Australia | The results of all in for Net-Zero
-
- Posts: 196
- Joined: 28 Sep 2024 23:04
Re: Australia | The results of all in for Net-Zero
Am I way off to think that it's more apparent that a nonzero sum of the climate push is an excuse to transfer established energy channels to heavy use (still dream) industries around things like AI or robotics or space exploration.
Re: Australia | The results of all in for Net-Zero
AI requires massive data centres powered by a uninterrupted supply of energy.NapLajoieOnSteroids wrote: ↑11 Dec 2024 09:10 Am I way off to think that it's more apparent that a nonzero sum of the climate push is an excuse to transfer established energy channels to heavy use (still dream) industries around things like AI or robotics or space exploration.
Google tried wind and solar and found it too intermittent - unreliable.
Google, Meta [Facebook], and Microsoft are all investing nuclear power for their data centres.
One of them, don't recall which, is investing in a new massive natural gas power station in Louisiana.
Robots also require an uninterrupted source of electrical power, unlike humans.
Given that are no nearby easily inhabitable earth-like planets, not clear to me what is the connection with space exploration.
Also, to-date, all rockets are powered by chemical reactions.
-
- Posts: 196
- Joined: 28 Sep 2024 23:04
Re: Australia | The results of all in for Net-Zero
It was lazy shorthand on my part but I was thinking of the outcome of additional manufacturing and transportation of materials on this planet from under the umbrella of "space exploration" down the road.
The point is that the soon-to-be-realized or speculative technologies of tomorrow [immediately scaled up too] require an enormous quantity of energy at very consistent rates and the consensus would be that those capable of producing the imagined future will need to limit the energy usage of the general public to attain their goals.
edit: I should emphasize that while one could dismiss it as conspiratorial, it need not be read as such. As always, political solutions attract a set of mixed rationalizations & motives from the actors.
What the energy bill will cost for my own robot butler creates a predisposition that to these eyes seems more clearly now than even 2 decades ago.
The point is that the soon-to-be-realized or speculative technologies of tomorrow [immediately scaled up too] require an enormous quantity of energy at very consistent rates and the consensus would be that those capable of producing the imagined future will need to limit the energy usage of the general public to attain their goals.
edit: I should emphasize that while one could dismiss it as conspiratorial, it need not be read as such. As always, political solutions attract a set of mixed rationalizations & motives from the actors.
What the energy bill will cost for my own robot butler creates a predisposition that to these eyes seems more clearly now than even 2 decades ago.