Re: [Swprograms] The cutting of radio before when we may actually needit the most

[Joe Buch <joseph.buch@xxxxxxx>]

At 06:07 AM 1/4/05 -0800, Kevin Anderson wrote:
>
>[In short, anticipate oil and petroleum products to get very
>expensive quickly and less available, followed quickly by
>natural gas, with the production of electricity to become
>unstable with blackouts, problems with transportation and other
>production, particulary food production (as food production =
>oil these days) and in short a major change in how life as we
>know won't be able to continue, including major loss of life
>everywhere as we need to adjust back closer to the carrying
>capacity of the earth without petroleum and technology.]
>
>The point of my post now (hence the title) is that this is a
>future where, if we want global news, we will need to rely on
>radio and not the computer or internet.  The simpler technology
>will be what survives and is maintainable.  I just hope the
>major international broadcasters will be able to step back up to
>the plate, refurbish transmitters (senders) and antenna arrays,
>and give us the news we will need.
>

There is a theory that so called fossil fuels are actually not the product of dead dinosaurs but rather the result of chemical processes happening under extremely high heat many miles below the surface of the earth.  We only find the stuff when it oozes to the surface through fissures in the earth's crust.  The theory mostly belongs to Thomas Gold, a Cornell University Astrophysicist who also happens to be the first guy to figure out how pulsars work.  So, if correct, the earth is continuously making more "fossil fuel".  Gold first published his ideas in a series of papers beginning in 1979.  I first ran across the theory in the February 1986 issue of The Atlantic in an article by David Osborne entitled "The Origin of Petroleum".  See if you can find a copy.  It may brighten your outlook on the future.

Here is a similar paper written more recently by Thomas Gold for those interested in delving further into this theory:

<http://people.cornell.edu/pages/tg21/usgs.html>

For the sake of this discussion, I will assume your dire prediction is actually going to happen.  The first question then arises - why would anyone want to listen to the news in such a dark world as you paint?  I will also ignore that question by assuming that we would be so hungry for good news that we would still listen to news on the radio or TV.  But I fail to see how thousands of high-powered radio and TV transmitters, each consuming hundreds kilowatts of scarce electrical energy, are the answer to your hypothesized doomsday.

I would like to suggest a truly eco-friendly technology to spread the word worldwide.  Satellite uplink stations, even at power levels associated with TV transmission and low gain satellite receive antennas, consume less than 10 kW with a 10 meter dish at C-Band.  Voice transmissions using simple SCPC analog signals can be uplinked with powers measured in watts depending on the uplink antenna size.  Satellites themselves only consume energy from earth during the manufacturing and launch phases.  Satellites have reliably used solar power for almost half a century.  Solid-state satellite radios can be easily powered by solar cells or windmills which charge a battery or by hand cranks ala today's emergency SW radios.

If your energy cost prediction proves correct, shortwave, VHF, UHF broadcasting as we know it will no longer be economical because of the huge power demands of the transmitters.  A solar powered satellite communications technology will be the most energy-efficient method to send information or propaganda from the central information control authority to the masses.  I still don't think I would want to listen.


~*-.,_,.-*~'^'~*-.,_,.-*~'^'~*-.,
Joe Buch
-*~'^'~*-.,_,.-*~'^'~*-.,_,.-*~'^


_______________________________________________
Swprograms mailing list
Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms

To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to  swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.