On Jul 9, 8:06*pm, "Charlie Gibbs" wrote:
In article ,

(Y.Porat) writes:
i am much more serious than you about it

oil * *coal *and even Uranium will drain off

so fusion is the only long term possobility
beside all the ;green sources
now please note that
even if the technological process * will be found
its IMPLEMENTATION * will take at least decades

Still, no amount of conservation or alternate energy
will overcome the problems of our ever-increasing population.
Maybe we should worry less about our carbon footprint
and consider that there are simply too many feet.
------------------------------
you are absolutely right about too' many feet'
yet since you corrected me about Luis 15
i will correct you about 'too many feel credits (:-)

the credit for that insight was of ...
Maltos (i dont knoe the right spelling of his name
an English thinker )
and that is really a major problem of society
yet does not all in opposition to the energy future needs
----------------------

so
if you think *like Luis 14 king of France that said:
'after me the flood'

ObNit: That was Louis XV, not XIV.

yes i recalled that myself a minute after pressing 'enter send'
but i thought it will not bother anyone since the main idea
was sent
---------------

i am not with you !!
(after him there was the Gillotin * *........)

...and the guillotine got Louis XVI.

i learned some French about 60 yeas ago .......(:-)
----------------

All together now, to the tune of Allan Sherman
(starting off vaguely like the Marseillaise):

and do you expect me now to remember how to spell
marseillaise
(those French are driving me crazy with all their
excessive letters (:-)

and now
how about some fusion ???
---------------------------------------

ATB
Y.Porat
---------------

Charlie Gibbs wrote:

Still, no amount of conservation or alternate energy
will overcome the problems of our ever-increasing population.

Duh!!!!!!

Androcles wrote:

*plonk*

And, out of the woodwork comes one of the greatest cranks.....

Talked with Spaceman lately??????

Bernd Felsche wrote:
"Charlie Gibbs" wrote:
(Y.Porat) writes:

i am much more serious than you about it

oil coal and even Uranium will drain off

so fusion is the only long term possobility
beside all the ;green sources
now please note that
even if the technological process will be found
its IMPLEMENTATION will take at least decades

Still, no amount of conservation or alternate energy
will overcome the problems of our ever-increasing population.

Populations in developed nations tend to decrease gradually; without
immigration.

Goodness. What about the real world?

Charlie Gibbs wrote:

To us, at least. A number of governments (Canada and Japan,
to name two) have expressed alarm that population growth is
slowing....

And, you don't know why? How do you uphold the dependency? Yet in the
real world we are still on an exponential incline...

Energy is fungible. Means you starve, kill, a third world for all your
self important needs...

Head, ass. Self removal is optional till you die......

In article ,
(Bernd Felsche) writes:

"Charlie Gibbs" wrote:

(Y.Porat) writes:

i am much more serious than you about it

oil coal and even Uranium will drain off

so fusion is the only long term possobility
beside all the ;green sources
now please note that
even if the technological process will be found
its IMPLEMENTATION will take at least decades

Still, no amount of conservation or alternate energy
will overcome the problems of our ever-increasing population.

Populations in developed nations tend to decrease gradually; without
immigration.

Encouraging the development of nations to such a degree that the
natural population growth is near zero to slightly negative is a
desirable objective.

To us, at least. A number of governments (Canada and Japan,
to name two) have expressed alarm that population growth is
slowing. The Canadian government sees immigration as the
solution to the "problem" of us unco-operative citizens
refusing to breed like flies and increase their tax base
(and consumers for their corporate sponsors). And even
though the emphasis is being placed on attracting skilled
immigrants (so they don't have to fund our own education
system), it's reached the point where they're starting to
get rather lax. Last I heard, there were about 45,000
people who have vanished shortly after they got here.

But that doesn't make the anti-development greens very happy.
Perhaps their solution is ritual culling for the sake of Gaia.

Perhaps. The right-wingers' version of this replaces "culling"
with "cannon fodder".

The "lack" of fissible materials is not an urgent problem. There is
quite a lot more thorium than uranium around. Both fuels will take
centuries to consume.

True. Now we just have to overcome the widespread resistance to
anything "nook-yu-lur".

By which time the global population should be in natural decline
as the fast-breeder nations become fast-food nations.

Let's hope so. Again, though, there's a lot of resistance to
overcome - and many of these resisters are in positions of power.

Managing fusion or something else as a long-term source of
affordable, abundant energy for civilisation is a worthwhile
objective. Practical realization can only be done safely a step
at a time, while keeping our eyes on the horizon.

Agreed.

--
/~\ lid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

In article ,
(Y.Porat) writes:

On Jul 9, 8:06*pm, "Charlie Gibbs" wrote:

Still, no amount of conservation or alternate energy
will overcome the problems of our ever-increasing population.
Maybe we should worry less about our carbon footprint
and consider that there are simply too many feet.
------------------------------
you are absolutely right about too' many feet'
yet since you corrected me about Luis 15
i will correct you about 'too many feel credits (:-)

???

the credit for that insight was of ...
Maltos (i dont knoe the right spelling of his name
an English thinker )

Malthus

--
/~\ lid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

On Jul 10, 3:20*am, "Charlie Gibbs" wrote:
In article ,
(Bernd Felsche) writes:
[snip]
"Charlie Gibbs" wrote:
[snippers]
The "lack" of fissible materials is not an urgent problem. There is
quite a lot more thorium than uranium around. Both fuels will take
centuries to consume.

True. *Now we just have to overcome the widespread resistance to
anything "nook-yu-lur".

By which time the global population should be in natural decline
as the fast-breeder nations become fast-food nations.

Let's hope so. *Again, though, there's a lot of resistance to
overcome - and many of these resisters are in positions of power.

This resistance is melting in some places. Some people are
finding their campaign promises pretty difficult to keep.
- We will cut carbon emissions.
- We will shut down the coal fired power plants.
- We won't raise electricity rates.
- Electric power will remain abundant and reliable.

Hard to accomplish that these days if you are anti-nuke
and don't happen to have a very large river flowing through
a deep gorge that nobody cares if you dam up.

Ontario has just announced a new nuclear reactor will be
built at Darlington. They are now deciding on the design.

Managing fusion or something else as a long-term source of
affordable, abundant energy for civilisation is a worthwhile
objective. Practical realization can only be done safely a step
at a time, while keeping our eyes on the horizon.

Agreed.

While I agree, safety is not one of the big problems with fusion.
So far, nothing anybody has built has any particular problems
managing the plasma safely. It's keeping the stuff in there and
keeping it hot and high pressure that are the chalenges.
Socks

On Jul 10, 10:22*am, "Charlie Gibbs" wrote:
In article ,

(Y.Porat) writes:
On Jul 9, 8:06*pm, "Charlie Gibbs" wrote:

Still, no amount of conservation or alternate energy
will overcome the problems of our ever-increasing population.
Maybe we should worry less about our carbon footprint
and consider that there are simply too many feet.
------------------------------
you * *are absolutely right about too' many feet'
yet since you *corrected me about Luis 15
i will * correct you about 'too many feel credits (:-)

???

the credit for that insight was of ...
Maltos * *(i dont knoe the right spelling of his name
an English thinker )

Malthus

---------------------------------
thanks

now how about some fusion ?? (:-)..........

----------------------
Y.Porat
------------------------------------------