[Kylon]

I was wondering, if someone had the solution to Peak Oil, and the inveitable doom was forseen by the masses, could they possibly use that to obtain complete and total political power over the masses?

Would everyone end up being their servants?

Or would they just be scape goated as the problem, killed and then the technology possibly forcibly removed from them, meanwhile some bastard claims the credit as hero, saying he stopped the evil which caused Peak Oil, even though he killed the person who solved the problem, and then he/she use that for political power?

Questions....

[rogerhb]

What technical solution would there be to overpopulation?

[Kylon]

A means of converting ambient thermal energy to usable energy.

Essentially a device, that, whenever you use energy up, it's not lost, it can be reused over and over and over again, so long as it doesn't leave the planet. A device which extracts thermal energy from the air, and allows you to use it to perform work.

With that kind of power source it would at least solve the problem for the next 100 years.

By then, people should have fusion. This of course would only delay the problem further, and greater and greater technological progression would be needed to counteract humans needs.

[rogerhb]

I was wondering, if someone had the solution to Peak Oil
....
Or would they just be scape goated as the problem

That already happened. His name was Jimmy Carter.

[rogerhb]

This of course would only delay the problem further, and greater and greater technological progression would be needed to counteract humans needs.

What we in industry call a non-scaleable solution.

[threadbear]

I was wondering, if someone had the solution to Peak Oil
....
Or would they just be scape goated as the problem

That already happened. His name was Jimmy Carter.

[SurvivalAcres]

I was wondering, if someone had the solution to Peak Oil, and the inveitable doom was forseen by the masses, could they possibly use that to obtain complete and total political power over the masses?

Would everyone end up being their servants?

This is tongue in cheek, right? 'cause what you say hear is already true, except the masses don't foresee very much except more bread and circuses.

Or would they just be scape goated as the problem, killed and then the technology possibly forcibly removed from them, meanwhile some bastard claims the credit as hero, saying he stopped the evil which caused Peak Oil, even though he killed the person who solved the problem, and then he/she use that for political power?

You mean a miracle technology that will save our present way of life? I'm a bit confused about the rest.

Even if there was a miracle technology, the cost and implementation of it would have to be considered. Like hydrogen. The infrastructure simply doesn't exist. Or cosmic rays from space... how are you going to retrofit the automobile, the trains, the ships, the planes to use this newfangled space energy?

I don't think there will be any heroes. Certainly not for political pundits. Science and technology can offer some work-arounds and half-solutions, but none are available as actual replacements for oil. Huge changes are in store, most of them very painful.

We need to be honest - we took the wrong path a long time ago.

[MonteQuest]

Essentially a device, that, whenever you use energy up, it's not lost, it can be reused over and over and over again, so long as it doesn't leave the planet.

Ever heard of the Laws of Thermodynamics?

What you are suggesting is a perpetual motion machine.

It cannot ever exist.

[rogerhb]

It cannot ever exist.

Dang! That ol' entropy thing again!

[Kylon]

If I told you what I was talking about it wouldn't violate the laws of thermodynamics. There are loopholes.

[rogerhb]

If I told you what I was talking about it wouldn't violate the laws of thermodynamics. There are loopholes.

You've been watching "Sliders" too much.

[Kylon]

Nah, I am serious, it would be done through a chemical process rather than using an engine.

[rogerhb]

Nah, I am serious, it would be done through a chemical process rather than using an engine.

We'll be interested to see the patent number. I gather that you are not allowed to lodge perpetual motion engine designs with the US Patent Office.

[Kylon]

So your saying, if it worked, it would be classified as a perpetual motion machine, and therefore couldn't be patented?

I don't see how it's a perpetual motion machine, it's essentially just using a type of reversible endothermic exothermic reaction, to produce energy.

Thanks for the info, I believe I won't be talking about this subject any longer.

[rogerhb]

I believe I won't be talking about this subject any longer.

Wise, because the next stages according to the thread's first post is scape goating followed by killing.

Read "Gridlocked" by Ben Elton.

[Aedo]

I don't see how it's a perpetual motion machine, it's essentially just using a type of reversible endothermic exothermic reaction, to produce energy.

Sounds like the description of perpetual motion - think of your "reversible endothermic exothermic reaction" (cycling from one state to the other and back again) as a flywheel painted half red and half green. Imagine the red half at the bottom as the endothermic phase and the red at the top as the exothermic phase - as the wheel spins it goes from exo' to endo' and back - is this how you are thinking? Back on the analogy of the flywheel, it cannot spin forever as there is friction in the shaft bearings etc which will slow it down and stop it eventually. BUT, if you take power out of the flywheel for another use (such as generating electricity) this will slow the flywheel down much more quickly (depending on the amount of energy you "withdraw"). The only way the flywheel can keep spinning is if some driving force is applied to counteract both the friction losses and the energy "withdrawn".

Now think back to your idea - what is the driving force keeping the "wheel" spinning?

When you know the answer go to the patent office (and acquire a flack jacket and bodyguard!)


PS: There are no loopholes in the laws of thermodynamics.

[MonteQuest]

Nah, I am serious, it would be done through a chemical process rather than using an engine.

Chemical or otherwise, if energy is transferred from one form to another, it adheres to 2nd law. Energy only moves from usuable to unusable, hot to cold, never the other way.

If it did, water would flow uphill on it's own.

[rogerhb]

If it did, water would flow uphill on it's own.

The closest we've got is the solar system itself. Harnessing the tide is to all intents and purposes purpetual, but by no means able to provide endless energy. There is a tide-mill in Woodbridge, Suffolk, England that dates from the middle-ages. It might run again.

[katkinkate]

Nah, I am serious, it would be done through a chemical process rather than using an engine.

The trouble with reversible chemical reactions is, if you split a molecule (Z) into smaller molecules A and B, producing a certain amount of energy for use elsewhere, to recombine A and B to get back Z usually takes at least the same amount of energy that splitting them did. So there is no net energy gain.

[Doly]

The trouble with reversible chemical reactions is, if you split a molecule (Z) into smaller molecules A and B, producing a certain amount of energy for use elsewhere, to recombine A and B to get back Z usually takes at least the same amount of energy that splitting them did.

Correct the "usually" and say "always". Reversible chemical reactions use the same amount of energy in one direction as they produce in the other.