Hi Ed, ...
> Yes Steven, I agree this is what we need. However, how can this > approach be brought about? If I knew the answer to that question! As for me, it often feels as if all I personally can do is continue to paint better visions of the future - directions we can take if we chose to. Hopefully some of my visions will eventually germinate. > We need a government whose self-interest is > not to keep energy cost high and we need a population that will elect > people based on their interest in solving such problems rather than > stopping stem cell research and killing social security. I predict the > problem will be solved after gasoline reaches $5/gal and after Bush and > his philosophy have been completely discredited. Aren't they already paying $5.00 a gallon in many European countries? It remains to be seen if we start bellyaching loud enough when the inevitable $5/gal price invades our own homeland. > At that time, people > will be so desperate that they will finally listen to reality. ...or to another fanatical regime even worse than the current Bush administration. "Oil is our God given right to take. etc..." That is one of my concerns. Perhaps it depends on how scared silly we get. > Until > then, nothing will improve because the special interests presently in > power are doing very nicely, thank you. However, they are not the kind > of interests that improve our lives. Just consider the situation, the > airline industry is going bankrupt, the auto industry is also going down > the drain, practically everything for sale is made in China, major > pension funds are being wiped out, social security and medicare are in > trouble, the national debt is out of control, and we are losing a war > that is killing our youth for no obvious benefit. In spite of all these > problems, the government is about to shut down, or at least be weakened, > because Bush and his gang want a couple of questionable judges. If > people don't care about these problems to do something, how would you > expect to gain support to solve the energy problem? > > Regards, > Ed I continue to have hope. I suspect you hold out for hope as well even though you may be battling your pessimisms - just as I wrestle with my own fears. Like your $5.00/gallon wake-up-call scenario prediction, I, too, suspect there will eventually be a major pivotal point experienced within our society as perceived by historians looking back another hundred years from now. Nobody can predict accurately what accumulation of events will trigger that pivotal point, or even worse, what path our nation will chose to follow as a result of the collective decisions we may take. In a metaphorical sense, it's as if the current time we're going through could be described as: the Seeding Time. This is the time one hopes to plant as many fertile seeds as possible. Hopefully, when society finally wakes up they will begin to perceive all the seeds that have been cast at their feet but ignored for so many years. Hopefully, enough of them will start making intelligent choices as to which ones to water. In the visual/metaphorical sense I created the following digital painting depicting such a concept, seen at: http://orionworks.com/artgal/svj/seeding_m.htm It was, by the way, the first digital painting I ever created back around 1994. 1800x2400 pixels using Corel PhotoPaint, a primitive 3D rendering program, and a Pentium III with 128 meg'o'memory. Yup, those were the good'ol days. [End of another self-serving mercenary plug!] Regarding one of those potential germinations it's possible that we may experience a collective national resolve to build self reliant energy collection structures like a couple thousand large scale Solar Towers. I have harped on the Solar Tower concept precisely because these structures, by their very presence would be in-your-face HUGE! They couldn't be ignored. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Symbolically, they could easily be perceived as positive symbols of hope, aspiration, independence, and self-reliance. If enough of the nation ended up rallying behind the building of these structures we would move mountains in the same way that we put a man on the moon by the end of the decade. I will, however, reserve judgment on whether it would be wise to build these structures until it is better known if they actually can deliver the amount of energy some claim they are capable of harvesting. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
