From: GBurch1@aol.com
Date: Sun Aug 29 1999 - 10:17:24 MDT
In a message dated 99-08-29 00:16:15 EDT, you write:
> Then the third effect would be heat dissipation as a side effect of
> our use of nanotech devices, both for manufacturing (and disassembling),
> as well for simply operating our computers, utility fog, and other nifty
> nano devices. This energy-waste cost would also be present during the
> transition period as we convert from natural elements to manufactured
> devices for the first time.
>
> However as I noted originally, the energy to waste in this way all
> comes from solar, and should already have been accounted for in my
> first category.
Good point: You're not "making" "new energy" in the process of using nanotech
devices. Also, shouldn't the over-all calculation take into account the heat
"savings" we get from using more efficient industrial and technological
process? Seems like reducing whatever current effect human technology has on
the planet's heat budget would have to be offset against heat created by use
of nanotech . . . of course, that's subject to the same idea contained in the
first point, i.e. that the Earth's energy system has only one significant
real input -- solar energy.
Greg Burch <GBurch1@aol.com>----<gburch@lockeliddell.com>
Attorney ::: Vice President, Extropy Institute ::: Wilderness Guide
http://users.aol.com/gburch1 -or- http://members.aol.com/gburch1
"Civilization is protest against nature;
progress requires us to take control of evolution."
-- Thomas Huxley
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:56 MST