Entry 293, on 2006-03-03 at 15:09:24 (Rating 2, Science)
This morning I listened to a debate on future ecological issues such as global warming (or more correctly, global climate change), energy supply, and the problems with the future oil supply. The participants were from various political persuasions, ranging from the political right-wing to the Greens. Not surprisingly the opinions seemed to range from "everything is OK, the market will ensure everything works out OK" to "the world, as we know it, is coming to an end". I suspect the truth lies somewhere between these two extremes.
There is no doubt that our current dependence on oil is not a good thing, both because oil is running out and we don't have good alternatives yet, and because the use of oil results in unwanted side effects, such as production of excess carbon dioxide. There's also the political problem that the world's oil supply comes from the Middle East, which is often unstable.
The answer will probably eventually be nuclear fusion but, despite many years of effort, we still don't have a working practical fusion plant, although progress continues and is looking more promising all the time.
Its hopelessly idealistic and optimistic to think the current economic system, based around oil, is likely to change - no matter how positive that sort of change would be. So I guess in the end, the market will decide. The question is: should the market decide? I think there are better ways to manage future progress, but I guess we'll just have to work within the system we have unwisely inflicted on ourselves.
There are no comments for this entry.
You can leave comments about this using this form.
Enter name, email (optional), enter number, comment, click Add. You can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous. Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies. Your IP address is stored and you will be blocked for misuse. Comment should appear immediately (authorisation is inactive).
BLOG PAGE