What are people's opinions on nuclear fusion (not fission which is what people are talking about when they talk about "Nuclear Power"). May be quite a way off, but it's also critically underfunded and could potentially end every worry about 1. running out of sources of energy and 2. the environmental impact of producing energy.
oh guys we will run out of uranium one day too you cant make uranium. Then we will use coal oil and then some other energy thing unill we are smart enough to make solar power so powerful we will need none other or unless we can make air a enegry or a gas....... This is all bullcrap guys we need to use mult energy coal oil and corn oil for airplanes electic and solar for cars, nulcear, wind, and hyro for turning on the lights, and stuff like that. Its like stocks you can just invest in one.
The retarded moron who wrote the previous comment needs a spanking. SIBUK, just gather up your pencils and crayons, call your Mother, tell her you forgot to take your medicine this morning, go straight home, get Dad's 9mm semi-automatic from his closet, and shoot yourself in the head.
What a bunch of stupid useless cunts. They seem to be under some kind of delusion that there is infinite uranium in the world. Do they think that god comes along while they sleep and takes a big uranium-encrusted magical shit on the earth and so we can therefore run the planet on infinite magical god shit?! If we replace all the power stations on the planet with nuclear ones the uranium will last only about 20 years, so this is no solution at all.Fusion is the only option (if it's even possible)
Wind and solar energies in particular will never be able to be a solution to the problem because the energy source is in essence unreliable. There is a steady demand for energy 24/7 and nuclear and coal energy is the only energy sources where there is an abundance of resources. Wind, solar and the other renewables are a dead end. Coal is a bad pollutant so my choice would be think long term and invest in nuclear.
US certainly has a lot of reserve energy, their obese population, get them to spin their windmills. That could last a few years before a real energy crisis starts.
Blind leading the blind. There is no one solution. Nuclear energy nowadays is too expensive without cheap oil. The energy used to manufacture and transport solar panels and windmills will never be regained through the use of these energy sources. Oil, coal and natural gas are old sources of energy that are being depleted, and because of the Hubbert production curve they will become unaffordable sooner than most people think. The only real solution is energy conservation and efficiency.
Switch grass is a very good source for ethanol. In Brazil over 50% of the cars fuel is ethanol. In Sweden ethanol is cheaper than gas. Solar or wind generated electricity can be stored in batteries. Those batteries are getting better and cheaper all the time. Global warming debate beside, burning of fissile fuels are polluting the air and water. The corals re dying in many places because of higher acidity caused by carbon dioxide ( burning of fossil fuels ).
@johan404 Not to my knowledge and I think nuclear energy is the most subsidized energy. Growing switch grass does not compete with food crops ans farm waste can be used to make ethanol too. The real costs of oil and coal are much higher if one would count the environmental impact too. We are running out on oil anyway
95% of all Greek households use solar energy for their hot water. As of end of 2010 20% of the electricity in Greece is generated via wind mills. I made in 98 a solar grill that was almost as quick as a electric stove.
I'm a little disappointed that geothermal and sugarcane ethanol where excluded from the debate.
Geothermal is a global resource, ideal for space heating (just take a look at Paris and Reykjavik) and some electricity production as well.
Sugarcane ethanol (different from corn ethanol) is efficient, profitable and carbon neutral, and can position some developing nations as energy powerhouses of the XXI century (like Brazil, the Caribbean nations, India, to mention a few).
@memetichero Its only about 4% of the energy produce from the plant, also building big wind farms with all the resources and maintenance is also fairly energy intensive
@AgrivatedKillah I know that but i am saying is that the excess CO2 is a pollutant. The key word being excess because its the extra CO2 that changes how out atmosphere works and how plants and animals live.
Ok, so the original video with 13 million views (which was gotten in just 48 hours), which was uploaded by the user 'ritchey', got removed do to Copyright.
Later, popular news shows such as Associated Press, and others, uploaded the video. After they uploaded it, ritcheys video got removed for copyright! That's wrong!
Copyright is soon going to take over YouTube. Give this comment a thumbs up if you agree.
copy and paste the message we must spread the word
Now guess mates= Are there ANY statistics that OIL will get RARE?
Where are the PAPERS? Where are the statistics?
The fuckin ELITE is creating an invisible FOE! THEY want to make us THINK that OIL is getting LOW to INCREASE the WORTH of OIL so they are geting rhicher than the arab states ;D
On the 10th of January 2011 a worldwide boycott of youtube will take place. Which means for one whole day no-one will visit youtube. We want VEVO (and other companies) and their f*cking ads OUT. Do your part sharing this comment on as many videos as possible and give this one a thumbs up
Riddle me this - If oil is a fossil fuel, how the fuck did BP drill into the Earth's mantle, 6 miles under the ocean, and find oil there? The answer - oil is abiotic, and is produced (and therefore reproduced) by the Earth. It is not a limited resource.
@wahahn It is all about rate of production/regeneration. NOTHING on planet earth is limited resource if is used at slow and steady pace. The era of cheap oil is gone FOREVER. The deep crust oil, the one that BP got choked on is as dirty as oil shale and tar sands and it is more difficult to extract than ANYTHING else. Thanks to tectonics and vulcanism mineral resources (crude oil too) regenerate at slow steady rate, and will continue to do for long time, but it can't keep up with mankind needs.
@wahahn True, but I beleive that it takes thousands of years to reproduce. Haven't really researched it though. We should employ zero-point (magnetic) energy which has been surpressed but special interest for years. Can't give the peasants access to free energy!
Myron... Myron, Myron, Myron..... you said it yourself, it's a TRACE element in the atmosphere... well, it least it should be, but not these days. These days there have been too many cars & plants pumping crap into the atmosphere, at the same time as there's massive de-forestation which cuts down on CO2 consumption by natural means.
Global Warming isn't a scare tactic. It's a naturally occurring process that our excessive burning of fossil fuels has & still is speeding up.
Yes I wonder myself why do we not use other effective means of obtaining energy, SUCH AS THE USE OF PLASMAS!!! for example if we could utilize cold plasma that would be alot of power WITHOUT THE USE OF OIL!!! Zero Point and Plasmas are the way to go, EVERYONE SHOULD JUST STOP USING PRODUCTS MADE FROM OIL AND JUST GET IT OVER WITH BECAUSE ITS GOING TO HAPPEN SOONER OR LATER ANYWAY
Why are zero point, magnetics, and other very effective FREE energy solutions not being addressed in this discussion?
JP Morgan - "If I can't put a meter on it, nobody will have it."
That's why. We need to remove the cancer that is the control of banking ownership of anything related to things that are in the common use arena. These are truly the future of renewable energy. It's GOT to go into the FREE SECTOR. PERIOD.
Fuck you oil defenders, don't you think about the future? How can we live with our main source of energy being non-renewable and so expensive. People that defend oil usage are just ignorants. Have you ever wondered about an advanced society relying in dead animals and plants as a major fuel? Just open your eyes and change the damn system, y'all are a bunch of accommodated ass holes.
What I can't understand is why people usually talk only about fuel on the topic of Peak Oil? Petroleum products are not only fuel, they are also plastic, wax, etc. Or am I assuming things?
I don't know much about creating electricity, but what happened to running water to create electricity? There are rivers all over the area were I live. We have nuclear and coal and oil power plants, and alot of windmill things.
In addition there's solar power satellites, something which has been studied since the '70s. Stick satellites up in orbit and have 'em beam down the power.
Launch costs need to come down to make that economically feasible, but these days it's more and more of a strong possibility, what with private companies like SpaceX having major successes.
In space there are many more resources for humanity to use, including near-limitless amounts of fusion fuel (deuterium and Helium-3). It's been estimated that there's enough fusion fuel in the Jovian planets to supply humanity's energy needs for hundreds of thousands of years. The moon alone has enough Helium-3 to power us for at least a hundred. The technology isn't there yet, but it likely will be within a couple decades, with all the money being thrown at it now.
In a thousand years we are going to kill each other for water and food.... just like fallout... play the game and teach your kids the ways of the fallout.... but it really is a shame what they are doing to the planet... im not saying i could do better but with all the scientists in this world something cleaner should already be in use to produce power... it probably is but its held back by the oil bosses
Here's the thing about nuclear energies.... we've taken the radioactive energy of a city block of mountain rock and condensed it down to the size of a pair of dice.... so we use up 80% of that energy and we are left with a pea size peice of energetic matter.... WHAT IS WRONG WITH BURYING THAT UNDER A MILE OF ROCK WHICH IS MANY TIMES MORE RADIOACTIVE THAN THAT PEA? It makes so much damn sense... the earth is hot because of radioactivity... dont let petro sway your opinion.. see the lies.
a climatic shift is taking place all over the planet. Is it really such a big deal to do something about the toxins we have been putting into the air, water and soil? Use some common sense about what we are doing to the planet.
@ThisBoyTV I completely agree. We have been destroying this planet for decades. Pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, wars, mining, dams, industrial waste, greenhouse gases (not co2), GMO foods, plastics. We are basically stuffed. There is an alternative and it starts with energy; free magnetic (zero-point) energy inventions exist but have been surpressed. Organic farming and better environmental regulations. It is a shame however that governments are only interested in taxing us for co2.
It's all a charade, really. The universe IS energy, it cannot be scarce. It's important what WORK we do with the unfathomable energy available to us. Hoarding greedily is not good work; free markets would be great if they existed.
@vegatron77 PLASMA works better than Nuclear,,, Besides alot of the components of a Nuclear power plant (ARE MADE FROM or made With products that have been made using OIL) You cant just dump some uranium into a core and say do your thing
@vegatron77 Tidal, wind and solar energy is to my oppinion the best and cleanest solution, depends on where you live. It all depends on our current monetary system and who has the gold and the worlds resources like uranium. We all live on the same world, so shouldn't we all have it or, only the ones with weapons and gold. Look for Jacques Fresco and learn from our failures made in the past. We can do so much better it's just a matter of mindset.
Nuclear energy can't replace oil. Oil is used for transportation, fertilizers, plastics (aka nearly everything we use) so personally I think the answer is downsizing everything and embracing New Urbanism. Local economies, locally grown food, and the end of the greedy car empire (unless we find a mirracle renewable fuel with no emissions)
In the future I believe people will honestly be happier and get more worth out of life without oil.
@vegatron77 No, it's not, because there's nucleair waste that will be a danger for millennia to come, and it's limited, just like oil. Resource's like uranium, just like oil, will not last forever. There will be no replacement for oil, and we will need to scale down our energy consumption on the long term, if we don't want to go back to the dark ages.
Of course oil is a good investment, but nuclear power in combination with renewable systems such as wind power and solar power is where the future is at. just watch...
panel of programmed meat computers.no basis in reality whatsoever.there are no "crises".ALL PROBLEMS in the world are intentionally created by the super rich in order to steal from the rest of us.I heard over a month ago gas prices were going to 4 or 5 bucks a gallon because EVERYTHING is rigged.Believe me it's not your favor.
The best thing to do right now is immediately is to cut unesscessary oil usage.
For example, many of our cities especially in 1st world societies are highly car dependent. Meaning there is tons of land use segregation, cul-de-sacs, highways, collector roads, oversized parking lots, etc...
This really and wrongfully benefits oil, cement, asphalt, big box retalier, fast food chain, and car companies while costing our energy supply.
i hate how when people are asked a simple straight forward question and they go into this big complicated rant and avoid the question all together. there are simple solutions to all problems in the world but people make them so difficult...and hence the world is so screwed up that theres hardly any hope left.
Moron Ebell is your typical establishment boot licker. Hey Ebell let's get rid of the prohibition of hemp before you go shooting off your mouth about free markets you white shoe scumbag. So this is alternative media. At least we know we got no friends in the Russian media either. Putin can suck some donkey d*ck. Why is the measure of a society how much electricity the morons use to begin with? That is a bit of a pompous benchmark to assume really. India and China can go blow each other.
Moron Ebell is your typical establishment boot licker. Hey Ebell let's get rid of the prohibition of hemp before you go shooting off your mouth about free markets you white shoe scumbag. So this is alternative media. At least we know we got no friends in the Russian meda either. Putin can suck some donkey d*ck.
I wish they were more charismatic. Man, I hope oil keeps going for many years. Its the only thing keeping the economy in my country going. I mean, yeah, we have other stuff. But we wont be able to sustain the poor aid bonus nor the educational system without it. This really makes me sad. Also I doubt we have the financial support to make a economical revolution. Im so sad.
Got to love those GREEN fanatics saying co2 is pollutant! hmmm... in Russia we learned in 3 rd grade at school that co2 is what plants use to grow and produce O2.
Next thay will say that oxygen is a toxic pollutant 8)
@infowarsru Indeed CO2 is Polutant. This is from the experts:
CO2 is toxic in higher concentrations: 1% (10,000 ppm) will make some people feel drowsy. Concentrations of 7% to 10% cause dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour. The Normal CO2 in AIR is only 0.039%
If you want to define "pollutant" with data like that, then oxygen is also a pollutant.
Unaverage doses will cause drowsiness, headaches, loss of energy, unconsciousness, and death if the atmospheric concentration is too little or too much.
Water is also a pollutant. Particularly the hydrogen atom within it. It also has oxygen in it. That's a doubly toxic pollutant.
No. Oxigen is NOT Toxic to Humans in fact it's used for OXIGEN TERAPHY.
CO2 it is toxic.
From the experts:
Room air only contains 21% oxygen, and increasing the fraction of oxygen in the breathing gas increases the amount of oxygen in the blood. It is often only required to raise the fraction of oxygen delivered to 30–35% . When 100% oxygen is needed, it may be delivered via a tight-fitting face mask, or by supplying 100% oxygen to an incubator in the case of infants.
Your "pollutant" is a natural part of the life cycle. You called it a pollutant because unnatural doses of it causes harm to health, and I said the same could be said of oxygen and water. In other words, your point is moot and CO2 is not a pollutant at all.
Hydrogen sulphide and carbon monoxide are products of incomplete combustion which are genuine pollutants. We don't normally get these in developed countries because we have rules against emissions.
@LordDyhalto You failed to see my point: CO2 IS TOXIC! Unlike O2 and water which ARE NOT toxic Plants are the Natural Filter of CO2 in the AIR and keeps it at a very low level 0.039 %
"Amounts above about 5% are considered DANGEROUS to animal life.
The combustion of all carbon containing fuels, such as methane (natural gas), petroleum distillates (gasoline, diesel, kerosene, propane), but also of coal and wood, will yield carbon dioxide."
Once the oil starts running out and once USA will realise that there is no point of waging oil wars then humanity will start going backwards and we will live like we did before crude oil. In 2050 it would take 2 and a half Earths to sustain human needs. Basically humanity is fucked. We are too stupid to find a renewable energy source.
What it represents now is so horrifically terrifying to the power elite and to their entrenched infrastructure that they crush all open discussion and marginalize it into oblivions, but with just a little research anyone can see its is a reality.
An even bigger joke than the clowns on this panel juggling petrol chemical non-sense is that the solution has already been discovered and is being intensely researched by behind the scene and very secretively; low temperature nuclear reaction a.k.a. cold fusion.
It's real, it works, and it is what will be next as soon as the status quos figure how to transition into a metered product like oil.
Oil has passed peak - so economic growth cannot be sustained.
Nuclear has about 100 years worth of Uranium if usage does not increase
Wind and Solar are temporary or intermittent solutions on a large grid.
The time of big grid energy is over. We are going to have to adapt to life in a different way than we do today. Consumerism will be replaced by necessity and private ownership will be replaced by community needs. However those that rule are greedy and insane which means war will come first.
There is in fact lots of Uranium.. more than we could ever use. The newly designed Nuclear Power plants can recycle and use up to 95% of their uranium cores. Certainly agree on the solar that is now bringing the costs to produce down. Wind is not friendly to the environment when looking at the amount of energy and minerals used to create just one unit.
@ThisBoyTV - I'd like you to send me the links as to where you retreived the information on Uranium. I have looked into it and found that there is enough to last 100 years at current levels. As more Nuclear power plants come online the total supply in years decreases. It is also interresting to note where the Uranium is.
The future problem will be the amout of energy required to enrich low grade Uranium at an affordable cost.
@ThisBoyTV - While you search, here is a good link that covers nuclear energy in depth, with a lot of good references. I suggest reading the whole article and then look at what is actually in use and what is theoretical.
I have many PDF's on the topic. Send me a message via my channel and let me know the best way to send them to you.
Wikipedia?? the one stop place on the Net to ensure that people remain ignorant. Write a glowing article about yourself and grant yourself 20 PhD's.. no questions asked. A great site for corporations to brag about themselves and certainly not a source for research,
@ThisBoyTV - You disapoint me, I thought you were someone that was open minded. I'll have to re-evaluate my connection with you. It's Time to move on.
What more can i do than send u the 1000s of pages of data? I am an independent news researcher and i love to read. Let everyone else follow the trail of lies while the truth sits unread by 99.9% of the people, Not once have i ever put a negative comment in your videos. Go ahead and re-evaluate.. your loss.
@ThisBoyTV - I am also an independent news researcher as are most people these days, however, I am open minded about a topic and I’m not afraid to discuss or leave a link to some of the online info. If you disagree with the article then why don't you change it? At least tell me what you find that is so wrong with the information in the article, but you haven't done that. Instead you trash the site and my opinion while putting your statement? on a pedestal. Really, there is no great loss for me.
@2minstral Do you have your own data for saying 100 years? Can you provide me a concrete link? You're the one saying 100 years, so you should prove your own words right first.
But let me give my info first to prove my point anyways. And also, now that you made me research it, Uranium would actually last far longer than 2000 years:
@fog0death - The article you are supporting is pure theoretical and for market speculation. Here is a good link to Nuclear energy in general. It even covers the topic you offer and gives references to the research. wikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Nuclear_energy
You can choose your belief, but its better look at all the facts, practices, and also the setbacks with material, costs, and radiation waste.
@offsprng46 - The most abundant material available that can be enriched at a low cost is Uranium 235. I don't claim to know everything about nuclear energy and that is why I have politely invited others to elaborate. There is no call for insults unless you are not able to carry on a two-way conversation and that would imply that you are not knowledgeable about the topic and lead with perceived misconceptions.
@holyspiritoftruth - Ah, my remark was at least as pointless I suppose. Perhaps I should have gone a step further to simply express that the solution is plainly before us but there are those who elect that it gains no heed.However, the rabbit sits quietly in the hat, grinning while he waits for the fall.
Equating nuclear power with nuclear weapons is idiotic and moronic. Whoever said that obviously doesn't know anything about nuclear power. They just want to deny an abundant energy source to the 3rd world.
You can cover the world in solar, wind, biofuel farms or a mix of all 3 and you still couldn't meet the energy needs of the world. Other than "fossil fuels", nuclear power is the only viable alternative. One of France's largest exports is electricity!
"Free markets" is not going to solve the energy problem. So moronic again. "Free markets" will go for the cheapest energy source up until the last drop of oil is squeezed out of the Earth. Remember the Congressional hearings when gasoline in the USA was approaching $4/gal. The Americans didn't like "free markets" then.
Nuclear power is not heavily subsidized and is competitive. Look at the cost of oil. Wars, blood, etc.
Which energy source has the most ecological devastating effect?
coal mining? creating those wind mills? creating solar panels? pumping oil from the ground? pumping oil from the ocean? harvesting natural gas? converting land for ethanol production? ...etc
also location! getting energy from a desert has barely any ecological negative effect but converting a green forest to coal, oil, metal and heavy metal operation... hmm that doesn't sound too pretty.
What a bunch of idiots. An oil lobbyist from an institute with the name "competitive" in it makes advertizing for highly subsidized fossil fuels. A media professional who can't pronounce the word "nuclear". An anti-enviromental psychopath who wants to produce even more highly poisonous radioactive waste despite peak Uranium and calls himself an "enviromentalist". That NRDC guy is stating the obvious about renewable energy, but repeats all the propaganda lies about Iran once again.
They never talk about Hydro electricity, and hydrocurrent electricity that is even more armless to the environment. Sure theres rivers to work on that wont be a problem for wildlife.
didn't china just plan to build 60 nuclear power plants by 2020? and i could of sworn i read china is beginning to dump coal and renewable in place of cheap and abundant nuclear energy plants.
Geothermal, tide, wave. Plus solar and wind where viable. After that we just need to get a bunch of people to ride bikes connected to generators to make their own power. That will teach them not to waste too much.
@0Honza You could tear energy from the atmosphere or sub-space. There is unlimited energy just sitting in the universe. Although that is dangerous and the consequences are unknown. As well as the technology is not yet public or invented yet.
There will be a serious reduction in life after oil (at least human life). Don't think that those in power have not prepared for this contingency. They (the upper 1% that hold as much wealth as 95% of the population) are now setting on the second largest oil reserve outside Saudi Arabia. The members of the Bilderberg Group have ensured that they have enough reserves of water, food, and fuel to maintain power. COG, Patriot Acts 1&2 and presidential directives will ensure they remain in power
Exactly, I believe the elites of the world who have had such an influence for 100+ years have a blueprint to control the energy/oil supply, conflict the financial system, which all have a devastating effect on 6 billion + people.
“Analysis of the Scope of Energy Subsidies and Implementation of Phasing Out” written by researchers from the International Energy Association (IEA), World Bank, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The report has found that the world could spend in excess of $500 billion each year to subsidize fossil fuels.
This discussion is such a fraud just like all RT programs are becoming.
Government subsidy waste? This guy needs to learn that the U.S. has not subsidized any forms of alternative energy sources others than oil.
Oil gets huge government subsidies in the forms of research grants, tax exemptions, environmental deregulations and so on. These all count as subsidization. If the government removes cost from a person or business and must recoup the loss on it's own books, then that's a subsidy.
i live in ontario which relies heavily on nuclear power and all i can say is the system is down more than it's up and they don't know how to deal with waste water and it is a FORTUNE to operate overall; financially and in every other way; it is a pipe dream
Wind power is a joke. Our family agreed to leaseland for a wind farm in southern Wyoming 5 yrs ago in exchange for tax abatement purposes. In that 5 yrs I've gotten a first hand look at how lame the sustainability and ROI is. 16 yrs on avg is the point of return if the grid can be maintained and that is down constantly, the back up source? Electricity powered by coal. I'm all for alternative energy if it can stand alone w/o subsidy, I think nukes and nat gas is going to be the future.
What is the debate about? I gather wind and solar power and turn it into hydrogen to heat my home and run a car. Fuck oil and coal, they say we need it for energy but that's bullshit. Oil needs to be saved for agricultural/pharma use. We could make energy easily for ourselves but big oil makes sure through TV that it won't happen. Most people think being energy independant is impossible but it's not.
Wind, solar and hydrogen isn't going to replace the way we use oil now. And hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source. And for us to scale down - we will require a revolution worldwide in economic systems - and that could lead to huge political instability. Oil is liquid hegemonic power, as you should already know.
@MrROTD Anyone for oil or nuclear energy is a hack on the payroll of a corporate interest. Oil is not safe or environmentally friendly, and who the fuck wants a nuclear power plant near them? I live near one, it's not fun. Furthermore nuclear waste cannot be disposed of, no one ever talks about that. We can't get rid of it so we bury it in the ocean or pay poor government like Somalia to let us dump it on their shores. The Somali "pirates" are defending themselves. Too many alternatives.
Biofuels are competely useless for maintaining our globalised inter-dependent industrial economy. Have you seen the Energy Return On Energy Invested of oil compared to biofuels?
Biofuels will be useful only to a society that has adapted to living on a lower energy budget. Life will become VERY different for most of us.
biofuel (as a stopgap), then algae to replace light oil (for cars, plastics etc)
crap crude can still power ships until they go nuclear
And there are methods being developed to cheaply recycle nuclear waste
Wind is useless, dams ruin ecosystems, wave generation is still in infancy, only solar has real potential and even then it's just not enough and not reliable enough
electrolysis, tesla gravity generators, mineral based kits that can attach to any car french suppressed technology, ozonators attached to cars. the stock exchange and pensions/ capitalisma are tied to oil. scrap oil and collapse the banks.
It doesn't have to be a catastrophe. We just have to get involved with movements such as Transition Towns - who have detailed energy-descent programs for localities.
No mention of Russia, which believes that oil is a renewable resource, so I am told, and not a fossil fuel. All the assumptions of this Cross Talk is based upon Western views on peak oil, etc. It might be worthwhile to debate this issue, versus why the West is so obsessed with notions of the scarcity of resources.
There is a strong chance that everywhere could become locally energy independent within a year. That is blocked by existing laws and technologies. If you want to know what they are: 1 steam engine technology, 2 pneumatic heat handling and energy storage, and, 3. simple heat saving with insulated water tanks. Right now we have stabile but extremely damaging. There could be hydroponic fuel growing tech. And this would be a boon. Everything energy would decentralize.
We never capture or try to use "waste heat", There are ways, but the fuel engine monopoly has banned them from the reality that common knowledge consitiutes. It is a variety of heat capture and use devices that could turn the world into an drill -less for oil planet. Presently we have exclusively heat chucking technology and are not allowed to venture into anything less "heat chucking". We are all simply totally inured to this. We duplicate processes as to burn ever more. Sounds like hell.
Western civilization wastes a lot of energy. We could simply cut down our consumption and that would help a lot - but our economic and monetary systems do not allow that. They are based on the notion of infinite-growth. We have to get rid of the debt-based money system, and start developing alternative paradigms.
the energy crisis will unfold an inevitable pragmatic solution all of its own - a price mechanism incentive to harness the huge pool of overpopulated humans as an energy resource ...well not as hi tech or faciful as the matrix .. but just people with satellite tracked total ID controls working as machines...after all what is more efficient than a biological body, just feed it an orange and it works a few hours and humans are highly intelligent unlike beasts of burden they can do complex tasks
stop talking about competitive markets! do you live in this planet? where have those ideas taken us? mercado competitivo para la energia nuclear, mis huevos!
we as the human race should be moving away from oil. we have enough technologies out there to find other sources of fuel. We as the human race should be looking to the stars rather than staying on this planet. Why we can stay on this planet forever. It one takes one meteor to kill all life on this planet.
I am sure there is a lot of politics over fuel get over it. This is for the better meant of the human race.
Clean and natural energy is Human energy=slavery.
nuclear energy equal mushroom cloud over city by battery lover.
The two clean energy(nuclear/electric) will fight for number one consumption.they will come to they sense and team-up to kill fossil fuel.The day the clean junkies kill the fossil fuel is the day the day you will see NO trees.burning fossil fuel is food for trees and other life cycle organism.An environment of clean energy is a world in slavery.Cooperation Dictator are oil junkies.
Well stop talking and put it to work.We needed an alternative energy source yesterday!
Mrquadracer1 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
Mrquadracer1 2 weeks ago
What are people's opinions on nuclear fusion (not fission which is what people are talking about when they talk about "Nuclear Power"). May be quite a way off, but it's also critically underfunded and could potentially end every worry about 1. running out of sources of energy and 2. the environmental impact of producing energy.
BigSponduli 1 month ago
oh guys we will run out of uranium one day too you cant make uranium. Then we will use coal oil and then some other energy thing unill we are smart enough to make solar power so powerful we will need none other or unless we can make air a enegry or a gas....... This is all bullcrap guys we need to use mult energy coal oil and corn oil for airplanes electic and solar for cars, nulcear, wind, and hyro for turning on the lights, and stuff like that. Its like stocks you can just invest in one.
gergar121 5 months ago
The retarded moron who wrote the previous comment needs a spanking. SIBUK, just gather up your pencils and crayons, call your Mother, tell her you forgot to take your medicine this morning, go straight home, get Dad's 9mm semi-automatic from his closet, and shoot yourself in the head.
john244innewton 8 months ago
What a bunch of stupid useless cunts. They seem to be under some kind of delusion that there is infinite uranium in the world. Do they think that god comes along while they sleep and takes a big uranium-encrusted magical shit on the earth and so we can therefore run the planet on infinite magical god shit?! If we replace all the power stations on the planet with nuclear ones the uranium will last only about 20 years, so this is no solution at all.Fusion is the only option (if it's even possible)
SIBUK 9 months ago
We can extract Uranium from sea water. Thats enough to last thousands of years, same goes for Thorium on last.
89Djm 9 months ago
Without oil, how are you meant to mine uranium and coal?
samage1337 10 months ago
we will just have to wait and create some new miracle product.
mannyman1012 11 months ago
what about Tidal wave power
shinjide213 1 year ago
Espeta
as3899508 1 year ago
What happened to geothermal energy?
ptolemy008 1 year ago
Thorium Nuclear reactors are also an option, we should be investing in that, there is a lot more thorium in the world than uranium.
Rustyshackleford08 1 year ago
Money Gets In The Way Of Life
raymondo900 1 year ago
Wind and solar energies in particular will never be able to be a solution to the problem because the energy source is in essence unreliable. There is a steady demand for energy 24/7 and nuclear and coal energy is the only energy sources where there is an abundance of resources. Wind, solar and the other renewables are a dead end. Coal is a bad pollutant so my choice would be think long term and invest in nuclear.
tryggviinga 1 year ago
US certainly has a lot of reserve energy, their obese population, get them to spin their windmills. That could last a few years before a real energy crisis starts.
meltingEyeballs 1 year ago
Blind leading the blind. There is no one solution. Nuclear energy nowadays is too expensive without cheap oil. The energy used to manufacture and transport solar panels and windmills will never be regained through the use of these energy sources. Oil, coal and natural gas are old sources of energy that are being depleted, and because of the Hubbert production curve they will become unaffordable sooner than most people think. The only real solution is energy conservation and efficiency.
johan404 1 year ago
Switch grass is a very good source for ethanol. In Brazil over 50% of the cars fuel is ethanol. In Sweden ethanol is cheaper than gas. Solar or wind generated electricity can be stored in batteries. Those batteries are getting better and cheaper all the time. Global warming debate beside, burning of fissile fuels are polluting the air and water. The corals re dying in many places because of higher acidity caused by carbon dioxide ( burning of fossil fuels ).
Demetrenos 1 year ago
@Demetrenos Ethanol is heavily subsidized everywhere, and growing crops for fuel is crazy, people are going to starve because of it.
johan404 1 year ago
@johan404 Not to my knowledge and I think nuclear energy is the most subsidized energy. Growing switch grass does not compete with food crops ans farm waste can be used to make ethanol too. The real costs of oil and coal are much higher if one would count the environmental impact too. We are running out on oil anyway
Demetrenos 1 year ago
95% of all Greek households use solar energy for their hot water. As of end of 2010 20% of the electricity in Greece is generated via wind mills. I made in 98 a solar grill that was almost as quick as a electric stove.
Demetrenos 1 year ago
I'm a little disappointed that geothermal and sugarcane ethanol where excluded from the debate.
Geothermal is a global resource, ideal for space heating (just take a look at Paris and Reykjavik) and some electricity production as well.
Sugarcane ethanol (different from corn ethanol) is efficient, profitable and carbon neutral, and can position some developing nations as energy powerhouses of the XXI century (like Brazil, the Caribbean nations, India, to mention a few).
jaggo84 1 year ago
@memetichero Its only about 4% of the energy produce from the plant, also building big wind farms with all the resources and maintenance is also fairly energy intensive
Darkwizzrobe 1 year ago
Did i hear that guy say that CO2 isnt a pollutant : waste matter that contaminates the water or air or soil
So when that excess CO2 is put in the air it is contaminating the air
caseyvill 1 year ago
@caseyvill Um carbon dioxide is what plants need...so its' not really a contaminate... just air we can't breathe.
AgrivatedKillah 1 year ago
@AgrivatedKillah I know that but i am saying is that the excess CO2 is a pollutant. The key word being excess because its the extra CO2 that changes how out atmosphere works and how plants and animals live.
caseyvill 1 year ago
READ THIS COMMENT
Ok, so the original video with 13 million views (which was gotten in just 48 hours), which was uploaded by the user 'ritchey', got removed do to Copyright.
Later, popular news shows such as Associated Press, and others, uploaded the video. After they uploaded it, ritcheys video got removed for copyright! That's wrong!
Copyright is soon going to take over YouTube. Give this comment a thumbs up if you agree.
copy and paste the message we must spread the word
AgentJohn1 1 year ago
watching this was like being bukkake'd with stupid.
U.S. proven coal reserves are at 150 years, this is where we get our energy
Nuclear(not nukeular like the fuck wit host) Energy is most likely the future
but.bruno never mention it takes on avg 10 yrs to start a reactor
and its fucking xpensiv
Dan is laughable renew. relies heavily on location and wont meet demands
people need to get real, we have coal and gas lets use it
in 150 yrs time i think we will come up with alt energy if not ill b dead
mfg0308 1 year ago
Now guess mates= Are there ANY statistics that OIL will get RARE?
Where are the PAPERS? Where are the statistics?
The fuckin ELITE is creating an invisible FOE! THEY want to make us THINK that OIL is getting LOW to INCREASE the WORTH of OIL so they are geting rhicher than the arab states ;D
CAPITALISM!! NOTHING MORE!!!! FUCK FED, FUCK US, FUCK WORLD!
Earthbound64 1 year ago
On the 10th of January 2011 a worldwide boycott of youtube will take place. Which means for one whole day no-one will visit youtube. We want VEVO (and other companies) and their f*cking ads OUT. Do your part sharing this comment on as many videos as possible and give this one a thumbs up
foxgott16 1 year ago
Riddle me this - If oil is a fossil fuel, how the fuck did BP drill into the Earth's mantle, 6 miles under the ocean, and find oil there? The answer - oil is abiotic, and is produced (and therefore reproduced) by the Earth. It is not a limited resource.
wahahn 1 year ago
@wahahn It is all about rate of production/regeneration. NOTHING on planet earth is limited resource if is used at slow and steady pace. The era of cheap oil is gone FOREVER. The deep crust oil, the one that BP got choked on is as dirty as oil shale and tar sands and it is more difficult to extract than ANYTHING else. Thanks to tectonics and vulcanism mineral resources (crude oil too) regenerate at slow steady rate, and will continue to do for long time, but it can't keep up with mankind needs.
th3dig1tal0n3 1 year ago
@wahahn The Russians found oil 4 miles beneath the surface and now the Zionists want to follow suit...
Only to fuck up the Gulf of Mexico big time.
sinsarcasmo 1 year ago
@wahahn True, but I beleive that it takes thousands of years to reproduce. Haven't really researched it though. We should employ zero-point (magnetic) energy which has been surpressed but special interest for years. Can't give the peasants access to free energy!
rainwilds 1 year ago
Myron... Myron, Myron, Myron..... you said it yourself, it's a TRACE element in the atmosphere... well, it least it should be, but not these days. These days there have been too many cars & plants pumping crap into the atmosphere, at the same time as there's massive de-forestation which cuts down on CO2 consumption by natural means.
Global Warming isn't a scare tactic. It's a naturally occurring process that our excessive burning of fossil fuels has & still is speeding up.
Darquine 1 year ago
Yes I wonder myself why do we not use other effective means of obtaining energy, SUCH AS THE USE OF PLASMAS!!! for example if we could utilize cold plasma that would be alot of power WITHOUT THE USE OF OIL!!! Zero Point and Plasmas are the way to go, EVERYONE SHOULD JUST STOP USING PRODUCTS MADE FROM OIL AND JUST GET IT OVER WITH BECAUSE ITS GOING TO HAPPEN SOONER OR LATER ANYWAY
Zombacolypse 1 year ago
1.) Pause at 0:00
2.) Hold left arrow
3.)Hit up arrow
4.)Have fun playing snake
5.)Vote up if it works
SonNickOsUzumaki 1 year ago
Why are zero point, magnetics, and other very effective FREE energy solutions not being addressed in this discussion?
JP Morgan - "If I can't put a meter on it, nobody will have it."
That's why. We need to remove the cancer that is the control of banking ownership of anything related to things that are in the common use arena. These are truly the future of renewable energy. It's GOT to go into the FREE SECTOR. PERIOD.
pushpaka 1 year ago
Comment removed
Darquine 1 year ago
Fuck you oil defenders, don't you think about the future? How can we live with our main source of energy being non-renewable and so expensive. People that defend oil usage are just ignorants. Have you ever wondered about an advanced society relying in dead animals and plants as a major fuel? Just open your eyes and change the damn system, y'all are a bunch of accommodated ass holes.
Illkiron 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
On the 10th of Jaunary 2011 a worldwide boycott of youtube will take place.
Which means for one whole day no-one will visit youtube. This is to show the
owners of youtube, that they are turning a great video sharing site, into
a corporate money-making tool. We want vevo and other companies out.
Do your part, copy and paste this onto other videos, and give this comment a thumbs
up
sorry i dont usually do these but i had to agree with this one
MuscleBuildProdject 1 year ago
What is that white thing stuck on that guy's face? It looks like he cut himself shaving and stuck a piece of toilet paper on it.
dizzious 1 year ago
You know this debate is bullshit when that guy said 'global warming is a scare'. Fucking moron
MoOtJeMan 1 year ago
What I can't understand is why people usually talk only about fuel on the topic of Peak Oil? Petroleum products are not only fuel, they are also plastic, wax, etc. Or am I assuming things?
StudentiaLatini 1 year ago
I don't know much about creating electricity, but what happened to running water to create electricity? There are rivers all over the area were I live. We have nuclear and coal and oil power plants, and alot of windmill things.
cmillerpa33 1 year ago
hho gas uawinfo. com
acedagaiin 1 year ago
solar and wind work only when the sun shines and the wind blows...well put!
notmycupotea 1 year ago
In addition there's solar power satellites, something which has been studied since the '70s. Stick satellites up in orbit and have 'em beam down the power.
Launch costs need to come down to make that economically feasible, but these days it's more and more of a strong possibility, what with private companies like SpaceX having major successes.
Suralin0 1 year ago
We have to go to space.
In space there are many more resources for humanity to use, including near-limitless amounts of fusion fuel (deuterium and Helium-3). It's been estimated that there's enough fusion fuel in the Jovian planets to supply humanity's energy needs for hundreds of thousands of years. The moon alone has enough Helium-3 to power us for at least a hundred. The technology isn't there yet, but it likely will be within a couple decades, with all the money being thrown at it now.
Suralin0 1 year ago
one nuclear fusion reactor could theoretically power a continent.
Lauremce1 1 year ago
@Lauremce1 Who needs nuclear when we have had zero-point energy for years; just has been surpressed by special interests trying to keep control.
rainwilds 1 year ago
In a thousand years we are going to kill each other for water and food.... just like fallout... play the game and teach your kids the ways of the fallout.... but it really is a shame what they are doing to the planet... im not saying i could do better but with all the scientists in this world something cleaner should already be in use to produce power... it probably is but its held back by the oil bosses
robwilco1 1 year ago
@robwilco1 lol OH NO KIDS WATCH OUT OF THE EVIL SUPER MUTANTS AND DEATHCLAWS lol
Zombacolypse 1 year ago
It's NUCLEAR, not NUCULAR Pete! No wonder the world thinks Americans are stupid!
ChristopherJManess 1 year ago
Here's the thing about nuclear energies.... we've taken the radioactive energy of a city block of mountain rock and condensed it down to the size of a pair of dice.... so we use up 80% of that energy and we are left with a pea size peice of energetic matter.... WHAT IS WRONG WITH BURYING THAT UNDER A MILE OF ROCK WHICH IS MANY TIMES MORE RADIOACTIVE THAN THAT PEA? It makes so much damn sense... the earth is hot because of radioactivity... dont let petro sway your opinion.. see the lies.
MisterAvis 1 year ago
I can't believe people still believe in Global Warming! They just make themselves look like complete fools.
rainwilds 1 year ago
@rainwilds
a climatic shift is taking place all over the planet. Is it really such a big deal to do something about the toxins we have been putting into the air, water and soil? Use some common sense about what we are doing to the planet.
ThisBoyTV 1 year ago
@ThisBoyTV I completely agree. We have been destroying this planet for decades. Pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, wars, mining, dams, industrial waste, greenhouse gases (not co2), GMO foods, plastics. We are basically stuffed. There is an alternative and it starts with energy; free magnetic (zero-point) energy inventions exist but have been surpressed. Organic farming and better environmental regulations. It is a shame however that governments are only interested in taxing us for co2.
rainwilds 1 year ago
It's all a charade, really. The universe IS energy, it cannot be scarce. It's important what WORK we do with the unfathomable energy available to us. Hoarding greedily is not good work; free markets would be great if they existed.
anandarew 1 year ago
It's all a charade, really. The universe IS energy, it cannot be scarce. It's important what WORK we do with the unfathomable energy available to us.
anandarew 1 year ago
Don't worry faggots I will create a Perpetual Energy Machine and save all you faggots from the oligarchy faggots
locolalo1364 1 year ago
@locolalo1364 bzzzz...repetition
sinclair61 1 year ago
Dan is a cook
alfiskoxp 1 year ago
Nuclear energy is the rational choice, and the only real choice..
vegatron77 1 year ago 8
@vegatron77 PLASMA works better than Nuclear,,, Besides alot of the components of a Nuclear power plant (ARE MADE FROM or made With products that have been made using OIL) You cant just dump some uranium into a core and say do your thing
Zombacolypse 1 year ago
@vegatron77 Tidal, wind and solar energy is to my oppinion the best and cleanest solution, depends on where you live. It all depends on our current monetary system and who has the gold and the worlds resources like uranium. We all live on the same world, so shouldn't we all have it or, only the ones with weapons and gold. Look for Jacques Fresco and learn from our failures made in the past. We can do so much better it's just a matter of mindset.
JDoubleOP 1 year ago
@JDoubleOP lets be realistic , and not be naive
our energy consumption is increasing day by day, and the world population is growing
so we have to find an energy source that accommodates this growing demand,and thats all part of the evolution of civilization
wind and solar energy aren't sufficient and financially speaking they would the worst option..
so ,those who want a so called green energy, cut the power line of your house, and enjoy the green -or dark- life style :D
vegatron77 1 year ago
@vegatron77
Nuclear energy can't replace oil. Oil is used for transportation, fertilizers, plastics (aka nearly everything we use) so personally I think the answer is downsizing everything and embracing New Urbanism. Local economies, locally grown food, and the end of the greedy car empire (unless we find a mirracle renewable fuel with no emissions)
In the future I believe people will honestly be happier and get more worth out of life without oil.
Gaznugget 11 months ago
@vegatron77 No, it's not, because there's nucleair waste that will be a danger for millennia to come, and it's limited, just like oil. Resource's like uranium, just like oil, will not last forever. There will be no replacement for oil, and we will need to scale down our energy consumption on the long term, if we don't want to go back to the dark ages.
Skoda130 6 months ago
Of course oil is a good investment, but nuclear power in combination with renewable systems such as wind power and solar power is where the future is at. just watch...
yeahyeya 1 year ago
@yeahyeya Solar yes.... Wind No
Zombacolypse 1 year ago
panel of programmed meat computers.no basis in reality whatsoever.there are no "crises".ALL PROBLEMS in the world are intentionally created by the super rich in order to steal from the rest of us.I heard over a month ago gas prices were going to 4 or 5 bucks a gallon because EVERYTHING is rigged.Believe me it's not your favor.
taxisgay12 1 year ago
On the 10th of Jaunary 2011 a worldwide boycott of youtube will take place.
Which means for one whole day no-one will visit youtube. This is to show the
owners of youtube, that they are turning a great video sharing site, into
a corporate money-making tool. We want vevo and other companies out.
Do your part, copy and paste this onto other videos.
bartorsz 1 year ago
India FTW!!!
synergestic 1 year ago
The best thing to do right now is immediately is to cut unesscessary oil usage.
For example, many of our cities especially in 1st world societies are highly car dependent. Meaning there is tons of land use segregation, cul-de-sacs, highways, collector roads, oversized parking lots, etc...
This really and wrongfully benefits oil, cement, asphalt, big box retalier, fast food chain, and car companies while costing our energy supply.
We must change our way of life in the cities NOW!
Cyrus992 1 year ago
Lashof says that the nucular industry is heavily subsidized. Like the oil industry ain't. This whole story is bs.
drewzillasaurusrex 1 year ago
this is why we are screwed. we keep having arguments that go on in circles and nothing gets solved, nothing progresses.
FishyMoe 1 year ago
i hate how when people are asked a simple straight forward question and they go into this big complicated rant and avoid the question all together. there are simple solutions to all problems in the world but people make them so difficult...and hence the world is so screwed up that theres hardly any hope left.
owens79 1 year ago
Moron Ebell is your typical establishment boot licker. Hey Ebell let's get rid of the prohibition of hemp before you go shooting off your mouth about free markets you white shoe scumbag. So this is alternative media. At least we know we got no friends in the Russian media either. Putin can suck some donkey d*ck. Why is the measure of a society how much electricity the morons use to begin with? That is a bit of a pompous benchmark to assume really. India and China can go blow each other.
drewzillasaurusrex 1 year ago
Moron Ebell is your typical establishment boot licker. Hey Ebell let's get rid of the prohibition of hemp before you go shooting off your mouth about free markets you white shoe scumbag. So this is alternative media. At least we know we got no friends in the Russian meda either. Putin can suck some donkey d*ck.
drewzillasaurusrex 1 year ago
The French and the Nuke Power WIN!
overseachininadoll 1 year ago
I wish they were more charismatic. Man, I hope oil keeps going for many years. Its the only thing keeping the economy in my country going. I mean, yeah, we have other stuff. But we wont be able to sustain the poor aid bonus nor the educational system without it. This really makes me sad. Also I doubt we have the financial support to make a economical revolution. Im so sad.
EcuadorianFlagShip 1 year ago
Got to love those GREEN fanatics saying co2 is pollutant! hmmm... in Russia we learned in 3 rd grade at school that co2 is what plants use to grow and produce O2.
Next thay will say that oxygen is a toxic pollutant 8)
infowarsru 1 year ago
@infowarsru Indeed CO2 is Polutant. This is from the experts:
CO2 is toxic in higher concentrations: 1% (10,000 ppm) will make some people feel drowsy. Concentrations of 7% to 10% cause dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour. The Normal CO2 in AIR is only 0.039%
Jlennon08 1 year ago
@Jlennon08
If you want to define "pollutant" with data like that, then oxygen is also a pollutant.
Unaverage doses will cause drowsiness, headaches, loss of energy, unconsciousness, and death if the atmospheric concentration is too little or too much.
Water is also a pollutant. Particularly the hydrogen atom within it. It also has oxygen in it. That's a doubly toxic pollutant.
LordDyhalto 1 year ago
@LordDyhalto
No. Oxigen is NOT Toxic to Humans in fact it's used for OXIGEN TERAPHY.
CO2 it is toxic.
From the experts:
Room air only contains 21% oxygen, and increasing the fraction of oxygen in the breathing gas increases the amount of oxygen in the blood. It is often only required to raise the fraction of oxygen delivered to 30–35% . When 100% oxygen is needed, it may be delivered via a tight-fitting face mask, or by supplying 100% oxygen to an incubator in the case of infants.
Jlennon08 1 year ago
@Jlennon08
You fail to see the point.
Your "pollutant" is a natural part of the life cycle. You called it a pollutant because unnatural doses of it causes harm to health, and I said the same could be said of oxygen and water. In other words, your point is moot and CO2 is not a pollutant at all.
Hydrogen sulphide and carbon monoxide are products of incomplete combustion which are genuine pollutants. We don't normally get these in developed countries because we have rules against emissions.
LordDyhalto 1 year ago
@LordDyhalto You failed to see my point: CO2 IS TOXIC! Unlike O2 and water which ARE NOT toxic Plants are the Natural Filter of CO2 in the AIR and keeps it at a very low level 0.039 %
"Amounts above about 5% are considered DANGEROUS to animal life.
The combustion of all carbon containing fuels, such as methane (natural gas), petroleum distillates (gasoline, diesel, kerosene, propane), but also of coal and wood, will yield carbon dioxide."
Jlennon08 1 year ago
Once the oil starts running out and once USA will realise that there is no point of waging oil wars then humanity will start going backwards and we will live like we did before crude oil. In 2050 it would take 2 and a half Earths to sustain human needs. Basically humanity is fucked. We are too stupid to find a renewable energy source.
themightyjoseph 1 year ago
What it represents now is so horrifically terrifying to the power elite and to their entrenched infrastructure that they crush all open discussion and marginalize it into oblivions, but with just a little research anyone can see its is a reality.
mattghtpa 1 year ago 2
An even bigger joke than the clowns on this panel juggling petrol chemical non-sense is that the solution has already been discovered and is being intensely researched by behind the scene and very secretively; low temperature nuclear reaction a.k.a. cold fusion.
It's real, it works, and it is what will be next as soon as the status quos figure how to transition into a metered product like oil.
mattghtpa 1 year ago
Peter Lavelle reminds me of Kermet the Frog for some reason
trje246 1 year ago
Oil has passed peak - so economic growth cannot be sustained.
Nuclear has about 100 years worth of Uranium if usage does not increase
Wind and Solar are temporary or intermittent solutions on a large grid.
The time of big grid energy is over. We are going to have to adapt to life in a different way than we do today. Consumerism will be replaced by necessity and private ownership will be replaced by community needs. However those that rule are greedy and insane which means war will come first.
2minstral 1 year ago 24
@2minstral
Exactly, I have been aware of this since 2008 when I was 15-16 years old when oil was around $147 a barrel.
Cyrus992 1 year ago
@2minstral
There is in fact lots of Uranium.. more than we could ever use. The newly designed Nuclear Power plants can recycle and use up to 95% of their uranium cores. Certainly agree on the solar that is now bringing the costs to produce down. Wind is not friendly to the environment when looking at the amount of energy and minerals used to create just one unit.
ThisBoyTV 1 year ago
@ThisBoyTV - I'd like you to send me the links as to where you retreived the information on Uranium. I have looked into it and found that there is enough to last 100 years at current levels. As more Nuclear power plants come online the total supply in years decreases. It is also interresting to note where the Uranium is.
The future problem will be the amout of energy required to enrich low grade Uranium at an affordable cost.
2minstral 1 year ago 6
@2minstral
will send a message to you on the topic
ThisBoyTV 1 year ago
@ThisBoyTV - While you search, here is a good link that covers nuclear energy in depth, with a lot of good references. I suggest reading the whole article and then look at what is actually in use and what is theoretical.
wikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Nuclear_energy
2minstral 1 year ago
@2minstral
I have many PDF's on the topic. Send me a message via my channel and let me know the best way to send them to you.
Wikipedia?? the one stop place on the Net to ensure that people remain ignorant. Write a glowing article about yourself and grant yourself 20 PhD's.. no questions asked. A great site for corporations to brag about themselves and certainly not a source for research,
ThisBoyTV 1 year ago
@ThisBoyTV - You disapoint me, I thought you were someone that was open minded. I'll have to re-evaluate my connection with you. It's Time to move on.
2minstral 1 year ago
@2minstral
What more can i do than send u the 1000s of pages of data? I am an independent news researcher and i love to read. Let everyone else follow the trail of lies while the truth sits unread by 99.9% of the people, Not once have i ever put a negative comment in your videos. Go ahead and re-evaluate.. your loss.
ThisBoyTV 1 year ago
@ThisBoyTV - I am also an independent news researcher as are most people these days, however, I am open minded about a topic and I’m not afraid to discuss or leave a link to some of the online info. If you disagree with the article then why don't you change it? At least tell me what you find that is so wrong with the information in the article, but you haven't done that. Instead you trash the site and my opinion while putting your statement? on a pedestal. Really, there is no great loss for me.
2minstral 1 year ago
Comment removed
2minstral 1 year ago
@2minstral
Nah, nuclear will save the 'big grid' if the masses would stop being bitches about it.
In the 100 years it takes to exhaust nuclear, I'm sure a superior energy would be discovered.
LordDyhalto 1 year ago
@2minstral Nuclear has 2000+ years worth of Uranium, you liar!
fog0death 1 year ago
@fog0death - do you have the data? or can you provide a concrete link? Show it to me and I'll look.
2minstral 1 year ago
@2minstral Do you have your own data for saying 100 years? Can you provide me a concrete link? You're the one saying 100 years, so you should prove your own words right first.
But let me give my info first to prove my point anyways. And also, now that you made me research it, Uranium would actually last far longer than 2000 years:
nextbigfuture(dot)com/2008/08/how-long-can-uranium-last-for-nuclear(dot)html
fog0death 1 year ago
@fog0death - The article you are supporting is pure theoretical and for market speculation. Here is a good link to Nuclear energy in general. It even covers the topic you offer and gives references to the research. wikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Nuclear_energy
You can choose your belief, but its better look at all the facts, practices, and also the setbacks with material, costs, and radiation waste.
2minstral 1 year ago
@2minstral You illustrate your extreme ignorance in your claims vis-a-vis nuclear energy. First and foremost, uranium is not the only nuclear fuel.
Actually, never mind. Clearly you are devoted to your religious belief of Malthusianism, so there's no use in trying to inform you of the facts.
offsprng46 1 year ago
@offsprng46 - The most abundant material available that can be enriched at a low cost is Uranium 235. I don't claim to know everything about nuclear energy and that is why I have politely invited others to elaborate. There is no call for insults unless you are not able to carry on a two-way conversation and that would imply that you are not knowledgeable about the topic and lead with perceived misconceptions.
2minstral 1 year ago
@2minstral "The direct use of force is such a poor solution to any problem, it is generally employed only by small children and large nations."
Illkiron 1 year ago
@Illkiron - That is very true. 8O)
2minstral 1 year ago
This is all so pointless - LOL
MAGNETGRUNT 1 year ago
@MAGNETGRUNT
Always the same story... yellow apple or red apple
-Hey, what if someone want a green banana?
-Moron, don't you know the bananas are yellow?
-Nope, bananas were green before...Tesla told us...
So,let's THINK... we will buy then, the green apple...
holyspiritoftruth 1 year ago
@holyspiritoftruth - Ah, my remark was at least as pointless I suppose. Perhaps I should have gone a step further to simply express that the solution is plainly before us but there are those who elect that it gains no heed.However, the rabbit sits quietly in the hat, grinning while he waits for the fall.
MAGNETGRUNT 1 year ago
@MAG
"If those who lead you say, 'See, the Kingdom is
in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you.
Rather, THE KINGDOM IS INSIDE OF YOU, AND IT IS OUTSIDE OF YOU.
When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and
YOU WILL REALIZE THAT IT IS YOU WHO ARE THE SONS OF THE LIVING FATHER. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty
and it is you who are that poverty."(Gospel of Thomas:3)
holyspiritoftruth 1 year ago
what about the energy from water currents and tides?
thinktothemax 1 year ago 2
Why do you guys discuss this topic?
The Petroleum industry is the pimp daddy of all gov'ts.
They have enough $ to bribe god himself [or herself] and lay down all laws for us to choke on.
My elec bill for Dec was $460.00 - that's pure fkn extortionized - robbery - repeat business - every 4 weeks = getting porked
tapfinger 1 year ago 8
Equating nuclear power with nuclear weapons is idiotic and moronic. Whoever said that obviously doesn't know anything about nuclear power. They just want to deny an abundant energy source to the 3rd world.
You can cover the world in solar, wind, biofuel farms or a mix of all 3 and you still couldn't meet the energy needs of the world. Other than "fossil fuels", nuclear power is the only viable alternative. One of France's largest exports is electricity!
harveybirdmannequin 1 year ago
@harveybirdmannequin
"Free markets" is not going to solve the energy problem. So moronic again. "Free markets" will go for the cheapest energy source up until the last drop of oil is squeezed out of the Earth. Remember the Congressional hearings when gasoline in the USA was approaching $4/gal. The Americans didn't like "free markets" then.
Nuclear power is not heavily subsidized and is competitive. Look at the cost of oil. Wars, blood, etc.
harveybirdmannequin 1 year ago 2
Which energy source has the most ecological devastating effect?
coal mining? creating those wind mills? creating solar panels? pumping oil from the ground? pumping oil from the ocean? harvesting natural gas? converting land for ethanol production? ...etc
also location! getting energy from a desert has barely any ecological negative effect but converting a green forest to coal, oil, metal and heavy metal operation... hmm that doesn't sound too pretty.
ZankDigiTrash 1 year ago
What a bunch of idiots. An oil lobbyist from an institute with the name "competitive" in it makes advertizing for highly subsidized fossil fuels. A media professional who can't pronounce the word "nuclear". An anti-enviromental psychopath who wants to produce even more highly poisonous radioactive waste despite peak Uranium and calls himself an "enviromentalist". That NRDC guy is stating the obvious about renewable energy, but repeats all the propaganda lies about Iran once again.
trakkaton 1 year ago
3 nerdiest guests all in one place.
darkartproductions 1 year ago
They never talk about Hydro electricity, and hydrocurrent electricity that is even more armless to the environment. Sure theres rivers to work on that wont be a problem for wildlife.
Theuf28 1 year ago
didn't china just plan to build 60 nuclear power plants by 2020? and i could of sworn i read china is beginning to dump coal and renewable in place of cheap and abundant nuclear energy plants.
shadowlaw44b 1 year ago 3
Geothermal, tide, wave. Plus solar and wind where viable. After that we just need to get a bunch of people to ride bikes connected to generators to make their own power. That will teach them not to waste too much.
alikhandaghabadi 1 year ago
@0Honza You could tear energy from the atmosphere or sub-space. There is unlimited energy just sitting in the universe. Although that is dangerous and the consequences are unknown. As well as the technology is not yet public or invented yet.
youngbuck189 1 year ago 2
There will be a serious reduction in life after oil (at least human life). Don't think that those in power have not prepared for this contingency. They (the upper 1% that hold as much wealth as 95% of the population) are now setting on the second largest oil reserve outside Saudi Arabia. The members of the Bilderberg Group have ensured that they have enough reserves of water, food, and fuel to maintain power. COG, Patriot Acts 1&2 and presidential directives will ensure they remain in power
romeoechomike369 1 year ago
@romeoechomike369
Exactly, I believe the elites of the world who have had such an influence for 100+ years have a blueprint to control the energy/oil supply, conflict the financial system, which all have a devastating effect on 6 billion + people.
Cyrus992 1 year ago
“Analysis of the Scope of Energy Subsidies and Implementation of Phasing Out” written by researchers from the International Energy Association (IEA), World Bank, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The report has found that the world could spend in excess of $500 billion each year to subsidize fossil fuels.
dewpanic 1 year ago
This discussion is such a fraud just like all RT programs are becoming.
Government subsidy waste? This guy needs to learn that the U.S. has not subsidized any forms of alternative energy sources others than oil.
Oil gets huge government subsidies in the forms of research grants, tax exemptions, environmental deregulations and so on. These all count as subsidization. If the government removes cost from a person or business and must recoup the loss on it's own books, then that's a subsidy.
youngbuck189 1 year ago
@0Honza The venus project is not going to happen. sorry.
arcanekrusader 1 year ago
Necessity is the mother of invention: the market will sort it all out.
arcanekrusader 1 year ago
i live in ontario which relies heavily on nuclear power and all i can say is the system is down more than it's up and they don't know how to deal with waste water and it is a FORTUNE to operate overall; financially and in every other way; it is a pipe dream
cruiscinlan 1 year ago 2
Wind power is a joke. Our family agreed to leaseland for a wind farm in southern Wyoming 5 yrs ago in exchange for tax abatement purposes. In that 5 yrs I've gotten a first hand look at how lame the sustainability and ROI is. 16 yrs on avg is the point of return if the grid can be maintained and that is down constantly, the back up source? Electricity powered by coal. I'm all for alternative energy if it can stand alone w/o subsidy, I think nukes and nat gas is going to be the future.
lintburger 1 year ago
Greetings form Julian Assange himself
wikileek 1 year ago
@wikileek wouldn't mr. assange have moe to say than calling attention to himself? is he as myopic as some make him out to be?
cruiscinlan 1 year ago
@wikileek uhhhhhhh...
savingdestiny 1 year ago
If we could speed up the process of making oil by 1,000,000,000X Then we would have no problem.
pok282 1 year ago
@0Honza greed ruins everything I agree
MrROTD 1 year ago
What is the debate about? I gather wind and solar power and turn it into hydrogen to heat my home and run a car. Fuck oil and coal, they say we need it for energy but that's bullshit. Oil needs to be saved for agricultural/pharma use. We could make energy easily for ourselves but big oil makes sure through TV that it won't happen. Most people think being energy independant is impossible but it's not.
MrROTD 1 year ago
@MrROTD
Wind, solar and hydrogen isn't going to replace the way we use oil now. And hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source. And for us to scale down - we will require a revolution worldwide in economic systems - and that could lead to huge political instability. Oil is liquid hegemonic power, as you should already know.
PersianPaladin 1 year ago
@MrROTD Anyone for oil or nuclear energy is a hack on the payroll of a corporate interest. Oil is not safe or environmentally friendly, and who the fuck wants a nuclear power plant near them? I live near one, it's not fun. Furthermore nuclear waste cannot be disposed of, no one ever talks about that. We can't get rid of it so we bury it in the ocean or pay poor government like Somalia to let us dump it on their shores. The Somali "pirates" are defending themselves. Too many alternatives.
youngbuck189 1 year ago
Biofuels are competely useless for maintaining our globalised inter-dependent industrial economy. Have you seen the Energy Return On Energy Invested of oil compared to biofuels?
Biofuels will be useful only to a society that has adapted to living on a lower energy budget. Life will become VERY different for most of us.
PersianPaladin 1 year ago
biofuel (as a stopgap), then algae to replace light oil (for cars, plastics etc)
crap crude can still power ships until they go nuclear
And there are methods being developed to cheaply recycle nuclear waste
Wind is useless, dams ruin ecosystems, wave generation is still in infancy, only solar has real potential and even then it's just not enough and not reliable enough
GeoffonTour 1 year ago
That Myron guy is full of shit. What we need is a combination of the the strategies of the other two dudes.
falcoperegrinus82 1 year ago
And a contracting global economy based on credit (i.e. debt) is a very UNSTABLE and dangerous one.
PersianPaladin 1 year ago
electrolysis, tesla gravity generators, mineral based kits that can attach to any car french suppressed technology, ozonators attached to cars. the stock exchange and pensions/ capitalisma are tied to oil. scrap oil and collapse the banks.
sexybritgent 1 year ago
It doesn't have to be a catastrophe. We just have to get involved with movements such as Transition Towns - who have detailed energy-descent programs for localities.
PersianPaladin 1 year ago
one honest actor, an oil shill and a nuclear shill.
GorgonLuvs8008135 1 year ago
No mention of Russia, which believes that oil is a renewable resource, so I am told, and not a fossil fuel. All the assumptions of this Cross Talk is based upon Western views on peak oil, etc. It might be worthwhile to debate this issue, versus why the West is so obsessed with notions of the scarcity of resources.
remfrancis 1 year ago
There is a strong chance that everywhere could become locally energy independent within a year. That is blocked by existing laws and technologies. If you want to know what they are: 1 steam engine technology, 2 pneumatic heat handling and energy storage, and, 3. simple heat saving with insulated water tanks. Right now we have stabile but extremely damaging. There could be hydroponic fuel growing tech. And this would be a boon. Everything energy would decentralize.
hypnofan35 1 year ago
We never capture or try to use "waste heat", There are ways, but the fuel engine monopoly has banned them from the reality that common knowledge consitiutes. It is a variety of heat capture and use devices that could turn the world into an drill -less for oil planet. Presently we have exclusively heat chucking technology and are not allowed to venture into anything less "heat chucking". We are all simply totally inured to this. We duplicate processes as to burn ever more. Sounds like hell.
hypnofan35 1 year ago
@hypnofan35
Western civilization wastes a lot of energy. We could simply cut down our consumption and that would help a lot - but our economic and monetary systems do not allow that. They are based on the notion of infinite-growth. We have to get rid of the debt-based money system, and start developing alternative paradigms.
PersianPaladin 1 year ago
Some suggested sources for people to look at:-
1. Google hoz turner's blog (some good insight into the energy-situation)
2. The Post Carbon Institute/Energy Bulletin dot net
3. The Oil Drum
4. CollapseNet
5. Transition Culture
6. The Automatic Earth
PersianPaladin 1 year ago
What a terrible interviewer. Says '' go ahead jump in'' whenever someone interrupts.
kennegun 1 year ago
@kennegun thats the format and it's retarded.
GorgonLuvs8008135 1 year ago
@kennegun crosstalk rules, in this show it is allowed to interrupt
zaurtrien 1 year ago
the energy crisis will unfold an inevitable pragmatic solution all of its own - a price mechanism incentive to harness the huge pool of overpopulated humans as an energy resource ...well not as hi tech or faciful as the matrix .. but just people with satellite tracked total ID controls working as machines...after all what is more efficient than a biological body, just feed it an orange and it works a few hours and humans are highly intelligent unlike beasts of burden they can do complex tasks
FucknuckIes 1 year ago
stop talking about competitive markets! do you live in this planet? where have those ideas taken us? mercado competitivo para la energia nuclear, mis huevos!
zaurtrien 1 year ago
Comment removed
kennegun 1 year ago
we as the human race should be moving away from oil. we have enough technologies out there to find other sources of fuel. We as the human race should be looking to the stars rather than staying on this planet. Why we can stay on this planet forever. It one takes one meteor to kill all life on this planet.
I am sure there is a lot of politics over fuel get over it. This is for the better meant of the human race.
blackdreamhunk2 1 year ago
This is all bullshit!
To rely on lobbiests is pretty the worst, you could ever do.
Check geothermal and HHO resonance power.
Forusim 1 year ago
solution:
use Nuclear energy for energy plants, and fuel for plains cars, etc...
angelusp777 1 year ago
Clean and natural energy is Human energy=slavery.
nuclear energy equal mushroom cloud over city by battery lover.
The two clean energy(nuclear/electric) will fight for number one consumption.they will come to they sense and team-up to kill fossil fuel.The day the clean junkies kill the fossil fuel is the day the day you will see NO trees.burning fossil fuel is food for trees and other life cycle organism.An environment of clean energy is a world in slavery.Cooperation Dictator are oil junkies.
SteveXnycperformance 1 year ago