Dear Editor,
I write today to say that something is really wrong. Not only in our actions, but also in that which we do not do for the sake of corporate well being.
For as long as I have lived, human beings have relied on oil and coal to provide the necessary energy to fuel our ever increasing needs as a society. We have always been told that the solution to our energy problems is in forward thinking, innovation and a lower carbon footprint.
I am talking about energy production - cheap energy production. If our governments are really worried about global warming, we would have water wheels, wind turbines and solar energy panels scattered all over.
Yes, many of you say it takes time and money - I agree, but when that becomes the excuse for trashing every eco-friendly initiative to come across the table - only to turn BACK towards fossil fuels boggles my mind no end. In terms of the infrastructure for fossil fuels, we are, no doubt, saturated, there is a petrol station pretty much every five kilometres in towns and cities.
What I am saying is this, in the past, money making endeavours such as the use of fossil fuel have been preferred to systems using less energy (that produce less profit). Which is fine, we needed to advance technologically to get to where we are today and we could never have done that without energy.
But when things like the Falkirk wheel pops up, I turn cold, knowing we have the technological capabilities to create vast amounts of energy, using simple theories such as Pythagoras' - but fail to do so because corporate can't make a high profit.
The Falkirk wheel - a type of boat lift in Falkirk - is able to lift 302 tons. It takes just 22.5 kilowatts to power the electric motors, which consume just 1.5 kilowatt-hours of energy in four minutes, roughly the same as boiling eight kettles of water.
Most will know that if you slap a couple of magnets on a circular disc and cause the disc to rotate around metal - you get energy. It's no secret it really does work, how else do you think they got those nifty little shake torches to work?
I am no rocket scientist or engineer and I may be missing something here but from my perspective, a combination of the two technologies described above would provide ample energy.
Does anyone want to tell me why a non-engineering/physicist has thought about this before any actual physicists and scientists?
I smell money, and it's eating away at ingenuity.
Craig
Get published on MyNews24 by sending your letter, story or column to us.
Send us your news photos
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on MyNews24 have been independently written by members of News24's community. The views of users published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24. News24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
- News24
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on MyNews24 have been independently written by members of News24's community. The views of users published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24. News24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.