[GJM] Fw: Re: Where is the best place to focus one's energy

[marguerite hampton]

 Dave, I feel this is very well said.  However, 
I feel also that the energy sources we are now
considering aren't going to be sufficient to meet
global climate change -- and I'm not talking about
still retaining the frills of our consumer society, but
in terms of being able to handle the huge amount
of migration required to get as many people as 
possible to safety and resettled.  

Unless there is some miracle evaporation process
that takes place as the glacial ice melt occurrs, we 
are faced with all of the low-lying coastal areas and
islands world wide being inundated with ocean rise. 
If you look at a world map and focus on the coastal
areas, most of them are where the largest population
centers are located.  So the movement inland from 
the coastal areas will be massive.  Since here in the
U.S. 80% of the population is located within 200 miles
of the coastline, the forced migration will be 
unimaginable. .

As well, all inlets from rivers running inland to the ocean
will be inundated.  Places such as New Orleans, already
hard hit by the hurricanes will be inundated with water again.  
And, we are not talking about just the U.S., we are talking
about this taking place worldwide.  And, as Al Gore has
assessed, this will take place "in his lifetime".   So this 
is not an event that will take place 20, 30, or 50 years off --
it is taking place today in scattered parts of the world --
the Inuit are greatly concerned as ice melt turns their 
land from one of ice to melting tundra and the flora and
fauna they had come to depend upon for food and livliehood
is suddenly disappearing as if over night.   

So, we are talking about massive need for energy to power
emergency facilities as this "shift" takes place and billions
of people are forced to seek higher ground.  Never before 
has humanity been faced with a worldwide event of this 
magnitude which may take place within one season as 
the speed of glacial ice melt continues to increase expoentially
as the Gulf Stream continues to slow.  

As well as the coastal ocean rise, we are faced with rising 
temperatures in different areas worldwide while other areas
may be inundated with layers of ice.  So it is not only ocean
rise that will force migration, but temperature change as well
as some areas become either to hot or too cold to support
life.  And, we cannot deny this event any longer -- recently
thousands of people died in Europe due to unusually high
temperatures.  

It is my understanding, and this is for sure, heresay, 
but it does appear that Zero Point Energy could be 
packaged in small enough containers -- suitcase size --
which could be carried by one person yet power a 
large football-field size building.  And these type of units
could be manufactured and disseminated in "quick time"
 
So, considering, it is understandable why the present
power brokers have an interest in keeping this type of
energy off the market.  

But then, maybe I am just the crazy old lady from the
wilderness who doesn't  know what she's talking about
either.  Take your pick. . 

.    
  . 

   
   

marguerite aka eco 
 
-------Original Message-------
 
From: Dave Ewoldt
Date: 11/21/06 10:56:03
To: President, USA Exile Govt.
Cc: gar; marguerite hampton; Reinette Senum; David West; Raleigh Myers;
Alden Bryant; Catherine Austin Fitts; List, COMMUNET; Janaia Donaldson;
mike at blogspot.l.google.com; W. Curtiss Priest; Adam Trombly; Mary Nelson;
Dave Ewoldt; Stephanie Sutton; List, Cyberspace Society
Subject: Re: Where is the best place to focus one's energy
 
Hi Keith... in one of your recents e-mails you accuse
Darley/Deffeyes/Heinberg/Kunstler/Lundberg/Pfeiffer/Simmons/EtAl of ignoring
the New Energy Truth Movement and shilling for Big Oil.
 
You bring out the argument that Holdren and Lewis at the Aspen Ideas
Festival did "assert authoritatively" that none of the current alternative
energy sources (or even the combination, actually) can replace the total
energy
extracted from fossil fuels as a way of trying to discredit those who are
warning about Peak Oil. You seem to be conveniently ignoring that everybody
with a shred of credibility in the Peak Oil movement has been saying the
same
thing. For much longer. Why do you think they're talking about power-down?
You
do, of course, get the media pundits who hype everything that comes along as
the cure all, but if that's who you're believing, you're on the way to
losing
any shred of credibility.
 
Then you admit it's time to go back to the alternative energy drawing board.
I
guess you're hoping no one makes the logical connection that it's somewhat
strange to accuse others of ignoring something that doesn't actually exist.
 
In the same message you included a snippet from Brian O'Leary, where he was
talking about the need to find a lasting solution. I agree.
 
So here's a lasting solution for y'all: quite using so damn much. Break out
of
the consensus trance and realize that a throw away economy built on
mountains
of waste with a population beyond the biosphere's carrying capacity is not
sustainable--I don't care what energy source is driving it. The fact that
burning fossil fuels has brought about catastrophic climate destabilization
has
merely helped to point out this glaringly obvious fact to everyone.
 
And again, I'm not pooh-poohing the possibility of boundless free energy.
But
it seems to me that there is just as large, if not a larger, possibility
that
the principles of natural systems would rather tend to stay balanced and
free
energy will prove to be chimeric. Our constant meddling as well as the blind
faith in a mystical story that we can get something for nothing has created
many of the messes we're being forced to deal with now. I think it's wiser
to
plan our future on what we currently know, instead of "authoritative"
assertions in papers and small-scale demonstrations that don't, and can't,
scale in any known realm but the mathematical.
 
It is a complete fallacy, and a fantasy, to think that any energy source can
stop global warming. Unless one of these free-energy sources can also stop
deforestation, toxic pollution, and the exploitation of the Global South by
creating the raw materials for a consumer culture based on entitlement that
thinks that not only can everyone's slice of the pie continue to get bigger,
but that the number of slices is infinitely expandable.
 
The fact of the matter is that wind and solar power could power actual human
needs. They won't, however, power capitalism nor elite rule.
 
Which causes me to wonder, what is it that you're actually trying to defend
here?
 
What responsibility are you willing to accept for handing out the latest
batch
of rose-colored glasses when the cheap energy infrastructure (economic and
industrial) collapses, fossil fuels can't be had for any price, and people
find
themselves face-down in the dirt totally unprepared because they'd been led
to
believe that technology would come along and save them if the government
would
just get out of the way.
 
There's a very rational reason that "techno-fix" is used in a pejorative
manner. Trying to use the recent CERA "report" (propaganda) to prop up
specious
arguments against Peak Oil must be examined in light of whose paradigms they
re
supporting.
 
 
For the Earth...
_dave_(this entire message is composed of recycled electrons)
Natural Systems Solutions
http://www.attractionretreat.org/NSS
Sustainable lifestyles, organizations, and communities
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net/attachments/20061121/b800e749/attachment.html