Energy: The Bottomless Well
by
Bill Walker
by Bill Walker
Governments
exist on a foundation of fear. The more fear they can generate,
the bigger they can grow. Fears of terrorists, of WMDS, of bird
flu, of Global Warming (or Global Cooling), of nuclear power, etc.
etc. etc. Any fear is a good fear for government. Popular support
for wars is based on fear.
The Iraq war
was originally supported on a basis of fear of nonexistent WMDs.
As that fear has receded, new fears are used as supplements. One
of the most popular is the fear of "Peak Oil." The idea
is that America must fight over the little pool of oil in the Middle
East, because that is all the energy in the universe and we have
to have it to drive to the mall. One is supposed to picture your
great great grandchildren in 2100 driving to malls in Chevrolet
Suburbans, fueled by the last dregs of Iraqi oil. They will, of
course, but only in historical reenactments (and the Suburbans will
probably be powered by "Mr. Fusion" He-3 units).
The truth is
that our current energy use is minuscule. The entire world burns
about 345 Quads of fossil fuel every year. Known coal reserves contain
200,000 Quads, oil shales 10 million quads, the deuterium in the
ocean 10 trillion Quads. (Of course we are no longer allowed to
think about using the huge thorium reserves… if you are younger
than 30, you probably don’t even know what thorium is). To believe
that energy shortages are our biggest problem requires very special
blinders.
People have
been panicking about "energy crises" since Og the cave
man noticed that the supply of fallen branches near the cave was
dwindling. There was a panic about "running out of wood";
Watt developed an efficient steam engine and England switched to
coal. There was a whale oil shortage in the 1800s; Drake developed
oil drilling. There were multiple panics in the 20th
Century about running out of oil; we developed nuclear fission,
offshore natural gas, efficient solar cells, fuel cells, hybrids,
better wind turbines… and then continued to find oil anyway, but
when we do need to switch there are multiple technologies available
and more on the way.
Energy produces
new energy; Watt’s steam engines were used to pump out coal mines
to produce more coal. Today’s reactors and drill rigs produce the
energy to make mining equipment and develop new power sources.
Huber and Mills
make several points in The
Bottomless Well. One is that we don’t really want "energy,"
we want useful order ("negentropy" in physics). Order
can only be produced by creating disorder somewhere else, by having
energy flow from more concentrated to less concentrated states.
If you don’t have a good grip on the concept of entropy, then read
this; you can’t talk effectively about "energy" if
you don’t know what it is.
This is why
talk of "conserving energy instead of producing" is self-contradictory.
If we want a clean environment, we have to use energy flowing from
a more concentrated source to a more dispersed state to power the
separating and recycling of pollutants. Now, this flow could occur
in the Sun and be collected by rooftop solar panels, or it could
occur in a space-based reactor and be transmitted via microwave
and then high-tension line to your house. But life doesn’t exist
without that energy flow.
Any successful
"energy-conserving" technology in fact leads to the consumption
of more energy. The authors point out that more energy now goes
into lighting after the invention of energy-conserving bulbs; people
make more use of the superior technology and outpace the savings
of each individual bulb. The same is true in computers; the energy
per logic gate keeps falling, but the overall energy use for computers
and Internet keeps rising as the superior technology is more useful
and runs more of the time. In fact, the Internet and supporting
infrastructure may consume over 10% of our power already. As computers
get more useful, more of them will be demanded; any good economist
could have predicted that.
The "silicon
car" will further increase the efficiency of the internal combustion
engine by 20%, prevent traffic accidents, and do nothing whatever
to reduce energy use. Since the vehicles will be safer and more
useful, more people worldwide will adopt them. The authors don’t
point this out, but only the FAA has prevented development of practical
personal flying vehicles and flying taxis, which will of course
use even more energy than cars (but be less useful for terrorists
than today’s 200-ton 747s and 767s).
Another point
well made is that only concentrated energy sources allowed Western
nations to restore their forests. We get more crops out of smaller
areas, where peasant societies just cut down every tree and plow
up every acre.
Besides allowing
us to leave the energy of sunlight for the natural environment,
our "wasteful" energy systems actually let us produce
more and more order for human purposes. The book traces the "inefficient"
trail of energy that starts out as a pile of coal or uranium and
ends up saving someone’s eyesight at the tip of an ophthalmologic
surgical laser. Kilowatts have been transmuted into watts, but the
watts carry useful order to where it is needed.
The public’s
confusion over energy, entropy, and economics has led to a lot of
counterproductive, even outright destructive effects. Huber summarizes
the effect of the anti-nuclear movement thusly: "400 million
more tons of coal have been burned." (Never forget, coal produces
over 100 times more radiation per kilowatt-hour than nuclear plants!)
Was this what
those who funded the "environmental" organizations wanted?
Maybe, but I doubt it was the objective of most environmentalists.
The moral is that putting your efforts into depriving other people
of the freedom to innovate probably isn’t going to achieve your
goal, no matter what your goal is.
There is no
reason to fear "Peak Oil," "Peak Coal," "Peak
Uranium," "Peak Deuterium," "Peak Antimatter,"
etc. Free human beings will not run out of energy for billions of
years, even if we never learn any more physics in all that time.
Our only shortage is of freedom itself. And that is something to
fear.
November
28, 2005
Bill
Walker [send him mail]
works in HIV and gene therapy research in Rochester, Minnesota.
Copyright
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Bill
Walker: Archives
|