: : : Today the computer industry is based on silicone, sand, and a healthy dose of human capital; imagination, initiative, and risk taking.
: : Wrong. It's based ultimately on power. Electricity. Without it, there is no power to make injection-moulded bits of plastic; no power to light up cathode-ray tubes; no power to power the telephone lines.
: : Take the combustion of biomass away and you've got a big and complicated paperweight.
Note: Frenchy makes no attempt to actually debate the points I've raised. Can I take that as tacit acceptance that I am actually correct in my points, Frenchy?
: Hold on...what about nukes? France is powered to the tune of 80% by good ol' nuclear power. Yeah, that sounds like a win/win.
No it doesn't. Do you have any idea of how much damage a meltdown can do?
Nuclear power stations need a) a lot of energy used to produce fuel, b) a very very thorough safety procedure and c) produce waste that hangs around pretty much forever.
The seagulls around the THORP plant in Sellafield are now officially classified as 'radioactive waste'; the mildly radioactive coolant water used in the power station flows straight out to sea and collects in the biosphere; mainly in protozoa, who are eaten by fish, who are eaten by seagulls.
And the Irish Sea is now officially a nuclear disaster area according to concentration of Tc-99; which is 40 times the recommended maximum, thanks to nuclear power.
It takes someone with the brains of Homer Simpson to believe that nuclear power is a real, sustainable solution.
And as soon as someone tries to maximise profit by cutting corners on safety, *foom*; and you can kiss goodbye to a couple of hundred square miles of arable land.
There is ultimately no techno-fix; the only real solution is to moderate consumption.
Now, are you going to try and argue my points, or are you just going to cover up your ignominious retreat with a few cheap jibes?