Is humanity even capable of evolving past oil?

[CmdrShep2154]

If this is true then fracking has saved America from independence on foreign oil.
https://www.realclearenergy.org/arti...ty_484409.html

But scientists has recently discovered that babies born near fracking have more health problems.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/judysto.../#20bd55cf5945

Should we evolve past oil for the sake of health?

Can we have that utopia where everyone is healthy without sacrificing modernity?


Should we lose our fear of nuclear power?

[Adamas102]

Not till I've retired, I hope.

[Mihalik]

Yes as a power source. A bit more complicated when it comes to plastics, but there are work arounds for that too.

The cost of not doing so is higher than the cost of ridding ourselves of our dependence on oil.

[PC2]

Should we evolve past oil for the sake of health?

No we should evolve past oil because other energy sources can be better and more energy dense. Oil is amazing but it's not thee greatest energy source of all time that could ever exist.

Can we have that utopia where everyone is healthy without sacrificing modernity?

Sort of, technically a utopia is a problem-free existence which is impossible. We can solve all of our current problems but doing so always creates new unintended side effects and/or externalities. So it's a never ending process of innovation -> progress -> entirely new kind of problem arises -> repeat forever.

Should we lose our fear of nuclear power?

Yes fear is an emotion, when analyzing nuclear power we should simply look at the numbers involved. Of course only the nuclear safety professionals can tell us the odds of plant failure.

[Ihavewaffles]

Just had a thought, if there was life on Mars, there should be lots of oil n gas there now!

[PC2]

Just had a thought, if there was life on Mars, there should be lots of oil n gas there now!

That would jumpstart the colonization of Mars but it'd still only be a matter of time before a superior energy source is needed.

[Poe]

That would jumpstart the colonization of Mars but it'd still only be a matter of time before a superior energy source is needed.

Unless there is a major abundance of life in the oceans underneath the ice of Europa and Enceladus in addition to life on Mars. And if there is life on those 3 bodies alone, the chances of life elsewhere skyrockets to the point where all resources can just be spent searching for life elsewhere.

[PC2]

Unless there is a major abundance of life in the oceans underneath the ice of Europa and Enceladus in addition to life on Mars. And if there is life on those 3 bodies alone, the chances of life elsewhere skyrockets to the point where all resources can just be spent searching for life elsewhere.

Hmm i'm currently skeptical of there being other life in the solar system and galaxy but it would be interesting to see what we can learn from them. Maybe evolution has given them some unique adaptations and compounds we could learn from. And maybe those planets have some organism like a horse or a dog that could become man's new best friend.

[Xarkan]

Hmm i'm currently skeptical of there being other life in the solar system and galaxy but it would be interesting to see what we can learn from them. Maybe evolution has given them some unique adaptations and compounds we could learn from. And maybe those planets have some organism like a horse or a dog that could become man's new best friend.

There should be life on Mars.. we brought it there

[PC2]

There should be life on Mars.. we brought it there

Right lol but we're mainly interested in what 'new' life, adaptations, and activities may exist there. So unless those passenger organisms have mutated then I doubt we'll get to study any interesting lifeforms on Mars.

[tromage2]

Once i saw this i thought with1 the next 100 years energy will not be an issue at all anymore when we can get it from the atmospher.
Ofc it will take alot of inventions to really get good energy out of it.

But in the near future molten salt reactors are the way to go, i dont get why they go full for solar and wind energy sources, in 10-20 years we will get alot of problem with them when their lifespam is up. molten salt reactor is safe and the nuclear waste keep active only 300 years why governments all around the world are not spending money to push the molten salt reactor forward is so wierd in my eyes. Current day nuclear power is negative because the waste is active for 10.000 years when you can push that toward 300 then what negatives are left?

[Temp name]

Yes. Definitely.
For electricity, we already have wind, solar, hydro, and nuclear. We're fine. Storage can be taken care of with 2 lakes with a hydro power plant in between (already proven to work)
For transportation we have electric cars, and hydrogen cars both looking fairly solid. Boats have nuclear options for large ones, and electric for small ones. Air travel would be a problem, but we likely aren't too far from a solution to that. Maybe 50 years at most?
Plastics? There isn't really any technology that requires plastic (I think?), it's just a cheap building material. This is likely the biggest thing that would completely stop us, but we can always go back to making things out of wood and metal. Or just make plastic from other things than oil.

Yes fear is an emotion, when analyzing nuclear power we should simply look at the numbers involved. Of course only the nuclear safety professionals can tell us the odds of plant failure.

Considering we've only had 2 large scale failures.. I'd say quite small. The dangers of what happens when they fail is another thing though. But that said, I still think we should use nuclear more. Even the other large problem, permanent storage, isn't that hard (conceptually). Mine out a mountain and be done with it. A hundred or so meters of solid rock should stop any left over radiation.

[Stormdash]

Once energy is, but other than nuclear power, petroleum is the evolution from most of the predictable suggestions to replace it.

[unbound]

Can we evolve past using oil? lol...of course we can. The real question is whether we have the will. Did you know that solar power is actually cheaper in many countries than fossil fuels? Fossil fuel industries have a massive amount of money, and, thus, have a major interest in keeping that money coming in. It is easier and generally cheaper to use existing processes, so they thrive with that old technology.

And they have found that spending a few tens of millions on advertising and funding think tanks is well worth it to keep that money rolling in. Hence, you see articles casting doubts on the benefits of the new technology and doubts on the problems of the old technology. And, looking around, it seems to work pretty well...a good chunk of people buy the BS, and another good chunk have doubts because of the fossil fuel industry PR.

So, yes, we can evolve past, but we lack the will because the obscenely wealthy wish to remain obscenely wealthy, and they really don't care who is hurt in the process (as long as it isn't them or their families).

Should we lose our fear of nuclear power? Not completely. While at this time it is an important tool to leverage, we shouldn't look to embrace nuclear power long term. The waste is more than just the nuclear fuel; the primary reactor components are also heavily radiated, so those who say the waste is small are ignoring all the irradiated components that will have to be dealt with anywhere from decades to hundreds of years. Nuclear power is a good solution for the near term until alternatives become efficient enough and scaled enough to replace those power plants even.

[Draco-Onis]

We will evolve past oil we kind of have to it's a finite resource.

[PC2]

We will evolve past oil we kind of have to it's a finite resource.

In the short run yeah, in the long run more could be synthesized if it was really needed. But by that time in the future there will probably be far better molecules for storing energy.

[Sunseeker]

Well I mean, we got off oil once already...whale oil that is.

We should be pushing harder, but expecting it to happen overnight is silly.

[Zan15]

LOL that site...

"Next, all this oil and gas belongs to the United States"

And yet....the only ones keeping all the profit is corporations...if they belong to the United States why do we give it away for pennies?

[cubby]

If this is true then fracking has saved America from independence on foreign oil.
https://www.realclearenergy.org/arti...ty_484409.html

But scientists has recently discovered that babies born near fracking have more health problems.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/judysto.../#20bd55cf5945

Should we evolve past oil for the sake of health?

Can we have that utopia where everyone is healthy without sacrificing modernity?


Should we lose our fear of nuclear power?

We'll be fine. At some point we'll move past oil into more nuclear power (and then fusion) while many smaller developed countries are already embracing 50%+ renewable energy, moving towards 100%. While those articles are interesting, they don't really imply a long-term threat to humanities existence just because of oil.

Now, global warming....

[Mihalik]

Just had a thought, if there was life on Mars, there should be lots of oil n gas there now!

There's a slim possibility that oil and natural gas might exist on Mars, but whether it would be abundant enough to make extraction viable is....doubtful.

On the other hand... if you want hydrocarbons...( fuel source) meet Titan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakes_of_Titan