>>80760675Ok, so what does that leave us with? I tend to think that you mean that on the macro scale we need more energy.
Oil & Fossil Fuels > no for obvious reasons, may be necessary for air/space travel for a while yet.
Nuclear (fission) > requires massive scale and biggest problems are the actual amount of uranium on earth and disposal of waste with destructive potential for 10k year scales.
Nuclear (fusion) > not yet feasible.
Wind > can't replace baseload power generation, can change weather, not feasible on large scale.
Solar > still not very efficient, but much improved. Biggest problem is that all solar cells are made from silicon wafers just like cpus, this takes tons of energy and requires massive economy of scale to barely break even. Can't replace baseload power.
Now here's where it gets a bit tinfoil-hatty:
Have you heard of M.T. Keshe? Iranian scientist who has released designs for zero-point energy generation for free. Without further investigation it seems like this is the tech that Tesla had or wanted to develop but was prevented. Is it really just there in the ether waiting for us to tap?
