Akira Shirakawa <shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Every step >> would be progress in technology, and would ultimately lower the cost of >> energy. >> > > Unfortunately, I fail to see how every measure or technology proposed so > far is aimed to ultimately lower the cost of energy. Which one would not? There are only a few technologies being developed: solar, wind and geothermal, plus steps to improve efficiency. The cost solar and wind has fallen drastically, to the point where they are putting pressure on conventional sources. It is difficult to imagine that improving efficiency would be carried out to the extent that it ends up costing more than it is worth, given the abysmal efficiency of most machinery. As one expert put it: "There is so much low hanging fruit in most industries, it bops you on the forehead the moment you walk into a plant." It is like looking for oil in Saudi Arabia in 1950. An expert from the U.S. showed up there, looked out from his hotel and started pointing to places to dig wells. He did not even have get into a jeep and take a drive. Even in Japan, where people have been paying attention to efficiency for decades, they have found they can reduce electric power consumption by 10% to 20% with no reduction in quality of life or industrial output. They did this in response to the Fukushima disaster. > Actually, (leaving aside every political / governmental implication) I am > getting the opposite impression: everything seems directed toward > decreasing global emissions by making energy more scarce and expensive, or > in other words decreasing wealth in the western world . . . I have not heard of such policies. A tax on carbon will only move money around. It will no make energy much more expensive or less expensive. It will level the playing field and give solar and wind some of the advantages oil and coal have from incumbency and government support. replies take much time to write; please don't get offended if I cut more or > less large portions of them when I reply for the sake of discuss things > quicker. > You are supposed to do that. It is part of the Rules here, which are more like guidelines than actual rules. - Jed
