Quote:
But it all really boils down to proportionality, with profit margins on one side and risk on the other.
Risk has now become a battle between technology and Peak Oil related issues.
The planet has finite Fossil Fuels left, and those remaining resources will become cost-ineffective to get out of the ground well before we physically run out. Humanity had been given a ration of usable energy to do whatever it wanted...and we partied.
This issue can now be related back to exploration of space. Going into space and especially long duration isn't about the vehicle and the crew, it's about 'Establishment'. The Apollo program employed 450,000 people and the industry surrounding it consumes energy. In the movie/doco 'Collapse' Michael Ruppert believes that we have run out of time to come up with new energy resources sufficiently capable of replacing fossil fuels...and the key words here are "sufficiently capable of replacing". He believes we will hit 'Peak Oil' well before industry can find new solutions, tool-up for the technology and convert across.
|
I agree that risk management between profit and loss is consistent with any enterprise.
As far as space exploration is concerned, unless the equipment is safe then it is unlikely that establishment will be a reality. You have to transport your resources safely and intact. The end doesn't justify the means where human life is concerned, and in the long run it's inefficient. The reason oil companies get away with it is because the money involved is enormous and they will not pay their share of the clean-up.
I think it's a matter of accepting sustainability over ever increasing profits. Personally, I'm not convinced by the arguments or fear mongering concerning our fuel resources. High end oil simply means short term profits to sustain and appease the shareholders until someone else steps up to take the heat. I think the global warming argument has shown us the corrupt agendas at work by the use of evidence that was known to be suspect.