In Nature There Exists No Free LunchInstant gratification is not compatible with the modern research tactics of science, much less as solution for alternative energy sources. The continued search to wean the human race off oil is a positive gesture; however science has to be permitted to catch up with imagination. As bio-diesel gains momentum in the media and word of mouth as a legitimate "green" substitute for oil, those who realize the true ramifications of this perspective, cringe.
Large scale production of bio-diesel requires the use of excess volumes of land to produce a necessary amount of plant matter to be converted into fuel. While conversationalists applaud the apparent reduced carbon footprint of this magical compound, a dichotomy exists as the needed acquisition of land needed to produce bio-diesel will actually result in more harm to environment than fossil fuels while driving the up the price of corn thus putting U.S. farmers out of business. (Those farmers who do participate in growing corn for use in bio-fuel are luxuriously subsidized by government dollars, hinting further that this method of alternative fuel does not possess the needed results to be produced effeciently, effectively and adhere to consumer spending standards) The mantra of clear cutting trees and those who live off the land is not in par with the expectations of the environmental movement. Even in Brazil where the organic matter from sugarcane produces a much more efficient end product than corn, the government has been forced to increase spending on oil to satisfy basic energy needs.
The practice of harnessing energy from the universe requires an understanding of the pervading laws of thermodynamics. It remains an abstract goal to believe that in the next 2000 years, humanity will be able to solve the efficiency issue in a closed energy system. Suffice to say, the harvesting of energy from space or from terrestrial sources will always result in a net loss. Even with the production of a hydroelectric dam, one has to picture the amount of labor expended by each individual worker and machine in the construction phase. On another level, one has to consider the properties of each individual turbine and the passing force of the river over the moveable parts. An apt metaphor exists in the business world. An employee is hired at 3000 dollars a month salary and not paid for the first month of work. The employee is paid the next month and until their tenure ends, but the business will always be behind by 3000 dollars. Even if the employee is given an extra 3000 dollars on his last paycheck, the ramifications of not receiving money for a month will have already affected his bank account and life in other subtle ways. No matter the correction, the system is now destined to function at a loss. Entropy may be cruel, but the concept remains the defining characteristic for the structure of the universe and reality. We will probably have to change our habits over the next two hundred years, barring the development of a feasible H3 reactor and a new love affair with nuclear energy.
UK journalist George Manbiot treats this debate with some intriguing thoughts about the effects of energy farming in tropical zones.
Large scale production of bio-diesel requires the use of excess volumes of land to produce a necessary amount of plant matter to be converted into fuel. While conversationalists applaud the apparent reduced carbon footprint of this magical compound, a dichotomy exists as the needed acquisition of land needed to produce bio-diesel will actually result in more harm to environment than fossil fuels while driving the up the price of corn thus putting U.S. farmers out of business. (Those farmers who do participate in growing corn for use in bio-fuel are luxuriously subsidized by government dollars, hinting further that this method of alternative fuel does not possess the needed results to be produced effeciently, effectively and adhere to consumer spending standards) The mantra of clear cutting trees and those who live off the land is not in par with the expectations of the environmental movement. Even in Brazil where the organic matter from sugarcane produces a much more efficient end product than corn, the government has been forced to increase spending on oil to satisfy basic energy needs.
The practice of harnessing energy from the universe requires an understanding of the pervading laws of thermodynamics. It remains an abstract goal to believe that in the next 2000 years, humanity will be able to solve the efficiency issue in a closed energy system. Suffice to say, the harvesting of energy from space or from terrestrial sources will always result in a net loss. Even with the production of a hydroelectric dam, one has to picture the amount of labor expended by each individual worker and machine in the construction phase. On another level, one has to consider the properties of each individual turbine and the passing force of the river over the moveable parts. An apt metaphor exists in the business world. An employee is hired at 3000 dollars a month salary and not paid for the first month of work. The employee is paid the next month and until their tenure ends, but the business will always be behind by 3000 dollars. Even if the employee is given an extra 3000 dollars on his last paycheck, the ramifications of not receiving money for a month will have already affected his bank account and life in other subtle ways. No matter the correction, the system is now destined to function at a loss. Entropy may be cruel, but the concept remains the defining characteristic for the structure of the universe and reality. We will probably have to change our habits over the next two hundred years, barring the development of a feasible H3 reactor and a new love affair with nuclear energy.
UK journalist George Manbiot treats this debate with some intriguing thoughts about the effects of energy farming in tropical zones.
No comments:
Post a Comment