Your Questions About Renewable Energy Group
What do you think of this scenario for a Sci-Fi movie?
It’s 2507, and a small group of civilized, attractive, ethnically-diverse people are holed up over a coal mine in Antarctica, the very last fossil fuels on the Earth. They’re holding off barbarian hordes, and when their stronghold falls, it will be the end of civilization.
“Oh what will we do?” they ask their supercomputer. “Oh why didn’t mankind begin developing renewable energy resources back in the 21st century?”
The supercomputer suggests a plan: they will build a time machine, and use it to send a robot back in time. Being old movie buffs, they make the robot look exactly like Arnold Schwartznegger. The robot is built and sent back to 1990, and arrives in the high-security area of a government lab. At first, the guards think it’s an attack, but they hit the robot with everything they’ve got (lots of attractive explosions, etc.) and nothing can touch it. Eventually the robot convinces some scientists that it’s from the future.
The robot calls a secret conference of top scientists, politicians, and religious leaders. Basically, these guys:
The robot pleads for world leaders to begin developing renewable resources. “The people won’t go for it” says the governor of Texas, “we can’t make it happen.”
“Wait a minute” says James Hansen, one of the climate scientists. What if we faked the data, to make it look as if fossil fuels were destroying the Earth’s climate by making it too hot?”
“But we know that the Earth’s climate is just natural cycles” says Michael Mann, “we’ll never be able to get anyone to believe that the tiny contribution of human CO2 could possibly affect the whole world’s climate!”
But Naomi Oreskes says “We could fake all the refereed literature on climate. We have control of all the journals, we can just make up anything we like!”
Richard Lindzen says “But you have to have a little controversy, so it doesn’t look fake!”
And so the great global warming hoax is born. The world leaders enslave the common people of the world by depriving them of fossil fuels. But in the end, it’s worth it.
Back to 2507: The whole future changes. The barbarian hordes disappear, and our beautiful civilized human find themselves in a paradise of plentiful renewable resources.
Ruel the Midianite: the people need to be enslaved for dramatic tension—otherwise the ending is too happy. Maybe the time period could be made 1000 years (of tribulation followed by Earthly paradise)—always good to get in some pseudo-Biblical allusion.
The real Arnold is detained by security forces and sent to a Spa/Gym, and spends the rest of his life lifting. The robot replaces him, and nobody notices. The robot winds down his movie career with increasingly silly movies and then becomes Govenor of California. The people of California are the first to be enslaved.
The secret conference is actually held 5 years after the robot appears, so Bush is governor of Texas. Inhofe is not invited, by mistake, and eventually succumbs to apoplexy.
You have either read too much scifi…or my guess, not nearly enough. Read some Heinlein, I think one of his stories was ver similar to what you propose.
Help with renewable energy resources in France?
I’ve been set a task to find out about renewable energy in France. What do they use most, how long have they been using it for? Stuff like that. Thanks! 🙂
Use different search engines and different search criteria, each engine has a different algorythm that will produce more of fewer results.
France does use about 75 to 80 percent nuclear power to produce electricity. This has been a statistic that some pro nuclear groups use to try support how safe it is- but no mention of the protests and riots over the waste storage. When was the last time you heard about the fiasco over Germany’s own plans for nuclear waste disposal? And they have a vocal opposition to it as well, and you virtually never hear of it.
I am opposed to nuclear energy myself, Chernobyl saw to that. But short of a failure of equipment on that scale, the US “news media” is heavily filtered and censored, you would never hear of the smaller accidents that happen. And that is what the Pro-nuclear lobby groups are trying to capitalize on. It has been about a generation since that accident, so what else can we expect?
You might get some additional information indirectly, refocus on EU and European Union, those statistics might be more readily found, and would be broken down by member country. Also search the UN website as they sometimes collect that data. Http://www.un.org
Powered by Yahoo! Answers