Korean Job Discussion Forums

[dbee]

Question: How many of the planet's 12 most dangerous doomsday scenarios are related to energy production ?

Answer: All 12.

* Global Warming ( Flooding, Extreme Weather, Ice Age).
* War in the middle east / Nuclear War.
* Environmental catastrophy ( Oil spills, Ground water pollution).
* Ecosystem devastation.
* CFC's ( Ozone Layer Depletion / Radiation ).
* Global economic meltdown.
* Human Rights Abuses / Terrorism.
* Endemic poverty, disease and lack of basic infrastructure in third world nations.
* Nuclear waste contamination of our seas and water supply.
* Food production / farming collapse.
* Extinction of mankind.

Is there an easy fix ? Well, yes actually there is. Does anyone remember the moon landing back in '69 ? It turns out that they may (or may not have) have forgotten to bring back the most important souvenir that mankind would have ever acquired.

The moon contains in abundance a compound called 3He (Helium-3). It can't be found anywhere on earth, but can be found on the moon and on other more distant planets.

3He is the missing element in the holy grail that is cold fusion. Before anyone guffaws at the idea of cold fusion again. Let it be known that world scientists and experts agree that not only is cold fusion possible, but that we already know exactly how it works and exactly how to use it.

All mankind has to do to save itself and the planet from certain extinction is to bring back from the moon a relatively small amount of 3He. Not only would this save the planet, but we'd also enjoy free, clean energy. A shuttle bay full of He3 could power the US electricity grid for one year with zero carbon emissions and for very little cost.

How difficult could it be to go back to the moon ? Not very. The moon landing in '69 was completed successfully with the most basic of technology. A simple home computer would contain more processing power than a space engineer could have even dreamed about at the start of the computer age. The goal back then was to land men safely on the moon and bring them back alive.

Our second mission to the moon would be alot easier as it wouldn't require any life support systems or manned shuttles.

The idea of rocket/space engineers coming together and using new and old technology to return to the moon and gather He3 to be used in fusion reactors to produce clean energy is an essential one that may save the planet.

It begs the question though, as to what NASA and the other space agencies have been up to for the past 40 years or so. I'm entirely convinced that they must have brought back enough of this compound to at least test it in theory. Right after the moon landing ( early 70's ), scientists stated convincingly that cold fusion was on the way - in at most 30 years. We seem to have gotten diverted from the path since then though for some as yet unexplained reason. The intervening years have brought oil wars, oil embargos, failed middle eastern states, terrorism and the Bush family.

It does make one wonder what the relationship between NASA, the US government and the oil companies might be and why NASA in particular have poured billions into failed science that does nothing to help the planet earth. Perhaps NASA has another planet that their planning on moving to when this one reaches breaking point over the next few years ?

NASA have plans to terraform Mars, but haven't bothered to deal with desertification along the earth's equator. NASA have no plans to harvest He3 and are currently looking to return to the moon in 2018 to set up outposts for further space exploration etc... Other agencies such as the European Space Agency (ESA) are currently working on other projects to their own folly.

Personally, I hope that there's still a living planet earth to return to by then. I'd take a (reasonably) educated guess and say that we should be able to reach the moon again in a reusable shuttle in ( at most ) 2 years for very little real cost. The result of which means that we should have an in-exhaustable energy supply in 3 years or so if we put our heads together.

We need to start talking about why this isn't happening. We need to start putting pressure on our 'leaders' to quit wasting what precious time we have left with celebrity appearances and other non-issues. If they're not going to do anything to save the planet then it will be up to us to force their hand or alternatively - to do it ourselves. We need a great leader such as Kennedy to stand up and make the pledge to return to a mission from the moon in 2 years and to bring back the materials needed to save the planet.

The energy revolution starts today. I'm personally going to tell 3 people - starting from today - about how harvesting Helium 3 on the moon will save the planet earth. If enough people tell 3 other people, then the whole world will know in a short period of time. If we start soon enough and with enough vigor - we might actually have a planet left to hand on to our children.

The only question I'd like to ask the president of the United States is why he isn't working on this issue everyday to save the planet ? Same goes for the Russian, European and Chinese presidents. Which of these leaders wishes to be the greatest president of all time ? Which of them will stand in our way if we demand a solution from our space agencies and scientists ?

I'm going to be a hero today and I'm going to try to save the planet. Anyone else want to help ?

http://www.anthonares.net/2006/01/nuclear-fusion-energy-where-are-we-now.html

[Snake Doctor]

We all gotta die someday.

[furtakk]

i will be the first to sign up to be a miner on the moon.

[Snake Doctor]

[OnTheOtherSide]

Let humanity destroy itself, don't cling to it.

[benji]

You forgot asteroid collision and Martian invasion on your doomsday scenario list.

[AgDragon01]

You really think that free energy will prevent human rights violations?

I'm reminded of the thinkers that believed that human flight would herald an age of human peace - if flight was widely available humans would experience a realization that from above, there are no borders, there are no dividers and humanity would finally understand that war was useless, in a magical shower of happy sparkles and smurfs.

Needless to say, that didn't happened, the exact opposite occurred - the new technology was used to wage war in an even more effective manner.

The same argument can be made from statistics of hunger and food abundance - we have the enough food to feed the world, yet still, hunger abounds.

[fruitcake]

can't this wait til tmr?