Readers letters
Reading Paul Shipman’s letter on the definition of ‘renewable energy’ raised a bigger and deeper question in my mind, that of the validity of the fundamental laws of physics.
To say that “once energy is used that is it” seems a rather obvious statement, but what about the law of conservation of energy; energy changes form but is neither created nor destroyed? The physical world is made up of energy in physical form called matter (E=mc2). When living organisms die, the elements they contain return to the ground, becoming part of the food chain and eventually other organisms, or are exposed to the right conditions and become hydrocarbon fuels which can then be used to drive something like an internal combustion engine to generate motive or electrical power. As this recycling of earthly elements is an on-going process, and no new resources are being flown in from other galaxies, then can’t we deduce that every source of energy is renewable, it’s just a matter of timescales?
Given that we are now in the 21st century, the refining and burning of crude oil seems like a very primitive energy source. But when you think about it, if you had a large pool of what is considered the only credible energy source, you would probably also try to:
1. Get the best possible price for your product by persuading people that there is a finite quantity available, and restrict the flow to keep prices keen (the diamond strategy).
2. Use the great wealth that you have amassed from selling your precious product to buy yourself in to a position of power and then maintain the status quo.
But not even money can stand in the way of evolution, and in time the moral, ecological and financial factors surrounding the extraction and use of hydrocarbon fuels has caused a significant global request for a credible alternative to oil, which is right around the corner. And just as the steam engine was replaced, the oil age is entering its twilight years.
Interestingly, alternatives energy sources to oil do exist, but are typically shunned by the engineering community. Engineers are almost as bad as scientists when it comes to living in the past. They cling so hard to the ‘immutable laws’ as though our understanding of life and how it works might never move on from our earliest understanding, and discredit novel inventions.
Once upon a time people thought that the earth was flat, because that was all that they could fathom, and as far as they were concerned the earth was flat. We are still very much living on a flat earth technologically speaking, pumping prime cost liquefied dinosaurs into our petrol tanks. What we need is a step change in thinking. Until we can see beyond the end of our noses, we will not realise the value of novel energy technologies and move forward into the next chapter.
Andrew Goodman, London
Next letter: Not with my battery!