Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

· Home
· Forum
· Special Sections
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 181 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here


Hot Links

American Antigravity

AESOP Institute

Closeminded Science



Integrity Research Institute

New Energy Movement

New Energy Times

The Orion Proj.




Science Hobbyist

Tom Bearden's Page


Want to Know

Other Info-Sources
NE News Sites
Alternative Energy News
E-Cat World
NexusNewsfeed ZPE
FringeEnergy News
NE Discussion Groups
Energetic Forum
Energy21 YT Channel
Energy Science Forum
Free_Energy FB Group
The KeelyNet Blog
Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
Vortex (old Interact)
Magazine Sites
Electrifying Times (FB)
ExtraOrdinary Technology
IE Magazine
New Energy Times

Interesting Links

SciTech Daily Review
NEXUS Magazine
Find Jobs

Energy Wedgists versus Technology Breakthroughists
Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2008 @ 22:35:15 GMT by vlad

Legal The future of the world's economy and climate may depend on which side wins
by Ronald Bailey | June 3, 2008/ Reason Magazine

The energy technology debate among those who are concerned about the dangers of man-made global warming divides into two camps—wedgists and breakthroughists...

Breakthroughists argue that the wedgist approach is a technical and political non-starter. In 2002, a number of leading energy researchers argued in Science that current on-the-shelf technologies cannot supply low-carbon energy at an acceptable cost.

One of the co-authors, MIT engineer Howard Herzog, declared, "To reduce greenhouse gas emissions from our energy systems while maintaining energy prices at comparable levels to today will take revolutionary change as opposed to evolutionary change."

Full article: http://reason.com/news/show/126806.html



Security Code: Security Code
Type Security Code

Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

Related Links
· More about Legal
· News by vlad

Most read story about Legal:
Formation of Archer Energy Systems, Inc.

Article Rating
Average Score: 0
Votes: 0

Please take a second and vote for this article:

Very Good


 Printer Friendly Printer Friendly

"Energy Wedgists versus Technology Breakthroughists" | Login/Create an Account | 12 comments | Search Discussion
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

Re: Energy Wedgists versus Technology Breakthroughists (Score: 1)
by Koen on Thursday, June 05, 2008 @ 12:39:06 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla
The wedgists are criminals:
read http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/0707.1161
and you understand man made global warming is a scam.

Extra atmospheric CO2 produced by human culture does not cause a raise in average earth termperature.  It has been known quite some time that "greenhouse effect" is a misnomer,  there is no global layer of glass anywhere, and the earth atmoshpere has a totally different effect on earth surface temperatures (could be even be a cooling effect).
CO2 gas has been measured NOT to block any infrared radiation, and even if it does this, there would be not "greenhouse effect"  because there is as much solar infrared influx as infrared outflux. Nett result on temperature: zero  (even if the atmospheric CO2 concentration doubled over night).

This is the only "argument" for the wedgists for cutting down energy consumption,  but the real reason is to criple the global economy before we have the change to develop energy conversion alternatives.

Folks, we're all in a lot of trouble (Score: 1)
by vlad on Saturday, June 07, 2008 @ 12:21:41 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
William Alek writes: Hello all,

$45 trillion needed to combat warming!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080606/ap_on_bi_ge/japan_iea_climate_change [news.yahoo.com]

"TOKYO - The world needs to invest $45 trillion in energy in coming decades, build some 1,400 nuclear power plants and vastly expand wind power in order to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, according to an energy study released Friday.

The report by the Paris-based International Energy Agency envisions a "energy revolution" that would greatly reduce the world's dependence on fossil fuels while maintaining steady economic growth.

"Meeting this target of 50 percent cut in emissions represents a formidable challenge, and we would require immediate policy action and technological transition on an unprecedented scale," IEA Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka said.

A U.N.-network of scientists concluded last year that emissions have to be cut by at least half by 2050 to avoid an increase in world temperatures of between 3.6 and 4.2 degrees above pre-18th century levels."

Now, you have to wonder where is the money going to come from to fund this enormous endeavor since the world financial system is for the most part, bankrupt? As noted in my last email:

The current CO2 level is quite literally off the chart and a complete meltdown of the world's glacial ice is estimated to be within 10 years!

Too little, too late...


William S. Alek, INTALEK, INC.
7760 E. State Rte 69 Ste C5-381
Prescott Valley, AZ 86314
PHONE: 928.255.0198
URL: http://www.intalek.com/

Next Steps on Climate and Energy (Score: 1)
by vlad on Saturday, June 07, 2008 @ 14:51:40 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
Next Steps on Climate and EnergyBy Andrew C. Revkin [dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com] / The New York Times, June 7, 2008, 8:41 am

When lawmakers get into partisan tangles over legislation and a bill dies a slow procedural death, as happened with a climate bill in the Senate this week [www.nytimes.com], the result is ugly and incremental, and doesn’t compete well with news of spiking oil prices [dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com]. That makes for shrinking space in the very finite (and ever more finite) confines of a newspaper.

Below is some context that did not fit into today’s story in The Times.

Here’s what a “floor fight” in the Senate over the issue of the century — satisfying energy needs without overheating the planet — looks like:

.... Full article: Next Steps on Climate and Energy [dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com]


All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.