Renewables and Cutting-Edge Physics
Given the realities of our time, most of us are short-term focused – even those in renewable energy R&D. We tend to want to know what can we do NOW to lower our carbon footprint and lessen our dependence on foreign oil. I’m not saying that this thinking is flawed, but occasionally I like to ask questions that attempt to get at the long-term answers as well.
To that end, in preparing my book on renewables, I’ve conducted a few interviews with extremely senior physicists, and asked questions about the theories and experiments in the lab right now that may change the may we power our world 100 years hence.
One such interview was yesterday’s, featuring Martin Perl, Nobel Laureate in particle physics – a man so brimming with warmth and kindness (not to mention overwhelming intelligence) that I really hated to leave when the interview was over. We sat just a few feet from the Stanford Linear Particle Accelerator — a device that speeds up particles – normally electrons – to velocities just under the speed of light – and then subjects them to various conditions, e.g., strong magnetic fields. Suffice it to say that wild things happen under those conditions.
The reason I traveled those 300+ round-trip miles was my belief that:
- the point of cutting-edge physics is to understand the ultimate building blocks of the universe,
- depending on whom you believe, we as a civilization are somewhat close to achieving that understanding, and
- with that understanding will come (somehow) an endless supply of clean energy
But surprise! Dr. Perl’s beliefs are 180 degrees opposed to these points. Summarizing an hour-long conversation, one that was both fascinating and disappointing at the same time, he believes that we’re nowhere close to understanding those building blocks and mechanics of the universe, and, even if we were, there is no indication that clean, useful, and inexpensive energy would ever come as a result. (Having said that, there are some extremely powerful implications of Dr. Perl’s work that will be a true boon to mankind in other areas, e.g., medical science.)
So what’s the take-away from all this for us fans of renewables? I suppose it’s this: If you believe Dr. Perl – and it’s hard not to given his credentials – we’ll have to look elsewhere for a long-term answer to our energy challenge. In a way, I suppose, that ratchets up the pressure to find answers using today’s technology that work within the confines of the law of conservation of energy as we know it. And is that impossible, when the sun bestows 6000 times more energy each day on the earth that all 6.8 billion of us consume? Hardly.
First I do not beleive Al Gore and the rest of those talkers about global warming. Next if we cut way back on co2 we can forget to eat. No trees, no grass, no food, no wheat, no corn and no plant will grow on earth without co2. Has anyone informed Al Gore about that. My electric and heating and water bill combined run less then $100 a month yet Al Gore’s electric bill alone runs $3000 or better a month. If he is so wrried about global warming why doesn’t he cut back on his electric use. It is because he knows there is no global warming but he just finds dumb asses to pay him millions for saying that.
Wow. Just wow.
There are some missing avenues of thought that (not surprisingly) don’t accompany Dr. Perl’s view of things.
First: Cheap, abundant energy would be the instant death of our planet. With petroleum and fossil fuels being expensive and getting more so, there is at least some dampening effect on consumption and production rates of other resources and mindless activities.
Second: “he believes that we’re nowhere close to understanding those building blocks and mechanics of the universe, and, even if we were, there is no indication that clean, useful, and inexpensive energy would ever come as a result.”
Yes, if you assume that the only avenue of approach to finding the building blocks of the universe is the publicly accepted one, and that there aren’t other views of the universe (sans Relativity, for example). We have been taught that the massive educational/research system is ‘on top of things’ and that if we don’t have the credentials of Dr. Perl, we should just ‘let the big boys handle everything’ for us.
Truth be told? I don’t trust anyone who has been part of that system, or who believes in the unfailing ‘truth’ of mathematical models, or anyone that doesn’t present deeper concepts in plain explanations.
If they can’t explain it without mathematical obfuscation, then they don’t understand what they are doing any more than you or I do.
There is plenty of evidence that the government is hiding some very important energy and gravity work going back to the 1940’s. There was a definite ‘kill fest’ spearheaded by MIT when Cold Fusion was discovered (yes, Pons and Fleischman have been vindicated, contrary to popular belief): not because of the lack of science, but because of the threat to comfortable scientists. Cold Fusion doesn’t represent the threat of an easy, great new energy source, but it represents questions that don’t fit the standard model of physics.
Guys like Perl either are threatened by those kind of questions or they work to eliminate them from open investigations, I suspect often because of “national security”.
That said, I don’t WANT humans to have cheap energy. I’m just saying it might already exist. I think we would waste the opportunity to do wonderful things as a species and instead use it for video games and automobiles to drive to the mall to buy more televisions to tell us to drive to the mall.
Good point. There is an implication in nearly every talk I have with people connected to universities to the effect that: There is established science that we academics discover, and then there’s bunk. It doesn’t really take into consideration that paradigms are normally shattered by people working outside the confines of the scientific community.
And in my mind, cold fusion is an example of something far worse: the deliberate sabotage of a scientific breakthrough.
Excellent…! I believe the discussions had to be overwhelming. Way over my understanding of things. As one who looks at solutions, it could be as simple as the X-Factor. The Global warming is real as the cycle of a planet. Pushing of the “Green” movement has a bigger picture as great as the understanding of the cutting-edge physics. It is a big picture made up of all the pieces. See the big picture and everything becomes simple. It is all in the added value.
Charlie, it appears u believe all the corporate lies against global warming and that very old electric bill that also includes a business office with employees. And who says he is getting rich off this? To fear running out of CO2 is ludicrous. Thanks Craig for helping to educate the Charlies of the world.
First, I come from both the sciences and professional problem solving, and in the interest of full disclosure, a math degree. I mean no disrespect here, but I have to say it – mathematics is a pure language with no inherent obfuscation. To say otherwise invokes images of foil hats.
The digital age has done us some apparent damage in that we tend to view many of our issues as 1-0, on-off, yes-no, solution-unsolved. It is not the case that the world can be dealt with that simply. Programs of any meaning often have many steps, or phases if you will. Our transition to a non-fossil fueled world will have some number of steps most definitely greater than two. Each of those steps will most likely have multiple parallel processes. Some of those processes will be calculated hedges that a risk analysis indicates are appropriate even though it is a certainty that some of them will fail. I could go on here, but my point is now obvious.
I will (uncharacteristically) cut to the chase to say, if you think this is going to have a straightforward solution then get over it. We need every scheme, every bit of current knowledge and every bit of future gamble to make our way through this challenge. As Redd Foxx used to say – “…this is the big one”.
Not sure about this interview. Just one guy’s take on the issue. I tend to agree with Dan and Craig that someone within the “established” system or in conventional scientists’ circles is certainly not the end-all-be-all on the subject. I think ultimately the solutions we are looking for will come from outside the box DIY types. They definitely WILL NOT come from windbags like Al Gore (uh oh…..I guess that makes me one of the “Charlies” of the world according to Barry N lol!). For those who don’t like me being critical of Al G, I’m actually in the midst of retrofitting an old building I just bought. So far I’ve had soybean based insulation installed, a radiant infloor heating system (which is quite efficient and niiiiiice) and we’ve used many recycled materials. I’m actually meeting someone tomorrow to look at installing BIPV on the roof and have other plans for solar hot water. I also have aspirations to live off-grid. Now, has anyone seen Al Gore do anything like this? Last I checked he has a huge energy guzzling mansion and flies in a personal jet. Whatever happened to the Ghandi saying of being the change you want to see in the world?
Carbon taxes and Cap and Trade are horrible ideas. Folks, they’re just trying to take your money, expand government and further erode your individual liberties. There’s no solution here. Here’s a really good comprehensive website about the elites who are behind this scam and want to bring in global government: green-agenda . com
Even if you totally think global warming is real and from manmade activities, there are REAL TANGIBLE SOLUTIONS OUT THERE THAT WE SHOULD ENCOURAGE AND IMPLEMENT ANYWAY!!! The Global Warming – I mean Climate Change debate can be rendered irrelevant if the solutions are sound and get us off our dependence on oil and make us more self-sufficient which in the end can ENHANCE LIBERTY AND FREEDOM FOR ALL rather further curtail it.
i just finished my electric conversion of a geo metro, it goes 80 mph. i am planning on putting solar panels on it so i can get completely off the grid./Users/David/Pictures/iPhoto Library/Originals/2009/2009 metro, buddy ron, trip/IMGP0709.JPG