To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (4021 ) 2/6/2006 12:28:31 AM From: Crabbe Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 218449 Malthusian Concepts such as running out of food to feed the world, have essentially been eliminated. Extending Malthusian concepts to energy, and espousing the idea that energy is limited far beyond mans ability to produce enough for the worlds huddled masses is as wrong as the argument that we can’t grow enough food. Untapped energy resources are Solar, Tidal, Atomic, River Flow (similar to wind), Wind, Hydro (with Dams) The Solar energy striking the worlds deserts amounts to several hundred watts peak/sq meter (High Noon), and averages above 200 watts/sq meter. Present day solar panels are 15% efficient, so for each sq meter of desert could be harnessed to produce at least 30 watts per hour. One square mile of desert covered with solar panels would produce 30 watts per square meter or 77.7 megawatts average output. A thousand square miles, 77.7 gigawatts. As for all practical purposes other than the desert hare and the rattlesnake this land is useless. A small percentage of the Sahara for instance could power Europe, Africa, and all of the middle east. A small portion of the Mohave could power the US and Canada. Electricity is easily converted to hydrogen for mobile power sources. Atomic power has been in some countries such as France nearly the sole source of electricity. The US due to environmental fear and regulation has not built any and in some cases decommissioned atomic sites, in the last 30 or so years. Wind as an environmental favorite is being built in the US, and could over the next several years produce a small but significant portion of our power needs. River flow is being researched it is possible to produce enough power to power New York City with the flow of the surrounding rivers. Tidal has not been utilized to any significant amount, but again could produce extensive amounts of power. The western US has utilized a significant amount of Hydropower, IE dams. Environmental concerns probably would block any significant increase. “It is said that many scientists are needed in this connection. The developed world produces fewer and fewer good scientists, due, I think to the lowering of average IQ.” I think you misunderstood what the Flynn Effect states, the average IQ has increased by 3 points per decade for the last 100 years. As a matter of fact there are more scientists alive and producing advances today than there are dead scientists from all of the history of the world. The problem with getting scientists in the developed world is more akin to diversion of students to computer games, and other fields. Everyone on this thread seems to think that affluence leads to more and more children, that is a transitionary effect, due to better nutrition and better medical care. The actual effect is less children, Europe is presently at 1.5 children per couple, the US is close to replacement at 2.1 children, HK the rate is 0.941. transitioning countries are at several children per couple, as are the undeveloped countries. Here is a chart of children per woman. Countries with Fertility at or Below Replacement Level2 Hong Kong 0.94 Russia 1.2 Italy 1.2 Japan 1.3 Germany 1.3 Poland 1.4 Australia 1.7 United Kingdom 1.7 China 1.8 France 1.8 United States 2.1 Countries with Fertility Above Replacement Level2 Brazil 2.4 Indonesia 2.7 India 3.2 Pakistan 5.6 Tanzania 5.6 Saudi Arabia 5.7 Nigeria 5.8 Ethiopia 5.9 Dem. Rep. of Congo 7.0 Yemen 7.2 As you can see, the more developed countries have birth rates at or below replacement, the transitioning countries are above replacement and the non-developed countries have birth rates far above the replacement rate. r