Energy Tsunami Heading Our Way

dillont

dillont

Well-known member
I'm a big science nerd, I love new technology and the advances that sciences constantly make in our understanding of the Cosmos.

I read quite a lot of different, seemingly disconnected articles, and came to this realization. We're headed towards a major change by way of immense new sources of energy. We'll be inundated by a tidal wave of energy.

http://dillonthomasdigital.com/incoming-tidal-wave-of-energy

A few strange philosophical questions arise from these findings.
 
Nope. No tidal wave of energy on the way after reading that article. Energy is not a theory. Energy is a practical endeavour. Either you can produce it, or you can't. There is nothing in that article about production on a grand scale. That's where most of these theories fail.

Oil can be pumped by the millions of gallons, and refined by the millions of gallons needed to power planes, ships, and automobiles. No one has come up with a means of producing energy on that scale. Many theories, no production.

Think of it like the difference between an architecht and a construction crew. The construction crew can build something the architect designs, but the artichetect sometimes forgets about where a bulldozer can go and where it can't, and how long it takes to pour concrete. A construction crew can tell you if an architechts dream is practical, or not.

We'll have a tidal wave of energy when the construction crews say they can build it for a reasonable price, in a reasonable amount of time.
 
Cool article. Hadn't heard of 'super position' before.

It is going to take a serious breakthrough in energy production to help move this planet through the next couple decades. As extracting oil becomes more expensive, the cost of everything is going to rise -- hurting poor people on the planet the most.
 
Hindsight will tell the whole story. Civilization also couldn't predict the tsunami of change unleashed due to harnessing electricity and ushering the industrial revolution (part 2).
 
Last edited:
dillont said:
I honestly believe we'll be quite surprised where we find ourselves within 10 years.
Click to expand...

I hope so. It's clear that what we're doing now, plus ten more years of population growth will be pushing us to the edge.
 
Agreed, 100%.

I have a schizophrenic outlook on the future. Both extremely dire (seeing what we're doing now) and very hopeful (seeing the brilliance of our species tap into understanding the Cosmos).

Noel Evans said:
I hope so. It's clear that what we're doing now, plus ten more years of population growth will be pushing us to the edge.
Click to expand...
 
dillont said:
I honestly believe we'll be quite surprised where we find ourselves within 10 years.
Click to expand...


I don't want to be cynical, but people have always felt this way. We honestly don't seem to be very good at predicting timelines of advancement, as so many factors go into play. The main thing that goes into play is economics. It's all fine and dandy to have a "breakthrough", but if it isn't economically feasible, it's not going to change life for anyone anytime soon.
 
Not to besiege an over used argument, but, at some point we thought we could never fly. And we thought we could never break the sound barrier. 22 short years after breaking the sound barrier, which we thought could never be broken, we put a man on the moon.

Yes, there've been misses with fantastic predictions; but let us not forget our surprising past. My grandmother remembers a time when the only way to go long distances was by train, and ocean liner.

We will have the same historical hindsight when we're old and grey, but things will have changed so much more dramatically because of the ever quickening pace of change.


jghenderson said:
I don't want to be cynical, but people have always felt this way. We honestly don't seem to be very good at predicting timelines of advancement, as so many factors go into play. The main thing that goes into play is economics. It's all fine and dandy to have a "breakthrough", but if it isn't economically feasible, it's not going to change life for anyone anytime soon.
Click to expand...
 
dillont said:
.

We will have the same historical hindsight when we're old and grey, but things will have changed so much more dramatically because of the ever quickening pace of change.
Click to expand...

That's assuming that the rate of change will continue to increase, but there is no way of knowing that. For all we know, we could reach a plateau in 5-10 years, and suddenly have a period of 50 years without any major breakthroughs. It's happened many times throughout history, there's no reason it couldn't happen again.
 
Again, it's about practical application. There are over 1 Billion cars in the world and more on the road every day. You won't be able to replace or convert a billion vehicles easily, or build new fueling stations, repair shops, etc. to maintain them. And that's JUST cars, not including 18 wheelers, planes, trains, and container ships that all run on some form of oil.

If you can make it in a lab that's great. But how soon and how economically can you turn that into a billion cars? Will it take you 50 years to do it? Will it cost 200K per car? If so there's no "revolution".

5 years to replace a Billion gasoline engines? That's not easy.
 
Innovation tends to give birth to new industries, not stifle them.

If/when energy becomes super abundant and cheap, then transforming the automobile won't be the issue you're making it out to be. It will be an advantage to have the automobile converted (or junked).

Gillvane said:
Again, it's about practical application. There are over 1 Billion cars in the world and more on the road every day. You won't be able to replace or convert a billion vehicles easily, or build new fueling stations, repair shops, etc. to maintain them. And that's JUST cars, not including 18 wheelers, planes, trains, and container ships that all run on some form of oil.

If you can make it in a lab that's great. But how soon and how economically can you turn that into a billion cars? Will it take you 50 years to do it? Will it cost 200K per car? If so there's no "revolution".

5 years to replace a Billion gasoline engines? That's not easy.
Click to expand...
 
dillont said:
Innovation tends to give birth to new industries, not stifle them.

If/when energy becomes super abundant and cheap, then transforming the automobile won't be the issue you're making it out to be. It will be an advantage to have the automobile converted (or junked).
Click to expand...

They aren't unrelated issues. Energy isn't "cheap and abundant" if you can't use it to get to work or deliver goods to the local shoe store. Look at the amount of electric cars being produced today and how long it takes to produce them. Mulitply by a Billion, and then take in consideration all the stations you need to convert to refuel whatever innovation you're talking about. you can be optimistic all you want, but it's not going to happen in 5 or 10 years.

Joe Schmoe in America working for 10 bucks an hour can't take the metro because more than likely there isn't one, and even if you built one studies show mass transit is LESS efficient than personal vehicles in rural and suburban areas that are not high density like a New York or London city.

What is this great innovation that' Joe Schomoe is going to be able to buy for 10K and fuel for roughly 3 bucks a gallon, and how are you going to build a Billion of them?

THAT is the real wave that will change things, not a breakthrough in the lab. Sure you have to get that breakthrough first, but it has to translate into real affordable production on a vast scale. That's usually the place where what they figure out in the lab falls apart. In the lab you can create electricity with a potato. Try running a Billion cars on potatoes.
 
Fair enough.

I'll just restate what I said earlier, then. When electricity was harnessed 150 years ago, there was no way to tell how deeply it would transform civilization, until after the transformation was well underway.

Cheap energy is coming; maybe this is the point you are arguing against? Fair enough. But this is my argument based on the very recent discoveries of how scientists are using concepts of Quantum Biology to extract energy. Innovation to application is just a few short steps when a revolution is at hand. It's not a matter of sheer optimism, but there's quite a bit of knowledge and understanding that is being put forth here as well. With the ever increasingly rapid advances of technology, the pace will not be slowing down, but will continue to speed up.

An example; the first iPhone was released less than 6 years ago, and it was only capable of being an ipod, a crappy phone, and an internet browser. No games, no other apps. no other functionality. 6 years later, iphone has helped push smartphones into the hands of Joe Schmoe who only earns $10 bucks an hour.

Time will tell. :)

Dillon


Gillvane said:
They aren't unrelated issues. Energy isn't "cheap and abundant" if you can't use it to get to work or deliver goods to the local shoe store. Look at the amount of electric cars being produced today and how long it takes to produce them. Mulitply by a Billion, and then take in consideration all the stations you need to convert to refuel whatever innovation you're talking about. you can be optimistic all you want, but it's not going to happen in 5 or 10 years.

Joe Schmoe in America working for 10 bucks an hour can't take the metro because more than likely there isn't one, and even if you built one studies show mass transit is LESS efficient than personal vehicles in rural and suburban areas that are not high density like a New York or London city.

What is this great innovation that' Joe Schomoe is going to be able to buy for 10K and fuel for roughly 3 bucks a gallon, and how are you going to build a Billion of them?

THAT is the real wave that will change things, not a breakthrough in the lab. Sure you have to get that breakthrough first, but it has to translate into real affordable production on a vast scale. That's usually the place where what they figure out in the lab falls apart. In the lab you can create electricity with a potato. Try running a Billion cars on potatoes.
Click to expand...
 
dillont said:
With the ever increasingly rapid advances of technology, the pace will not be slowing down, but will continue to speed up.



Time will tell. :)

Dillon
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have that this will be the case? I know people like to assume that advancement is an upward slope that will keep increasing exponentially until we reach the "singularity", but as of yet I have seen absolutely no concrete argument as to this being the case.

Look, I understand the desire to believe that within the next 50 years we will all have free energy, all diseases will be cured, and human beings will be able to live for hundreds of years. Who wouldn't want to believe in that? And you know, it's possible, it absolutely is. But it's just as possible that 50 years from now won't look all that different than it does now.
 
A little time spent researching recent tech advances will give you evidence. As a complete nerd, I spend a LOT of time looking at how things are developing. Not just in energy, but also in medicine, biology, nanotech, and material sciences. And these advances aren't happening in isolation, the innovations made in one field are bleeding over into other fields. And now we're in a territory where nanotech and medicine are experimenting with each other, and material sciences are having an ever more profound impact on energy production and storage.

One case in point; scientists have successfully 3D PRINTED a human kidney and transplanted it into someone.

20 years ago, this was unthinkable and left for science fiction.

http://www.ted.com/talks/anthony_atala_printing_a_human_kidney.html

One more sample of evidence, I'll leave the onus on you to find out more about how the pace of technology continues to accelerate; nanotechnology in the delivery of medicine. 6 years ago, it was a great idea with no real application. Now, it is being used to treat many ailments, one of them being cancer. Research is exploding and finding fantastic success in fighting tumors because of nanotech. http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v65/i8/p38_s1

Dillon






jghenderson said:
What evidence do you have that this will be the case? I know people like to assume that advancement is an upward slope that will keep increasing exponentially until we reach the "singularity", but as of yet I have seen absolutely no concrete argument as to this being the case.

Look, I understand the desire to believe that within the next 50 years we will all have free energy, all diseases will be cured, and human beings will be able to live for hundreds of years. Who wouldn't want to believe in that? And you know, it's possible, it absolutely is. But it's just as possible that 50 years from now won't look all that different than it does now.
Click to expand...
 
dillont said:
Fair enough.

I'll just restate what I said earlier, then. When electricity was harnessed 150 years ago, there was no way to tell how deeply it would transform civilization, until after the transformation was well underway.

Cheap energy is coming; maybe this is the point you are arguing against? Fair enough. But this is my argument based on the very recent discoveries of how scientists are using concepts of Quantum Biology to extract energy. Innovation to application is just a few short steps when a revolution is at hand. It's not a matter of sheer optimism, but there's quite a bit of knowledge and understanding that is being put forth here as well. With the ever increasingly rapid advances of technology, the pace will not be slowing down, but will continue to speed up.

An example; the first iPhone was released less than 6 years ago, and it was only capable of being an ipod, a crappy phone, and an internet browser. No games, no other apps. no other functionality. 6 years later, iphone has helped push smartphones into the hands of Joe Schmoe who only earns $10 bucks an hour.

Time will tell. :)

Dillon
Click to expand...

The point is figuring out how to extract energy with quantum biology doesn't do anything. Figuring out how to produce it on a mass scale for cheap is what will change things. I don't see any evidence of that on the horizon.
 
They literally just made these discoveries in the last few months! Give it some time.


Gillvane said:
The point is figuring out how to extract energy with quantum biology doesn't do anything. Figuring out how to produce it on a mass scale for cheap is what will change things. I don't see any evidence of that on the horizon.
Click to expand...
 
dillont said:
... and here's an article predicting the same energy revolution. The utility companies sponsored a study that predicts their own demise!

http://grist.org/article/solar-panel...u-s-utilities/
Click to expand...

Link is to Grist, but not a specific article.

I hope I'm wrong and you are right. But every time I see a "breakthrough" in the lab, it turns out a few years later that they can't manufacture it on a grand scale for cheap so it doesn't lower our electric bills or get us to work cheaply.

Solar panels were supposed to end the electric companies about 50 years ago. We'd all put solar panels on our roofs and no more electric bill! Still hasn't happened.

On a related note we're still waiting on the flying car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top