mortongr@flash.net wrote:
> I thought I would alert anyone who might be interested in some actual data on the issue of world energy supply/consumption you can find a wealth of info at
>
> http://www.bp.com/worldenergy/index.htm
>
> Therre are powerpoint slides, excel spread sheets etc for the downloading. For those who don't know, BP is British Petroleum, one of the largest oil companies in the world.
>
> I also found (at another site) some fascinating statements in an article by Richard Duncan, one of the experts in the field of energy supply. He is the one who advocates the Olduvai theory which suggests that the lifespan of the average advanced technological civilization is "horribly short". Duncan is one of the most pessimistic experts on the topic and thus is fascinating reading. He suggests that a new stone age will be upon us within 100 years. His essay can be found at
>
> http://www.dieoff.com/page125.htm
>
> Anyway, his thesis is that the only way we escaped the oldowan way of life (this is the lifestyle led by earliest man 2 million years ago) originally was with energy consumption (first fire, then animal energy, then coal, oil and nuclear) and we are about to lose our energy consuming ways, no matter what we do with taxes, no matter what we do to conserve energy. An interesting way of looking at oil production and what will happen is that given by Campbell. He points out that the discovery of 3.5 times the oil Norway has will delay the inevitable day of peak oil production by only 1 year. Big deal. And finding 42 billion barrels is not an easy task. (In my entire career, I have been involved in finding approximately 1.5-2 billion barrels along with the other people I worked with on those prospects). One field reported to have been found in Khazakstan is estimated to have 50 billion barrels. But, in that place it will probably take 10 years to get it to market and in the meantime the world will have prod
uced 300 billion barrels of oil. The 50 billion won't do us a lot of good on the production curve.
>
> Anyway that is the Olduvai connection. If Duncan is correct and the life of an advanced civilization is indeed short it has implications for SETI--the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. In the early 1960s Frank Drake suggested an equation for determining the probbability that advanced civilizations exist in our galaxy. The equation is
>
> N= R f(p) N(e) f(l) f(i) f(c)L (Shklovskii and Sagan, Intelligent Life in the Universe, P. 409-411)
>
> Where (estimates are mine)
>
> R is the stellar formation averaged over the lifetime of the galaxy = 10/yr
>
> f(p) is the fraction of systems with planets = 1
>
> n(e) is the number of planets with stable orbits suitable for life = .5 ??
>
> f(l) is the fraction of planets with life = .5 ??
>
> f(i) is the franction of planets with intelligent life = .0004 ??
>
> (this estimate is based on the fact that H. erectus who I believe was an intelligent being appeared demonstrably at 2 million years ago so we had 4.5 billion years without intelligent life and this estimate is 2e6/4.5e9)
>
> f(c) is the fraction of planets with intelligent life having radio = .1
>
> and L is the average length of time a radiocapable civilization survives = 200
>
> This is based on the idea that if we run out of oil, we will not be wasting energy on 50,000 kilowatt radiostations.
>
> Multiplying all this together gives .01 civilizations in the galaxy today. We are it. And this may be why we don't hear any other civilizations. Unless you are listening during the correct 200 year interval, you won't ever hear the advertisments from an alien radio station.
The problem here, as with all applications of the Drake equation, is that at present one has to put some pure guesses into it. In particular, we know so little about chemical evolution & about the emergence of intelligence that we really have no idea what f(l) and f(i) are. We'll continue to know nothing about f(l) until we can study at first hand other earth-type planets (which probably exist, though we aren't sure yet) - or until we do get some ET signals, whichever comes first.
I'm also wary about your estimate of f(i): A statistical sample of one doesn't give us a lot to go on.
Which all may seem kind of picky. But if either f(i) or f(l) is several orders of magnitude below your estimates then the absence of ET signals can be explained on that basis & gives no information about L.
It's also possible that another intelligent species, even if sinful (which is probably "inevitable") might have made more intelligent use of their energy resources.
BTW, The Akron Beacon Journal had a front page story yesterday with the headline, "Oil is plentiful in the world, but it'll cost us to find it." The story is that there is at least a 40 year supply, even with rising demand. Whether or not the facts & estimates are correct (& some problems & doubts are pointed out), what many people will see is just "Oil is plentiful in the world" & their acceptance of the Rush Limbaugh mantra, "Folks, you don't have to change your lifestyle" will be reinforced.
Shalom,
George
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 27 2000 - 09:50:13 EDT