Earlier this year I read Frank Schaetzing's novel "The Swarm". Unfortunately it gets classified as a science fiction book and so falls off of most people's radar. It is actually a novel about how extensive offshore drilling so endangers the ocean that it fights back.
I know, that sounds like science fiction or something like it. It does create another species which is water based and made up of single cells that act in conjunction with one another to undermine continental shelves, the result of which is to send massive tidal waves which destroy coastlines around the world.
Now I am not suggesting that there is such a species. I am suggesting that our search and destroy mission to find fossil fuels has consequences. This is in addition to the effects the burning of such fuels have on our environment, and that this a problem, a man made problem.
What is galling is that world opinion seems to get split into two. On one side is that part of the population who can only look at the world in terms of profits and can only think of the world as a resource to be be exploited, regardless of the "collateral damage".
On the other side are the environmentalists who correctly bemoan the destruction of our natural environment, yet have great difficulty coming to terms with the practical realities of the world in the 21st century.
The Drill Baby Drill idiots don't get it. Nor do the environmentalists who think wind power will solve all our problems.
What I find most curious is the way nuclear energy has been banished. The environmentalists hate it without understanding it. Industry has determined that it is too difficult to build in a cost effective manner because it is one area where the safety precautions are reasonably high as everyone knows the perils of radiation!
Sooner or later we will wake up and realise that nuclear energy, today fission, and tomorrow fusion is the way forward.
In the meantime we drill for oil in the most ridiculous of locations, skimping on safety precautions, until we have the "Chernobyl" of the Gulf Coast.
I am not concerned for the future of the world. Nature will survive. I am concerned about the future of mankind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Odd that you would invoke Chernobyl after suggesting nuclear is the way forward. Nuclear, unfortunately, has huge costs associated with it--certainly disposal and safety issues are paramount, but it also uses a tremendous amount of water to keep the works at the right temperature, and water itself may begin to rival energy as a critical need.
ReplyDeleteWe have ourselves a conundrum, no question. Perhaps we will find a way to mimic photosynthesis more affordably than photo-voltaics. Meanwhile, there are considerable gains to be derived from reducing demand. For example, "for the ultimate HD experience...go outside."
Fair point. I invoked Chernobly as it showed the devastation which nuclear can cause if not monitored and properly built. We have oil disaster after disaster, and yet we just keep on drilling and shipping/pumping oil in the same old fashion. Also, although poorly presented, I wanted to make the link to the fact that nature is regenerating itself there-but humans still can't enter the zone without danger.
ReplyDelete