|
Well, I think it's sufficient to say a few things:
1. We have to do something. I don't think the current models are perfect by a longshot, and I think it's a pretty good bet that they will be outfazed within 10 years. However, that's the problem with any early adopter market. Thought you were slick with that bag phone, or that beta movie cassette, or that 8-track? Well suck it brother. But the basic concept of making portable communication and media devices has caught on big. Same thing with a lot of technologies - it's going to take time to get it to be more-or-less acceptable, and yes I think we're behind the ball. Then again, a majority of people still believe in and conduct themselves in what I would consider to be pretty archaic fashions, so I don't think it's much of a surprise. People en masse don't do shit until they have to, or it's incredibly profitable, or conversely incredibly easy.
1.a. I do think the current models are useful for those that can afford them, because we can learn from what doesn't work as a scientific and engineering community.
1.b. I think that people need to stop seeing their cars as imaginary metal dicks, and more as a tool. I've got a little thing in my toolbag (that I affectionately call my Whammy Bar) that can rip out dry wall, pull nails, split wood, and pry out most things I have a need to around the house. It's ugly as a motherfucker, but it gets the job done. I don't care if it's pretty.
2. Most technologies currently considered as viable alternatives for energy production and storage in the future are not viable right now. Pick one. I can tell you reasons it won't work right now. I can also point to cases where it's coming along, and where research needs to be conducted to get to the next step. But there is hope. Batteries are interesting because we know that they work in many cases right now, and there is something of a production and distribution setup to whip them out. Hydrogen is interesting because it has the "potential" to be clean, and the current storage capacities (albeit of fairly exotic materials) are better than those of batteries. Ethanol/bio is interesting because the materials aren't necessarily exotic, and they directly harness our only real original power source: the sun.
3. Nuclear is a different animal: it's a source, not a carrier. Given the issues with radiation/health, and the safety concerns, I don't really see active nuclear as an instantaneous source/carrier anytime soon - but as a source that we might be able to implement with reasonable energy production, and then transfer the energy to another carrier - it's worth looking at. Of course, all of these technologies run into a little problem when you consider projected energy demands versus potential for production/actual resources available; the time to put these technologies in place and the investment required to get them there.
So we continue to do research - but the field is very fractured. This is because there is no clear winner at this point. Therefore, I think that implementing and testing these electric/hybrid technologies is a positive step - even if it proves to be incorrect in hindsight. The more people concentrate on shifting their consciousness and expectations, the better off we will be. Just remember: we are in an early adopter market - so the first things that come out are almost destined to be dinosaurs in 10-20 years.
__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style
|