Did Gordon actually 'save the world'?

[AronSearle]

Going green will only happen after the mad max era.

How right you are.
First film was probably the best ( despite Gibson's awful acting ) but I remember watching the second and thinking if it is set in a future where the oil is all but gone why is the main character driving round in a gas guzzling muscle car rather than something more economical such as a mini or a moped or even a bike or a horse?
'Course I realised it is really a metaphor for human society.

No, it's just an action film.

Laziness or fear of change keeps people clinging to what they know rather than attempting to try something else.

Wot, like the billions being spent on renewable infrastructure, billions being spent on ITER, on fuel cell technology, on rare earth (that isn't really rare) replacements.

Keep talking rot.

Keep doing and acting the same and everything will be just fine and dandy.

You mean keep investing in new tech, researching sustainable cheap fuel.

I agree, the future is bright!

 

[pred]

Going green will only happen after the mad max era.

How right you are.
First film was probably the best ( despite Gibson's awful acting ) but I remember watching the second and thinking if it is set in a future where the oil is all but gone why is the main character driving round in a gas guzzling muscle car rather than something more economical such as a mini or a moped or even a bike or a horse?
'Course I realised it is really a metaphor for human society. Laziness or fear of change keeps people clinging to what they know rather than attempting to try something else. Keep doing and acting the same and everything will be just fine and dandy. It ( the film) also is probably predicting the resource wars that will most likely occur as countries try to hold onto what they have but accelerating the end by their own endeavours . How much fuel was burnt by those road warriors just to get control of one tanker of petrol.

I admire your stance on society LL, if only more people were the same, I assume you only ever travel by foot or pushbike and your home is not connected to the national grid and you are not receiving benefits which derives from capitalist taxes.

 

[ladylola]

Slowly but surely

 

[ladylola]

Going green will only happen after the mad max era.

How right you are.
First film was probably the best ( despite Gibson's awful acting ) but I remember watching the second and thinking if it is set in a future where the oil is all but gone why is the main character driving round in a gas guzzling muscle car rather than something more economical such as a mini or a moped or even a bike or a horse?
'Course I realised it is really a metaphor for human society.

No, it's just an action film.

Laziness or fear of change keeps people clinging to what they know rather than attempting to try something else.

Wot, like the billions being spent on renewable infrastructure, billions being spent on ITER, on fuel cell technology, on rare earth (that isn't really rare) replacements.

Keep talking rot.

Keep doing and acting the same and everything will be just fine and dandy.

You mean keep investing in new tech, researching sustainable cheap fuel.

I agree, the future is bright!

That'll be all that pandering then.

 

[AronSearle]

Slowly but surely

You mean after you purchased your right to buy council house.

And I bet your ecological footprint is bigger than mine.

Hypocrite.

That'll be all that pandering then.

Best you can come up with?

You don't have a clue do you.

 

[ladylola]

Yes I do have a clue and your assumptions are poor even by your standards. The real point here is that I'm open to and not scared by change , indeed I would openly embrace radical change to our society something that mainstream parties and for that matter a large part of the population are scared ****less of.

 

[Norcon]

Going green will only happen after the mad max era.

How right you are.
First film was probably the best ( despite Gibson's awful acting ) but I remember watching the second and thinking if it is set in a future where the oil is all but gone why is the main character driving round in a gas guzzling muscle car rather than something more economical such as a mini or a moped or even a bike or a horse?
'Course I realised it is really a metaphor for human society.

No, it's just an action film.

Laziness or fear of change keeps people clinging to what they know rather than attempting to try something else.

Wot, like the billions being spent on renewable infrastructure, billions being spent on ITER, on fuel cell technology, on rare earth (that isn't really rare) replacements.

Keep talking rot.

Keep doing and acting the same and everything will be just fine and dandy.

You mean keep investing in new tech, researching sustainable cheap fuel.

I agree, the future is bright!

There's no replacement for fossil fuels. Not now and never will be.

There building anerobic digestors round my way. We've been approached a few times about the main construction on these kind of projects. Would tie us up for about 6 months on one site so we ain't interested. At the moment anyway.

I'm told by informed skeptics that if they just burned the fuel that is used to maintain the crop and transport the silage and slurry to the actual site in a big diesel generator instead it would be much more efficient.

Then of course the silage can be used to feed the cows.

 

[ladylola]

Yes in reality you are correct Norcon . It is possible to use electric vehicals or run them with a wood gas generator and regular internal combustion engine but the EROEI is much lower and becomes unviable.
If you think using diesel to transport spillage to a digester is daft how about pumping it underground to obtain fracked gas ....
http://www.propublica.org/article/drillers-illegally-using-diesel-fuel-to-frack

 

[AronSearle]

Yes I do have a clue and your assumptions are poor even by your standards.

I can only make assumptions, because you say nothing of substance to base any informed judgement.

The real point here is that I'm open to and not scared by change

More platitudes.

Change of what, to what, how.....

I can only assume you have no clue, because all you can repeatedly do is spew forth platitudes without substance, and cannot or will not discuss criticism of green party politics.

Being unafraid doesn't mean it is then sensible to step of a cliff without looking.

 

[AronSearle]

There's no replacement for fossil fuels. Not now and never will be.

Rubbish, there already is.

Fuel cell technology exists, wave power exists, the problem is that they are currently just to expensive, but prices will come down as the technology matures. New building materials will make wave power cheaper to construct and maintain, car companies are already dumping electric cars powered by battery in favour of further research towards fuel cells.

ITER, and projects like it will eventually crack the fusion problem.

Research into algea based fuels is advancing.

 

[Norcon]

You might as well light the candles if you think that lot will sustain a fraction of what oil is currently sustaining.

 

[pred]

Now they have a Formula 1 electric car series the technology will take massive leaps forward.

 

[AronSearle]

You might as well light the candles if you think that lot will sustain a fraction of what oil is currently sustaining.

Producing the energy isn't the problem, it is storing it.

And fuel cells and batteries will crack that problem.

The greens of course don't want to believe this, they want us all to live in mud huts (us, not them).

 

[Brigadier]

You might as well light the candles if you think that lot will sustain a fraction of what oil is currently sustaining.

Producing the energy isn't the problem, it is storing it.

And fuel cells and batteries will crack that problem.

The greens of course don't want to believe this, they want us all to live in mud huts (us, not them).

Because more and more people are wedded to the concept of the car (internal combustion engine), I doubt that batteries will ever be the solution - short of an easy, 1 minute way to remove a spent battery from your car, and replace it with a fully charged one. From where I sit now, hydrogen is the obvious, near like-for-like, advance.

However, that is based on my limited horizon, reasonable timescales, and my own assumptions on what is likely to be "do-able". The real solution might well end up being so outlandish by today's standards, it would boggle even a current SF writer's mind.....

 

[JBR]

I agree about hydrogen use for powering vehicles (batteries are inconvenient to say the least).

Hydrogen can be produced from water (plenty of that about) by electrolysis; electricity can be produced from nuclear fission. Nuclear power is the only realistic way forward, and we have the resources for centuries of its use.