A very long time ago I was told that we should leave the world in better shape than we found it. There's little hope of that. There are walls to run into everywhere we look and the truth is that we don't look very much -- too depressing and we want to get on with our day to day lives, a thing that is hard enough to do.
At last Monday's meeting, I mentioned that I was reading Bonner's and Wiggin's "Empire of Debt". It's one of the most depressing books I've ever read. Because of its huge private and public debt, America could implode, or could be made to implode because much of the debt is held abroad by countries that may not remain in sync with US interests. The globalized world is one in which labour and other cost differences have created huge advantages for emerging economies like China and India. As the authors put it, they increasingly make and we increasingly buy. We want bargains and they can give them too us. It won't always be like this. At some (distant?) future point, their costs will increase and ours will fall, and our grandchildren may be making cheap stuff for them. Consumer and mortgage debt are another problem. You want to buy something, you do it on credit. You want a house, you get yourself a no down payment mortgage. And given today's housing bubble, you can make some money by flipping the house, or at least you can right now. Implications for Canada? Well, our economy is tied to the American economy. They go down, we go down with them. I'd rather not, thank you, but it's hard to see a positive alternative. Oh gloomy day!! Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: David Delaney To: David Delaney Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 11:17 AM Subject: [Ottawadissenters] US Nat'l Acad Science: Not so much coal in US "There is probably sufficient coal to meet the nations needs for more than 100 years *at current rates of consumption*". A chilling statement. First, consumption won't be at current rates but will rise exponentially (or faster) until the occurrence of a Hubberts peak in a few decades. Second, after that peak, there will be an inexorable decline lasting for much longer than 100 years as much of the coal is retrieved long after the 100 years. From the Wilmington Star http://www.wilmingtonstar.com/article/20070621/ZNYT01/706210447/1002/business http://tinyurl.com/2v6whz /Start article Science Panel Finds Fault With Estimates of Coal Supply A new report says estimates of coal reserves are unreliable and the U.S. may not have nearly as much coal as is popularly believed. WASHINGTON, June 20 - The United States may not have nearly as much coal as is popularly believed, and mining the remaining resources may be more dangerous for workers and the environment than current operations, the National Academy of Sciences said in a report Wednesday. With domestic production of oil, gas and uranium far below peaks, coal has been promoted by elected officials and energy experts as the only bright spot in the national fuel supply picture. But as Congress considers billions of dollars in aid for projects to make gasoline and diesel substitutes from coal, and to build coal-fired plants that would capture their own carbon emissions, the study said that estimates of coal reserves were unreliable. "There is probably sufficient coal to meet the nation's needs for more than 100 years at current rates of consumption," the study said. "However, it is not possible to confirm the often-quoted assertion that there is a sufficient supply of coal for the next 250 years. The 250-year estimate was made in the 1970s and was based on the assumption that 25 percent of the coal that had been located was recoverable with current technology and at current prices, said one member of the study group, Edward S. Rubin, a professor of environmental engineering and science at Carnegie Mellon University. But he said that more recent studies by the United States Geological Survey showed that at least in some areas, only 5 percent of the coal was recoverable with today's technology and at current prices. The 100-year forecast was based on current consumption rates, about 1.1 billion tons a year. By 2030, the rate of coal consumption could be 70 percent higher or 50 percent lower than it is now, the study found. The impact of carbon constraints, if the government imposes them, are not clear, members of the study program said. The new report, which was requested by Congress at the urging of senators from two coal-producing states, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, raises the possibility that taxes on carbon dioxide emissions will sharply lower the demand for coal. It also points out that mining will increasingly occur above or below seams that have already been excavated, raising questions about safety and the disruption of underground water flows. The federal government spends hundreds of millions of dollars a year to research ways to use coal cleanly and tens of millions on miner safety. But the committee said more research was needed to find better ways to mine coal, to estimate reserves and to store carbon dioxide captured from plants. Carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is a major factor contributing to climate change, scientists say. /End article __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Polls | Members | Calendar Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Visit Your Group SPONSORED LINKS a.. Social science book b.. Online social science degree c.. Social science degree d.. Social science education e.. Social science major Yahoo! Search Find it faster with Yahoo! shortcuts. Y! Messenger Group get-together Host a free online conference on IM. Yahoo! Mail Get it all! With the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta . __,_._,___
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
