On 4/15/2011 4:24 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 15/04/2011 11:21, Invisible a écrit :
>> This is the thing. I've heard a lot of environmental activists say "we
>> should stop doing X" or "we should stop doing Y". I haven't heard much
>> about "we should do Z instead".
>>
>> Burning fossil fuels is obviously stupid for a number of reasons. And
>> the alternative is...? What exactly?
>>
>> Nuclear power works in theory. In practise, if you make even the tiniest
>> mistake, just once, everything is ruined forever. (Or at least, for
>> several centuries.) And there's nothing you can do to fix it.
>>
>> Wind power is great. But... do you really want the whole country to go
>> black every time the wind stops blowing? Similarly, solar power. You
>> realise that the sun is below the horizon for hours at a time, right?
>> And some days, it's just not very sunny. For either of these things to
>> work, you seriously need high-efficiency power storage, so you can
>> collect power when it's there, and store it for when it's not.
>
> All these should raise a question: why would you need a perfect and
> continuous source of energy ?
> Because you were raised in such environment where performance is
> expected and requested all the time... time to change that way of thinking!
>
> It's like email: they are not an INSTANT delivery system.
>
> Back to middle-age, working from dawn to dusk but never past dusk.
> Working enough to survive the year, yet the year after is still unknown,
> not expecting interest-rate to provide wealth. Working about every day,
> in theory, but having great collective break to prepare and celebrate
> many holidays. one penny a day, 240 pences a year, such were the
> unqualified wages. It also means that there was about 60 days of work
> per season, not 90! (ratio of day off was not 1/7, rather 1/3. So you
> think that todays week-end is a progress... well 2/7<  1/3 !).
>
> Also, local production should be sufficient to sustain all. You might
> spent ten years without going further than 10 km from your home.
>
>
None of which worked worth shit, or as you imply. lol

Post a reply to this message