ENGLISH Gilbert Syndrome Forum > Offtopic

How to solve the worlds energy problems

<< < (2/3) > >>

This is probably an important piece of information. Please note that I think that nuclear is NOT an option unless "inherently safe" reactors are developed which do NOT produce significant amounts of significantly radioactive waste, aka which do not create the problem how to store the used reactor fuel for a long period of time. Thorium perhaps.
FS says:   
July 9, 2022 at 3:11 pm   

We can easily replace oil if the overlords wanted us to. Oil has dropped from 49% of World primary energy supply in 1973 to 31% in 2020. There is no real problem reducing oil even to zero. Rationally you would keep the less Expensive oil production to supply petrochemicals and jet fuel. Everything else can easily be replaced with gas, coal & nuclear. As gas supplies deplete coal & nuclear will suffice. Note Nazi Germany and currently South Africa produce a large portion of their diesel fuel from coal. South Africa was at 30% CTL diesel fuel, last I heard.

The real truth is that the scheming, lying Davos Psychos and their minions in government have been deliberately and maliciously disrupting oil production in the West, cancelling pipelines, imposing giant carbon taxes and mandates, cancelling oil & gas drilling leases on public land, pushing refinery closures enhanced by wacky covid restrictions and of course their real bonus was to deliberately cause the Russia-Ukraine war and then use it as an excuse to impose unheard-of-ever draconian sanctions on Russia including for oil & exports. This was all planned. We are seeing true unmitigated evil at work here. If there is a supply problem, why this?:

Oil can be replaced by Coal or Gas to liquids, that’s well established tech. And methanol is an easy replacement for gasoline. And DME is an easy replacement for diesel (except for jet fuel). They can be made in vast quantities from coal, stranded or flared gas, any biomass (i.e. forest overgrowth which is just burnt anyway in forest fires), seawater CO2 or cement plant flue gas and nuclear hydrogen/electricity.

ICE VEHICLE to BEV CONVERT CONVERSION: Old ICE vehicles, especially ones with engine issues, can easily be converted to electric. It takes one day. With ~10kwh batteries, very inexpensive, suitable for city driving which is the vast majority of vehicle usage.

They’re not doing ANY of the above, not even discussing it. INEVITABLE CONCLUSION: This artificial energy crisis combined with their plandemic is all about more destruction of the middle class, creating a new feudal socio-economic system which they call “The Great Reset” or Davos World Hegemony and techno-feudal socioeconomic system.


A very interesting reply, which might hold a lot of truth as well:
I’m sorry but without oil we are caput, done. None of the above mentioned are feasible in the long run, and nothing can effectively replace oil for the purposes for which it is employed, neither wind nor solar, nuclear or “electric”, hydrogen, coal or gas.
 The reality is that 8 billion people is simply unsustainable, and if the oh so devious elites had in mind to decrease the growing amount of mouths to feed, looking at history, it seems to me that they did a very, very poor job of it. If they aim to do so now, then it is already too late, they should’ve started in the 70s at the most.

Although this was written on the first of April, this is most likely true:

Thorium Reactor, more abundant than Uranium and has a way less half-life. Can also use old Uranium wastes to recycle for   Thorium reactions of 232 into 233 using an absorbed neutron from the wastes (fuel breeding), end result is a nuclear waste with a half-life much shorter than Uranium. Thorium 232 is also 3x more abundant naturally than Uranium 238.

NO MELTDOWN POSSIBILITY DUE TO GRAPHITE NECESSITY FOR REACTORS OPERATION along with uniqueness of Uranium-233 needing the neutron to continue sustaining a reaction.

Thorium nuclear reactors should be a top priority for energy replacement in the U.S.; Thorium reactors and Fusion reactors are pivotal to our advancement as a species for more abundant and sustainable energy sources.

There is enough Thorium in the U.S. to power our country for over 1000 years. Thorium was one of two proposed reactors during WW2, the other being Uranium based reactors of U-235.

The reason U.S. chose to follow U-235 research  when Th-232 was more efficient? Weaponization of Plutonium. You see, Th-232 cannot be efficiently weaponized for the same reason it cannot have a meltdown, U-233 is made with a breeding process of neutrons and therefore does not "runaway" when left unattended like U-235 does. You would need to breed alot of Th-232 to get even a little Pu-238/239/240

I digress, please stop assuming nuclear energy is bad, it really boils down to how we utilize it . It is a much better alternative than fossil fuels that contribute green-house gases and is certainly more efficient than solar energy (literally just a fractional amount of fusion energy of the sun, to get all of it we would need a Dyson sphere). The ultimate goal is sustainable positive Q-factor fusion, but until the funding and world is ready for such feats of physics and engineering Thorium fission reactors are, in my opinion, the next best thing.

However, these are just my personal thoughts on Thorium Reactors. 😉🧐

I have no idea if these are good ideas regarding desalination, but I collect them here in case they are:
posted by a minds.com user named
Virtualstan Leejohn Conwayverse
Bringing desalinated water uphill via repeated filtering of salt that forces the salty heavy water to push the lighter desalinated water up, and two other more obvious methods.

Method 1: Using sun and moon tides.
Continents are more rigid so don’t move as much sideways or vertically with tides. We notice the tide on water because ‘it leaves the continent behind’ so to speak, otherwise we would notice the continent rising more instead when they don't move together. Water accumulates at the high-tide areas near and opposite the moon and the sun that causes the tide, draining from the low-tide areas where the rigid continent cannot follow. To make use of the tides, at the high-tide area light water needs to be pushed up for a bit in the desalination filter entrance, by the filter and pressure or by a small pump, but then the desalinated water will just spread on the apparent horizontal plane of forces - horizontal as it appears to it, resting on top of the salted oceanic water - as the tubing guides it to flow towards the destination. In practice it would be a series of long tubes comparable to a significant arc of Earth, buoyantly floating for the part of the tide where water is pressed on high while it borrowed water mass from all other sides, rising up with the tide for as much as it can, and then ‘hanging and falling in to the continent down’ as it reaches from the high tide sea to the low tide land. This "hanging" of tubes, supported by alternative fixed or buoyant methods, gives the desalinated water the impression of a river or soft waterfall, and as such allows it to flow without further energy consumption to the needed uphill destination.
Benefits: Plenty of water flow during tide. Easy to repair. Able to reach any continental altitude on the planet given the known altitude displacement of tides.
Problems: Geopolitical claims and made up division of planetary resources. Altitude reached is limited by the reach of the arc around a significant segment of the planet, but does not scale linearly requiring long tubes even for minor lifting. The water-fall to destination needs to be a very horizontal slope to keep flowing during the proper tide, requiring long tubes also but quite restricted in position.

Method 2: Deep tubes pushing via heavy sea itself the desalinated water.
A salt-water filter will keep passing water through its material structure as long as the pressure is enough. In a U-shaped tube with a filter at the bottom and salted water on one side of the U, desalinated water will rise higher on the other side. The higher the U tubes, the greater this pressure difference per weight will lift the light water. Using the sea itself as pressure provider, a tube with a filter at the entrance can be put deep into salted water, a few kilometers deep not necessarily straight down, to guide the rise of clean water a few hundred meters uphill, in a loosely defined ‘few’.
Benefits: Plenty of water flow regardless of tide.
Problems: Harsh conditions and high pressure differences will cause degradation of tubes. Hard to repair down there. Regular replacement of the tubes may be necessary. Limited maximum lift in natural oceanic depths, may require drilling to reach further down.

Method 3: U-shaped tubes with filter at the bottom and salt-water on one side, each lifting and dropping desalted water a little higher up for the next U tube.
Repeating the U-shaped distribution of salted and unsalted water, with a small switch that lets temporarily some salt redistribution from the salty water regularly in the unsalted water tube but with still plenty of weight difference, allows the filter to lift desalted water on one side using weight distribution, and lift the salt too in the same tube by chemical distribution. At each step, desalinated water climbs as high as it can go before spilling one-way into the next step’s salted water tube. At each step the salted water tube will receive a steady income of mostly desalinated water from up, and will filter desalted water through pushing it higher on the next segment. Each step will also mechanically block and connect the tubes allowing introduction of some of the salt on the desalted water tube, salt that will diffuse in the water and climb to spill on the next segment along with it. At each step the salt density in one side is much bigger than on the other side, allowing this pressure to keep persisting through the tubes artificially arranged like this. The final step with desalinated water ready for consumption does not need to lift the salt anymore.
Benefits: Accessible tubing from water source to destination allows comfortable setup and repairs.
Problems: A lot of material consumption. To produce the water flow using gravity energy and chemical properties arranged un-naturally like in the proposal needs an industrial supply of spare parts and technicians.

Maintenance of tubes and filters makes none of the proposed methods appropriate for energy extraction of the water brought uphill, but necessity of drinkable water brings economic sense in eccentric flow of salt and water.


IMHO this comes CLOSE to the truth, but as no solutions are given, it remains "just close" to the truth. IMHO there definitely is a solution, and that is most likely that people must reduce consumption, reduce birth rates and must choose to live according to natures "carry capacity". If they dont, they will be forced to, either by nature itself or by their fellow men, out of necessity / inevitability. Technology can mitigate the impact of living inside natures carry capacity to a good degree, if used wisely and as long as birth rates, consumption and waste management are controlled effectively and wisely.


 Karl North on June 25, 2021  ·  at 8:06 pm EST/EDT

Although it took a rather long winded article on the new malthusianism to bring it out, it’s nice to see awareness of global resource depletion gradually seeping into discussions on the Saker site, citing long time energy descent analysts like Catton, Tverberg, Orlov, Mumford, and Meadows et al – even if it is so far relegated to commentary rather than fully informative articles.

Certainly the general focus on the Sakar site – reporting on the collapse of the Western imperium after five centuries of terror, pillage and mass murder, and its replacement with a new, multipolar order – is valuable. However, that reporting has revealed no awareness of how deeply our species’ violation of the laws of nature is affecting the leading nations of the new order – China, Russia, Iran, etc., just as they are now causing the collapse of the old Western imperium. Writers like Escobar, Giraldi, Shamir, Martyanov and the Saker himself are great contributors to the geopolitical economics of the shifting order, but remain oblivious to the rapid rate in which industrial civilization is destroying its own resource base. This process can only result in a catabolic collapse, one that will happen sooner in some societies than others – far sooner for example in the US than in Russia, for example.

News in this commentary session of modern society succumbing to resource depletion has elicited some of the denial arguments familiar to energy descent writers like myself:

1. If only we stopped war making, and beat the swords (military budgets) into the proverbial plowshares, we could feed the world forever.
2. If only we stopped wasting the planetary resources in domination of lesser nations, there would be plenty for all. Organic farming will feed the world.
3. Technology will save us.

The problem with these arguments is not only that they are politically utopian in view of the rather poor historical record of the species. It is true that industrial economies create enormous waste of resources, but without curtailing human consumption, elimination of waste will add only a few years to the life of industrial economies. And no technology can sustain modern life without the energy to build, run and maintain it, energy which is fast depleting to unaffordable costs of extraction.

The literature of the end of cheap energy and its consequences is well developed, and includes, in addition to writers mentioned in these comments, prolific analysts such as James Kunstler, John Michael Greer, Cris Martenson and many others. As an energy descent writer (karlnorth.com), I hope to see increasing acknowledgement on Sakar of this predicament of modern society, particularly in writing about China, which is set to become the leading consumer of resources on the planet.
Log in to Reply

    Robert Shule. on June 28, 2021  ·  at 3:28 am EST/EDT

    Thanks for posting your comment. I concur with much of what you are saying, and feel others on this blog need to grapple the subject. Actually, the greater problem is not resource depletion (there is plenty of oil in the ground), but rather the problem is of choking on waste (namely carbon dioxide, but also other things). There was an interesting exibition at the science museum in Toronto Canada many years back, (I do not know if it is still there) in which a lot of rats were put in a cage. Given food, the rats multiplied to a point where they choked on their waste, and their numbers quickly dwindled. Such a situation we humans will experience on earth if we do not start being careful of what we consume (that was the point of the exibition).

    Ted Kaczynski in his book “Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How” has a very good treatment on world political economy in mathametical terms. He describes how competition among economic systems, e.g. “The West” vs. “Russia-China Axis” must maximize production to survive competatively in the near term. In doing so, they undermine their long term viability. Eventually, all systems get snuffed out.

    Yes, political economy and environment are subjects joined at the hip. One cannot talk about one without acknowledging the other. What the “great reset” is hedging at is the exhaustion of world resources causing collapse in world economic systems, and what to do about it (give the elites some credit). It has little to do with Malthus.

This is an important comment by a guy named "dave jordan" referring to a video about economics / La Rouche / anti-entropy:
Can you please get to the point? Look, it's simple. You have to lift people up to achieve their highest potential for the good of all. That is most certainly anti-entropic, don't you think?


[0] Themen-Index

[#] Nächste Seite

[*] Vorherige Sete

Zur normalen Ansicht wechseln