Xenon Zi-Neng Yuan
wenhuadageming at comcast.net
Tue Aug 12 09:45:10 MDT 2003
hydrogen is not a source of energy. it is only a form of storage, one with
a net loss of energy at that.
oil is a concentrated and easily manipulated (compared to coal) form of
energy. there is no replacement for it in the foreseeable future. oil is
originally the solar (and geothermal?) energy accumulated over *hundreds of
millions* of years. please show me how barges, trains, and airplanes will
run on solar or any of the current or hypothesized "alternate"
sources. and how will 6.5 billion people be sustained with
non-petroleum-based agriculture? and what about plastics and the
dependence of modern industry and medicine on them?
as louis just pointed out, it doesn't mean capitalism will inevitably
collapse as a result of this alone (or any other scarcity of a "basic"
resource), but it also doesn't mean that lots of (poor and working) people
won't die as a result of this impending "readjustment".
At 05:00 PM 8/12/2003 +0200, Paolo Chiocchetti wrote:
>It was the economic logic who lead the drift from wood to coal, then from
>coal to oil as the main source of energy.
>Neither wood nor coal became exhausted: when their price began to rose, or
>technological improvements or discoveries made other sources of energy more
>profitable ad convenient, capitalism made the latter the main fuel and let
>the former a reduced space (but always important).
>Observing from an historical and dialectical point of view, it's probable
>that the same will happen with oil, which will be substituted as the main
>fuel by the atomic, solar, eolic, hydro or other kind of energy, whose cost
>of production and efficiency will improve as long as they get a mass market
>and increasing investments.
More information about the Marxism