Harry Veeder wrote:
Sure, but there have been costs too.
Social impact studies should be required by law just as environmental impact
studies are now required by law.
That is impossible, even in principle. The social impact of cold
fusion, or any other technology, is always a matter of choice. We
decide what the impact will be. Any technology can be used for good
or evil. Of course some disruption is inevitable, and jobs will be
lost, but that can easily be balanced by social improvements and new
jobs. But we have to decide that is how things will be. We have to
make decisions, set policies and allocate money. When the U.S. built
railroads, highways, computers, modern agriculture, the Internet and
most other major technology with a society-wide impact, the projects
were planned by and paid for mainly by Uncle Sam. So the public had a
direct and decisive role in planning the outcome.
When the price of gasoline rose in the 1970s, nations in Europe and
Japan decided to make changes. They raised gasoline taxes so that
fuel cost about $6 per gallon. They improved efficiency. That is why
countries like Italy are roughly twice as energy efficient as the US,
and why the record high price of oil will have little impact on their
economy. I believe Norway and Sweden intend to phase out the use of
oil completely in the next 10 or 20 years. They can do this because
they deliberately set out to change their society 30 years ago. We
could have done the same but we chose not to. If we had joined Italy,
France and the others, the U.S. would now be a member of OPEC. We
would be exporting oil and we would be delighted that the price has
reached $72 per barrel.
- Jed
