on 4/1/2002 9:40 AM, Jim Elwell at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The world is most assuredly NOT running low on energy. We have more > reserves of every fossil fuel we use today than we did 10, 20 or 50 years > ago.
Surely this cannot be true if the word "reserves" refers to supplies of these fossil fuels in the ground. After all, during the past 10, 20 or 50 years we have certainly burned up a lot of this fossile fuel. During this time, NO ONE HAS MADE ANY FRESH SUPPLIES, as far as I know. It is patently obvious that, if we use some and don't replenish it, then we have less now than we had before. If we continue to do so, we WILL run out. If your word "reserves" merely means "what we think is there" or "what we know about" or "what we think can be extracted economically", then we are fooling ourselves with a shell game. No matter how much more is yet to be discovered, it can't possibly be infinite. Therefore, if we continue to use it, we will eventually use it all up. It is a fact that we are running out, not because we may or may not have more "reserves", but because IT DOESN'T MATTER how much we have in reserves. Quibbling about how much reserves are left is just quibbling about whether we will run out in 100 year or 105 years. I am not comforted by a mere extra few years before human society collapses for lack of sufficient energy. Regards, Bill Hooper retired physics professor, Florida, USA -------------------------------------- "Simplification" begins with "SI" --------------------------------------
