[p2p-research] [Open Manufacturing] Fwd: there is no energy crisis

[M. Fioretti]

OK, to begin with, for the second time in two hours:

> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:13 PM, M. Fioretti <mfioretti at nexaima.net> wrote:
>
> > please do learn to quote email properly. Don't retransmit to many
> > people, every time, KBytes and KBytes of text they had already
> > received. On a global scale, this is one, not the biggest of
> > course, reasons which keep consumption of raw materials for
> > networks and drives higher than necessary. On a local scale: even
> > if there were only one member on this list who pays Internet
> > connectivity per byte or time... would it be polite to force that
> > person to pay more just because of carelessness?

with respect to this:

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 23:27:36 PM -0800, marc fawzi wrote:

> The counter argument is that... It is funny to suggest that hundreds
> of billions of dollars in annual trade that is based on Gallium,
> Indium or any substance is going to go away just because that
> substance may be hard to extract or less common.
> The amount of money involved means that there is large funds
> available... to pursue more efficient production of Gallium and
> Indium as well as to find replacement.

OK. Written this way it makes much easier to see what your point is,
thanks. Given the current economy, the "large funds available" part
does smell a bit funny though...

Sorry, couldn't resist. More seriously:

- eventually, the sky won't fall down, of course, but the real problem
  is scale and *time* to find and deploy a real alternative to Indium
  and Gallium worldwide. This is the "scale and time" problem
  explained by K. Cobb, which doesn't change a bit even if you're
  right, does it? Incidentally, the Reller and Graedel papers are
  almost two years old. Have there been any newer papers claiming
  they're wrong, or giving concrete evidence that transition to new
  materials is already feasible and can happen without major pain?

- on a related note, but directly linked to the original topic, that
  is "there's no energy crisis because nanosolar is already here",
  we've still got nothing to counter another objection by Cobb, have
  we? From
  http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-February/001415.html

> Nanosolar will just come up with a substitute, you may say.  Yes, perhaps,
> but when? Keep in mind that the claims they are making are based on their
> current technology which uses these inputs and they are not anticipating
> that they will have to find substitutes for these.

Marco F.
http://mfioretti.net
-- 
Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on how
software is used *around* you:            http://digifreedom.net/node/84