All
This seems to have little to do with road transport technology, or
policy. I would be grateful if you please take this discussion off-line.
-David Cebon
At 11:38 20/02/2003 -0800, Muriel Strand wrote:
>as amory lovins has pointed out long since, we need very little of the
>high-intensity energy which is nuclear's strong point. based on
>what i've heard about at the bioneers conferences (see www.bioneers.org)
>there appears to be plenty of technology available to generate
>and efficienctly use the large quantities of low-intensity energy which
>are what we actually NEED. we will never succeed in improving
>consumption efficiency as long as we act like economic demand is something
>whose every whim we are impelled to cater to.
>
>to let people think there are not viable alternatives to nuclear power
>risks wars over uranium mines and waste repositories. i don't see
>that this is doing any good. we would be much better advised to have an
>honest discussion about carrying capacity.
>
>in point of fact, humanity lived comfortably and sustainably on renewable
>sources of energy for thousands of years. pretending that the
>level of enlightenment of any civilization requires a certain kind of
>technology represents to my mind a mistaken view of the interaction
>of mind and matter.
>
>muriel
>
>[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> > I don't agree with Muriel Strand. What California really needs is more
> > nuclear power and the hydrogen economy as we are going to
> > do in France: about 80% of electrical power is produced by nuclear power
> > stations here.
> > "Within the scope of today's technology, nuclear fission is the only
> > viable, clean source of large quantities of energy" :
> > Geoffrey Ballard reported by SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN december 2002.
> > Let people believe that there are other alternatives won't do any good to
> > the human society and
> > will only get us to do war for oil.
> >
> >
> > snip
>
>--
>The political-economic challenge facing California is real.
>Every Californian needs to contact their elected representatives
>to solve this problem.
>
>Any resemblance of any of the above opinions to anybody's official
>position is completely coincidental.
>******************************************************************
>
>The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian
>needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For
>a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy
>cost, see our web site at http://www.arb.ca.gov
>
>Muriel Strand, P.E.
>Air Resources Engineer
>CA Air Resources Board
>1001 I Street
>Sacramento, CA 95814
>916-324-9661
>916-327-0640 (fax)
>www.arb.ca.gov
|