[FoRK] Concrete results

Eugen Leitl eugen at leitl.org
Mon Jun 17 02:03:19 PDT 2013

On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 09:43:51AM -0700, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
> On 6/16/2013 4:50 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> > Oil is not really information-driven,
> ???
> You think oil companies still randomly poke holes in the earth until
> they find something?

Absolutely not. But that they're blind as a mole if it
comes to long-term planning. In fact, the industry is
actively hostile to insiders who take the long view, 
and see something which promises trouble to the bottom line.
> >  the peak 2006 has hit them
> > cold. Peak total fossil and total nuclear fissible is 2020, almost
> > nobody is aware of that yet.
> As for nuclear, that assumption would only be true if we won't turn
> to breeder reactors 

Ah, but have you looked into why breeders are a failure?
They're much more expensive than new nuclear, have a low
breeding factor and safety records from hell.

> if/when we need to.

We *already* need to. You need about 1 TW/year for
the next 40 years, which translates to about 2000 new
normal-sized nuclear reactor equivalents per year. 

That thing is dead, Jim. It might have worked if
we have pursued the alternative fuelcycle (MSR)
breeders in 1970s/80s, but now it's never going to
happen on a sufficiently large scale to make a 
difference. It's far too late for that.

This is 2013. Total fossil and nuclear peak is 2020.
If you look at R&D budget, it's not there. If you
look at deployed and planned deployed capacity, it's
not there.

I'm afraid we screwed this one up. 

What is left to do is a managed regression scenario.
If you don't do that, you'll get an unmanaged regression,
where the global complex system can produce a series
of concerted collapses, instead of controlled unravelling
to an increasingly more resilient state until the decline
is arrested.

On the positive side, we'll get rid of the obesity epidemic.

More information about the FoRK mailing list