In the late 1960s one of my first jobs was working in long range planning for HMG. By then it was clear to those of us working in that field that the world would be in a state of entropic collapse by 2010.
[Entropic collapse = more and more energy would be needed to find and process new energy]
Plan A was to press ahead with fusion power so that by the time all the easy oil started to run out around 2000 we would all seamlessly switch to running on electricity. Plan A didn't work out due to problems with fusion power and so when conventional oil supply started to contract in 2005 the world plugged the gap with facked oil which I'm sure you have all heard about. What I suspect you know nothing about is that fracking for oil is no more than a ponzi scheme and even more importantly fracked oil isn't regular crude oil as it contains no diesel. Now most of you probably have no idea that the world runs on diesel. Trucking, shipping but most importantly agriculture all run exclusively on the stuff. And peak diesel occured in 2005.
So there you have the essence of the dilemma facing the folks in charge. Whether you know it or not, you are living through Plan B ie. collapse the world economy and so strip out most of the world's shipping and trucking and so concentrate the remaining diesel for use in agriculture so we all get at least a meal a day. In the circumstances it looks like the best thing they could come up with.
So my question is what would you have done?
So my question is what would you have done?
Well, without getting into what I think we ought to do now, I'll answer your question as I see it. To have put any credibility into fusion at that point of its development clearly was misguided, IMHO. Just the same now when "planners" hope for the best and expect un-proven solutions to be actual solutions. Most often they are not.
Fracking is not really complicated technology. But fusion, fission, grids for electricity distribution, hydrogen systems, solar, etc. are all relatively complicated. It takes time. My rough guide to forecasting technology (and I always try to remember it's a guess and I'm probably wrong), is that it takes 20-30 years from "idea" to "in-production". Maybe a bit less, but never "really quick" or "for sure".
Books are written on this topic. Had to summarise and discuss here.
I'm afraid you missed my point. As long as the ponzi scheme held out; the overnight FED repo rate last September suggests it was failing, the world could have fracked till the cows come home and the world's supply of diesel would not be affected one jot. None of this is at all complicated!! Just trust your GCSE Physics and Maths. Well O level in my case.
