You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #17: Thanks. I agree with your last statement. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-03-06 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Thanks. I agree with your last statement.
Sometimes I may come across as indicating that we need to produce 440 exajoules (or more) forever. Actually I don't think we can produce 440 exajoules forever and that the attempt would rather be like Russian Roulette with six bullets in six chambers.

I believe that we must manage ourselves to demand far less energy. However most people predict that energy demand will rise, one hears numbers like 1000 exajoules. I don't agree. I think energy demand will fall, but that the fall will involve catastrophe rather than result from rational planning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC