The Energy Question

Let's try to take a look at the big picture of our energy condition today.

We are told that we are putting too much carbon dioxide into the air.  It is heating up the Earth and this is a bad thing.  But is it really?  Could there have been something good about it?

Let's back up a little bit, and see how we got to this point.  In Roman times, there was little need for machines as there were plenty of slaves.  The Romans could have built steam engines and started an industrial revolution, but they didn't.  There was a curiosity in those times---it was called the aerophile, which is something like a steam engine.  It remained a curiosity, because there was little need for machines to do work that the slaves could do.  So, there was no industrial revolution for 1500 years or so.  Not because the Romans were too primitive, but because they saw no need for what a steam engine could do for them.

Another thing about the industrial revolution---the reason coal came into use was because they were chopping down too many trees in order to run their new fangled steam engines.  In fact, they ran out of trees in England, so they had to do something, and that something was to use coal.  Now, if you were to burn trees, you have a carbon neutral source of energy.  But there weren't enough trees, as was the case in England at the beginning of the industrial revolution.  Coal may be dirty, but it saved the what remained of England's forests and the world's forests later as the revolution spread from England.

So, we began to use machines that used up fossil fuels.  This is how we got to how we live today.  We have become dependent upon the machines.  If it weren't for the machines and the fossil fuels that run them, many of us could not survive.  The world's population grew as living conditions improved.  We can't live without these machines.  The world has a lot more people than it once did because the machines made that possible.

Machines and fossil fuels replaced the slaves of the Roman world.  We are highly advanced civilization, like the Romans, but there are those who believe that what we are doing cannot be sustained over the long run.  There are too many people, they say.  They are probably right.  But, what to do about this?  Kill off the surplus population?  That may be good for the survivors, but not so good for the others.  Perhaps there's a better way.

Energy production allowed us to raise civilization to a higher level than the Romans.  Why can't that be the answer?  There are those who argue that energy production takes too much out of the Earth.  That's true, but it doesn't have to remain so.

Going back to the old ways of energy production isn't the answer.  We may as well go back to slavery as the Romans did.  Even if we did, the Roman empire didn't survive.  The world would sink even further than that to a much more primitive state.  Wind and solar are old technologies.  They cannot push us to a higher level.  They are like a new and improved horse and buggy system for a world that long ago gave up the horse and buggy.  The horse and buggy can only work for a world with a lot fewer people in it.

What about conservation?  It can only make what we've already got last longer than it will at present rates of usage.  But, it cannot get us to a higher level.  What happens when the fossil fuels run out?

Not to knock conservation and energy efficiency.  You don't want things to be any more inefficient than it has to be.  Inefficiency is something to be avoided.  But it isn't a solution in itself.  Energy has to be produced and produced in prodigious quantities at times.  This cannot be done with solar and wind power.  It can be done for fossil fuels, but not for the long term.  Meanwhile, we are fouling our air.

The answer is nuclear energy of course.  At present, many countries are participating the the ITER project, which will be a way to master fusion energy.  Perhaps this will work.  But what if it doesn't?

There are other ideas out there that look promising.  But what if those don't work either?  We could be in a real pickle if these ideas don't pan out.

Fission energy does work, but there are problems with it.  The main problem is not the one that you hear about.  The main problem is that we are like the Romans in one respect.  Innovation was not one of the Romans best qualities.  There was the story of Tiberius, the emperor who stopped the production of aluminum because it was a threat to his interests.  Aluminum and aerophiles--- two things the Romans could have used to good advantage, but could not because innovation was stifled.  Innovation in energy is being stifled today as innovation was stifled in Roman times.  Fission energy can be perfected, and it was proven so, but that has been ignored and suppressed.  A solution does exist, but the question is whether or not that innovation will be allowed.  If it is, we can go to a higher level.  If not, we may meet the fate of the Romans.

All forms of energy should be allowed.  Let's not put all of our energy eggs in one basket.  Don't stifle fission energy because it isn't perfect.  Develop the molten-salt reactor.  It may be the only real solution available to us.  If it isn't, something better could replace it at some point.  Consider it an insurance policy.