Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 05:27:08 +0800
Subject: Re: The Idea of Peak Oil
From: Malcolm Riddoch <m.riddoch-AT-ecu.edu.au>



On Monday, June 7, 2004, at 12:36  AM, henry wrote:

> your sojourn through the last few weeks of
> intellectual exploitation does not appear to have required much in the
> way of recuperation.

it's perverse but I feel wrecked, insomnia has kicked in, I'm trying to  
rest and the only way I can start to do so is by writing which just  
makes me edgier still. I just get so bored of life if I don't write.

> Throughout your enlightening jeremiad, i expected two words to perch
> somewhere on the edge of the end of the post:
>
> nuclear power

Matt Simmons advised Bush on his energy policy earlier in the  
presidency and with depletion he sees everything going towards nuclear  
and coal powered generation (  
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ 
index.php?name=MATT%20SIMMONS&origin=/INTERVIEWS/MATT.SIMMONS/ 
index.php&transcript=2004/04/ 
MattSimmons.InterviewedByJulianDarley.Part-1.2004-04-15 ).

The nuclear scenario is another nightmare though as even Indonesia has  
now become a net importer of oil and gas and is apparently looking at  
nuclear alternatives. The other side of nuclear power generation is of  
course nuclear arms proliferation and the production of some of the  
most toxic and militarily dangerous waste materials known to humankind.  
That doesn't solve the transport problem though nor industrial farming.  
But as Simmons says, either you shrink as a nation or you go nuclear.  
Bush seems to have been reasonably well informed about these problems  
since at least his initial election campaign. Cheney on the other hand  
is on the public record as fully recognising the coming energy crisis  
in 1999 when he was chairman of Halliburton.

> and isn't nukuler--as our dear leader pronounces it-- truly fitting for
> the end of metaphysics, heidegger-wise?  as the soft-skinned essence of
> human existence is more and more mechanized by way of formulating all
> cultural practices into modes of human resources; as all of metaphysics
> converts to technology = nihilism = total mobilization of all beings
> toward the arbitrary ends of humanity... so, the will to power, the  
> will
> to will... mirrors somehow the physics of the interchangeability of
> energy/matter; and the poetry of power, physically, becomes the nuclear
> arrangement of our future? so an insight by heid, that the worst is not
> the bombs going off, but rather their not, and so the slow, long
> synthesis of life, energy, power, matter, existence. a long, slow,
> mutating re-shuffle of the ontic deck of ontological cards, while
> continuing to pursue... what?

Health, friends, family, happiness and a long life for all? I prefer  
the Star Trek version where the world joins together to eradicate  
poverty and overcome adversity through technological innovation. I vote  
we all go clean fusion and drive electric SUV's, and maybe Ronnie  
Raygun's aliens are still watching us waiting for some sign of  
intelligence before making friendly first contact. If we wanted to we  
could already have genetically modified flying pigs too.

Who knows what comes next? I'd say there's plenty of room for  
pessimistic optimism if only someone somewhere has the power to start  
dealing with this problem. Someone needs to inform the public and soon.

Cheers,

Malcolm



     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---