The non-human energy used in the United States, Europe, and Japan is energetically equal to about 90 slaves working for each of us every day.  The energy for these 90 slaves comes from the combustion of fuels that contain carbon.  The carbon dioxide produced by combustion is changing the composition of the atmosphere.  This composition change will warm the world and alter the climate.  We must stop adding the waste product, carbon dioxide, to the atmosphere. We need to preserve fossil fuel chemicals for higher value uses.  To keep our standard of living and help others to improve their standard of living we need a completely new energy system.

Some folks deny the danger from carbon dioxide and say “take no action”; the magic of the open market will solve all problems.  They are willing to treat the world as a business in liquidation. They expect to sell all the earth’s resources at what ever price today’s market can bear.  They appear to believe we can segue from the current burning of oil/natural gas/coal to a future system based on tar sands, shale oil and liquid fuels from coal.  They appear to completely ignore the higher value of hydrocarbon reserves as feed stocks for chemicals.  These folks have little or no concern for the future of life on the earth and are immensely dangerous. 

Another group suggested for energy we should plan to burn the carbon compounds and sweep the carbon dioxide under the rug for future generations to manage.  They promote a puerile plan called sequesterization.  The sequesterization plan is to pump the carbon dioxide into the ground AND HOPE FOR THE BEST.  They have no clew as to the permanence of the sequestered carbon dioxide.   They cannot guarantee future safety.  The sequesterors need to look anew at Lake Nyos in Cameroon.  In 1984 the lake released sequestered carbon dioxide and suffocated 1700 people, all their live stock, wild life and destroyed most of the vegetation.  As this is being written underground gas under high pressure is causing a mud volcano that is destroying thousand of hectares of Indonesia.   Sequesterization is a very dangerous strategy.  It does not preserve the fossil fuel chemicals for higher value use.  It is appears corrupt to pass the problem to a future generation.  These folks are only slightly less dangerous that the reality deniers. 

A third Group promotes growing crops for energy.  We use fossil fuel to provide the energy for the 90 slaves. Humanity is able to produce only slight more food than is required to support our 6.5 billion members.  For the United States alone the farm crops would be required to provide about 90 times the current yield.  The mismatch between the fossil fuel energy supporting our 90 slaves and the energy from farm crops is so extreme that there is no hope of growing adequate crops to supply our energy needs.

Some think that renewable energy sources are the total answer.  Wind, solar, and the like are clearly a vast improvement over burning fossil fuels.  Unfortunately, renewables are very unreliable.  Wind is only available part of the time.  In the northern climes it is cloudy much of the time, preventing collection of solar energy.  Dams teach us that large scale harvesting of renewable energy can cause environmental harm.  We need to harvest all the renewable energy practical, but a base load source of energy is necessary.    

What is the answer?

Fission nuclear energy is unsatisfactory.  Thus far there is no acceptable solution for the transportation and storage of high level radioactive waste.  There is only enough uranium (a relatively rare element) to sustain a fission based energy system for about 75 years.  Near term use of fission leads to a scenario in which we become dependent on fission and then must segue to the use of breeder reactors.  A breeder system magnifies all the shortcomings of burner reactors and in addition adds the threat of large quantities of fissionable material as articles of commerce.  This will delight the terrorists of the world.   

I think the answer is: humanity should support the harvesting of all the renewable sources practical and with nuclear fusion as the base load energy supply.  Sir David King, the chief science advisor for the United Kingdom, recommends that fusion (not uranium fission) is the answer to future energy needs (King, David, ‘Fast Forward to Fusion’ New Scientist, Issue 2442, 10 April 2004).  Unfortunately, within the United States the Department Of Energy (dedicated to fission), and the fossil fuel industry have successfully discouraged the development of fusion for 50 years. 

In 1992, a fusion reactor produced energy for a short time; a scheme to build a full size reactor was proposed;  It is called the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). In July 2005, the journal NATURE reported that after 13 years of procrastination and haggling the multi-nation ITER team reached an agreement.  ITER will be located at Cadarache, France; this is good news!  In other reports, Raymond L. Orbach of the United States Department Of Energy told the United States press that the ITER might lead to a power plant in the year 2040; this is bad news.  The approved design envisions an ITER reactor one-half the size desired by the technical team; this is also bad news.  The small size is reputed to save money, but it magnifies the potential for failure.

In rebuttal to Mr. Orbach’s schedule, see the 1976 report, FUSION POWER BY MAGNETIC CONFINEMENT, ERDA-76/110/1, UC-20, Page 8.  (ERDA is the United States Energy Research and Development Administration, a precursor to the current DOE). This 1976 ERDA report states that building a pilot fusion reactor would take 10 to 13 years with a Maximum Effective Effort (using 1976 computers and technology). 

Humanity should support a Maximum Effective Effort to harvest all renewable energy practical and develop of nuclear fusion for the base load energy supply.   With this we can end the threat from further global warming, and depletion of high value carbon chemicals.  Ultimately we will achieve energy independence for all nations.  

Contact your governmental representative and urge then to take action soon.