Could you please put a link to continuation of threads in the future?

Much obliged.

quote:

---

... As recently as a decade ago, China was nearly self-sufficient in oil. Since then, its consumption has doubled, and a little over a year ago, it quietly became the world's second-largest oil importer, overtaking Japan but still lagging the United States.

India, just a bit behind its larger Asian neighbor, has doubled its oil consumption since 1992. ...

If China and India raise their per-capita oil consumption over the next few decades to even half the American level, those two countries alone would consume 100 million barrels of oil per day....

---

But there is always hope.

quote:

---

...BEIJIGN, Jan.12 -- Energy guzzlers China and India are often blamed for some of the world's environmental problems, but a new study says the two most populous nations may well set the stage for a clean and green Earth. ...

---

quote:

---

..If the economies of China and India continue to grow at their current rate, the world will not be able to produce enough oil to meet demand by 2050, when consumption will have grown from the current 85 million barrels a day to 200 million barrels.
“Few geologists believe that output will reach even half those levels before beginning to decline,” says the report...

---

http://www.thedailyjournalonline.com/article.asp?ArticleId=216805&CategoryId=12395

[ 21 January 2006: Message edited by: VanLuke ]

I've long thought that the Chinese would not be so foolish as to pattern their economy after the western world, but I'm not so sure any more.

Perhaps they won't fully go down the road we have but at this point it seems that only the invisible hand of commodity shortages is holding them back. Prices escalate and they hold back. The intent seems to be there, however, to go full steam ahead.

No sign whatsoever, eh Michael?

Transportation isn't every thing

edited to add:

That is about 40 Chinese per building where water is heated with the sun. Dividing Canadian population by 40 it would result in 825,000 buildings.

Wouldn't it be a nice beginning if we had 825,000 buildings with solar water heaters?

I'm not claiming the above is scientific or statistically justified but as a rough indicator it will surely do.

[ 22 January 2006: Message edited by: VanLuke ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by VanLuke:
" China's world leading solar-power industry already provides water heating for 35 million buildings"

---

I had the good fortune to vacation (some years ago) on Rarotonga, which is an island atoll in the South Pacific. All fuel has to be shipped in, which is expensive. Consequently, every house, and I mean every, has a large stainless steel water tank on the roof. No one goes short of hot water.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nanuq:
It's not as if there are any viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine yet. China and India can only advance as far as available technology allows. They may be in a good position to set up an infrastructure to service hydrogen fuel cells cars if and when they become practical but they're not there yet.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Watkins:
I'm not so sure we can trust the Chinese stats, but here's the thing - transportation isn't everything, but it consumes most of the energy produced on the planet. We have to get a handle on transport or we are doomed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cougyr:

I had the good fortune to vacation (some years ago) on Rarotonga, which is an island atoll in the South Pacific. All fuel has to be shipped in, which is expensive. Consequently, every house, and I mean every, has a large stainless steel water tank on the roof. No one goes short of hot water.

Most of the American South could use this
technology, but the home owner doesn't want an unsightly tank on his roof. One needs to be south of the frost line, or drain it in winter. Still, the sun heats it for nothing.

---

You may already know of this but if not google "off griders" or something like this. People in California started it (hippies I guess at first) and it was before the meter could be turned back with ones own electricity. But there are some exciting things that happened there and probably still do.

Lucky guy visiting the South Pacific!

If I *was* a jealous person .....

quote:

---

Originally posted by arborman:
[QB]

Actually, trains have been viable for about 200 years.

---

And China is (with the help of foreign investment) in the forefront of this too with a Magnetic Levitation line being built (or already finished).

I don't know if it's very energy efficient. But I thought it interesting enough to mention it here.

My guess would be that it takes a lot of energy to lift a big train off the tracks. But I'm not a scientist and don't really know.

In any case, IMO energy is but one criterion.

[ 25 January 2006: Message edited by: VanLuke ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by arborman:
Actually, trains have been viable for about 200 years. It's just that we subsidize our oil, truck and car industries so much that trains can't compete.

---

Also a business management style that has been enabled by computerization and logistics planning ... just in time delivery.

Its quite a tide to fight; trucking and logistics is a big sub-industry feeding the industrial consumers of materials and goods. Its harder to achieve the incremental productivity gains achieved with JIT delivery and manufacturing with a mostly rail transport.