Arcane Gazebo

Did anyone happen to mention nuclear power? It seems to me that this is an extremely important power source in the interm between now and the development of fusion. If people are really concerned about the catastrophic effects of global warming, then nuclear is probably the only viable option for the short term, IMO.

Koonin mentioned nuclear power as being consistently about 5% of global power generation. France was able to take a chunk out of their emissions with widespread nuclear power. I think the main issue is that it's more expensive than fossil fuels. (Also, he didn't mention this, but the supply of uranium is limited just as fossil fuels are, and will eventually be exhausted... but I agree with you that it's a good way to transition away from coal in the short term.)

Goodstein in general seems to have a more pessimistic personality than does Koonin, so their different outlooks on this situation may not go far beyond that.

Also, for those of you who don't know Steve Koonin, he and Rick Moranis were separated at birth. :)

I remember the gist of Koonin's response to an editorial I wrote when I was one of the Tech Editors. (Well, he responded to all of us because I forgot to put my signature there, but that was amended the next week.)

I recently read that per capita annual oil consumption in China is 1.6 barrels per day or less than one-tenth of that in Korea. Buy oil stocks now and sell 'em in 15 years.

For another contast, see Deffeyes (he too has a book out on the subject). His take is that peak oil happened around Thanksgiving last year. :-)

I remember seeing the nuclear option (not the Senate version...) discussed somewhere, maybe a review of Goodstein's book. As I recall, the claim was that using nuclear to generate all power now generated by fossil fuels would exhaust the planet's uranium reserves in a century or a bit less.

Another interesting renewable option is wind power. Just recently there was an article about bleeding edge techs there (can't remember if it was Physics Today or one of the science blogs - bad memory, bad!). The concept is to harness the more consistent wind streams high above the ground. Two of the technologies would go a few thousand feet up, and one would even hover at 35,000 feet, with obvious air traffic control issues to worry about.

Is solar still more expensive? I know it used to be, but I thought it was close to competitive now that oil is so much more expensive... Maybe I'm confusing the solar numbers with the Fischer-Trobsch coal gasification numbers.

I hate to say it, but emphasis on adaptation to climate change rather than prevention is probably the most realistic option. *sigh*

Obviously I too am fascinated by energy issues (have been since a physics colloquium at UCSC ~5 years ago). :-D I'll have to take a look and see if Koonin is on the Caltech physics colloquium schedule this spring.

Koonin is not slated to speak in the main Physics Research Conference this year. Isn't he spending most of his time in the UK? I think he hasn't been on campus too much.