Sure, the US went off the gold standard decades ago (a mistake in my
opinion), but where does money get invested when currencies weaken. precious
metals.  You do realize that we're not just talking transmutation of two or
three elements. the LENR tests which looked for transmuted elements found
many. some over ten different elements, and I'm not counting isotopes as
separate elements.  LENR would most likely have a very disruptive impact on
that market. which has advantages as well as disadvans. a lot of those
metals are used in technologies like integrated circuits and special alloys
for aircraft, and the price will come down, which is good for the consumer.

 

In addition, if currencies are based on the petro$, then that's going to
collapse like a tons of bricks when the financial industry realizes that
LENR just made petroleum obsolete.  Then, currencies will be Nickel-based?
Or what?

-m

 

From: Wm. Scott Smith [mailto:scott...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:21 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:LENR G & Silver & Currency

 

I really don't think there is any direct connection between precious metals
and modern currencies.

 

Last I heard: Today's Currencies are based on the price of oil in $USD since
a large part of the World's Oil Supply is only traded in terms of $USD aka
the "Petrodollar"

 

Has anything definitively changed?

 

(On another topicI think this is how the leading US export is "freshly
printed" dollars!!!LOL)

  _____  

From: zeropo...@charter.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:LENR is not a disruptive technology...
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:53:11 -0800

Eric, 

I suggest you read my entire posting.  I was being facetious, and stated
that 'disruptive' is not going far enough.

-m

 

From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 10:45 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR is not a disruptive technology...

 

LENR would be quite disruptive if it even replaced 10 percent of the world
energy supply over the next twenty years.  If it turns out to be bona fide
and something that can be commercialized (hopefully we'll get a sense of
this soon), and barring some unforeseen impediment to its widespread
adoption, it's not difficult to imagine that it could replace well beyond 10
percent of the energy supply over time.

 

As a thought experiment, assume that LENR effectively makes energy free
during the next 100 years.  Find some activity of concern to the majority of
people on the planet that is limited in some way by scarcity -- agricultural
production, water distribution, the generation of heat and electricity,
heavy manufacturing, transportation, housing.  The cost of these activities
would go down significantly.  It's hard to even get a sense of what the
implications of such a development would be.

 

Now consider the possibility of mass scale production of isotopes by way of
controlled transmutation.  It would be an understatement to say that this
would be disruptive.  Precious metals would become commodities, and the
already tenuous connection between gold and silver and the monetary supply
would probably be broken.  But more worryingly, it might be possible to
order up as much uranium-235 as you want.

 

So for the sake of widespread, unencumbered adoption of LENR, let's hope
that energy production becomes easy and transmutation of heavier elements
proves to be difficult or impossible.

 

Eric

 

On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint
<zeropo...@charter.net> wrote:

AussieGuy wrote:

"Transmutation of elements via the FPE may replace mining."

 

It'll do more than that. it'll kill the entire precious metals business
which has been a foundation for countries' *monetary systems*.  What affect
that will have on economic systems, and countries, is probably not going to
be pretty. in the beginning.

 

With energy being extremely cheap, it will drive down the cost of just about
everything from raw materials to completed products. and it'll be much
cheaper to transport those things to the point of consumption, so we're
talking about much lower cost for most *everything*.    It wouldn't surprise
me if govts stepped in to bring in the changes gradually.  But how does one
decide what to do when this is probably unlike anything that has ever
happened; nothing to go on.

 

*To call LENR a 'disruptive' technology doesn't even begin to describe it!* 

 

-Mark

 

 

Reply via email to