Kyle, I've got no problem with fuel from oil shale as long as extraction
and use
1) does not cause undue damage to the natural species ecologies of the areas
2) does not damage areas of great natural beauty
3 does not delay the introduction of non carbon based energy sources
4) does not delay the point at which the escalating price of oil will render
even the currently marginal renewable technologies economical to use.
If US oil shale stocks caused the US to stop messing with other people's
(oil rich) countries as much that would be great, however as a "get out of
jail free" card to escape the coming decline of economically and
environmentally extractable oil, they won't help the world too much. From
Wikipedia (kerogen is the "oil" in the oilshale):- "Therefore, worldwide
there are approximately 620 billion barrels of known recoverable kerogen.
This compares with known worldwide petroleum reserves of 1200 billion
barrels (Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy, 2006)."
Off Topic follows
Standing Bear wrote:-
<<Many of these are sincere wackos, but many others have an ulterior motive
for being obstructionists and economic saboteurs. For instance if one
wanted
to destabilize or harm a nation for any reason, this kind of activity would
be
one of the most efficient means possible to cause maximum misery to the
target population. Those who went along with them for any reason would be
the usefull fools that inhabit most any bandwagon. Also, luddites probably
will be also found in the pay of major energy producer industries not
benefited by this process>>
Have we fallen into a vortex and gone back to the 1950's? Is Standing
Bear's real name McCarthy? Seriously, S.B., I've been in the environmental
movement since the late sixties. Guessing about what you mean, I can say I
have never experienced, nor ever heard of anybody else experiencing, nor
seen any evidence whatsoever of this cold war paranoiac "sleeper agent" and
espionage centred view of the world actually having much, if any, basis in
reality in the environmental arena. Most of the real hardcore supporters
that I ever saw were little old ladies and gentlemen concerned about the
world their grandchildren would inherit (they leave us money in their wills)
and that proportion of youth who are not yet corrupted by money and power
and excess possessions. It's true that environmentalism attracts people of a
liberal social justice type (pinks to reds) but it equally attracts highly
conservative "blues" - the balance is actually pretty even. This is because
the basic ideas are just good common sense. Both political ends of the
spectrum have some good things going for them, it's just that the presence
of the other is disruptive. Neither would be pleasant if allowed free rein
without the other to counter balance it. The blue end would be nature "red
in tooth and claw" with "devil take the hindmost" as the motto with success
only available to a few, and misery to the rest - the red end would be total
bureaucratic control of the human spirit and lack of freedom. Neither is
sustainable in the long run because both would ruin the environmental life
support systems that life relies on. I know this looks like a superficially
trivial point, but a nice mix of red, green and blue creates balanced white
light!
Environmentalists have been warning about climate change at least
since the 70's and yet it is only in the last few months that the dam of
obstructionism and environmental policy sabotage has been breached and sense
is now starting to appear in the international arena. Earth could have had
three decades less of global warming gases injected into the atmosphere if
the world had listened to us and not the siren voices who used all their
huge wealth and intellectual brilliance and rhetoric to blind people (useful
fools) to the simple truth. The truth is S.B., it is people like you,
accusing us of ulterior motives, who actually demonstrate that it is they
who are the real threat to truth and sense. By projecting onto us what your
"side" evidently sees as acceptable (i.e. pay offs and tied sponsorship and
black propaganda) you therefore rant and scream and hold us up as an enemy
without realising who the real enemies are. It is you who are the "sincere
wacko" and the "useful fool".
Nick Palmer
