
    too general I think. Hence, I still don't find the historian's case
    particularly
    strong as a "single cause"; however, I do find it a compelling observation
    all the same.

    To go back to the main thrust of Glenn's post:
    Probably fusion is a good suggesting since it doesn't create the waste
    characteristic of fission reactions. It also does not dirty the atmosphere
    with CO2 and NOx which is also a matter of concern.

    Maybe we should not be pessimistic harbingers of doom, but neither
    should we be a bunch of Pollyannas. We must think. That is possibly
    why God gave us a brain.

    His Grace is sufficient, and by Grace alone do we proceed,
    Wayne



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 15 2000 - 08:07:45 EDT