Power Options
Nuclear: could be much more tenable if fast
neutrino operation were employed. The most terrifying aspect of
current fission-based power is not (at least for me) the off-chance
of a Chernobyl or even a Three Mile Island. Those are very small
probabilities compared to the certainty of Yucca Mountain. The
interminable *waste* is the real game-stopper for slow neutrino
production. There was a movement underway to utilize fast-neutrino
process, which produces more energy more efficiently, and which has
essentially NO waste product (the fuel is like 98-99% consumed).
However, Three Mile Island happened, so ALL fission expansion
ceased.
Hydrogen Fuel Cell: Agreed, the single most
promising technology for which we actually have technical answers.
Always seemed to me to be an issue of putting generating plants in
very sunny seashores, use solar to separate the H2 from the H2O, and
then solve the distribution problem. But there's an economic
"activation energy" barrier that will not be breached until the
cheaper stuff is expended.
Hydrogen Fusion: Obviously, WHEN (not *if*) the
technological hurdle for this puppy is overcome, THIS is the Top
Kahuna. Unlimited power, and essential free (after capital
investment of the plants is paid for). Uranium is scarce and
expensive. The universe is composed of 99% hydrogen. Not scarce.
What worries me here is that all movement on this front seems to
have stalled. Or at least there is nothing being reported. There
will still be a need to provide some form of air motive power: I
don't think electricity will ever power an airplane the way we
expect an airplane to be powered. But who knows?
Wind, Solar, Geothermal, etc: Don't write these off
completely. There is nothing wrong with a combined approach. Any
power available from these sources means less needed from others.
ZPE (Zero Point Energy): I have enough of the
science fictionary in me to seriously consider the possibility of
one day tapping into the quantum foam. Infinite energy, "available"
at every point in the universe. Well, it's a thought. You know SOME
Big Bang Theory Sheldon is dreaming about it SOMEWHERE :).
But for me, the thing we need to give the greatest consideration,
first and foremost, now and in the future, is not so much the new
source of civilization's power (and by that, I chiefly mean Western
civilization, and by that I chiefly mean American civilization), but
rather how we are USING our energy & power. Conservation has been
essentially ignored as a strategy, since the idea seems to get
politicians unelected in a hurry. But if we were to curb our
consumption significantly, the need for foreign oil, while we work
out the answers to new sources of energy, could be greatly
decreased. However, like I said: no American politician, however
knowledgeable about the depths and complexities of this problem,
will EVER again suggestion conservation as a strategy. The example
of Kennedy will forever prevent a president from seriously bucking
the military-industrial complex. The example of Jimmy Carter wearing
sweaters while turning down the heat will pretty much do the same
for those who contemplate conservation.