Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Water

Those Who Control Oil and Water Will Control the World

By John Gray, Comment Is Free. Posted April 7, 2008.


New superpowers are competing for diminishing resources. The outcome could be deadly.
Advertisement

History may not repeat itself, but, as Mark Twain observed, it can sometimes rhyme. The crises and conflicts of the past recur, recognisably similar even when altered by new conditions. At present, a race for the world's resources is underway that resembles the Great Game that was played in the decades leading up to the First World War. Now, as then, the most coveted prize is oil and the risk is that as the contest heats up it will not always be peaceful. But this is no simple rerun of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Today, there are powerful new players and it is not only oil that is at stake.

It was Rudyard Kipling who brought the idea of the Great Game into the public mind in Kim, his cloak-and-dagger novel of espionage and imperial geopolitics in the time of the Raj. Then, the main players were Britain and Russia and the object of the game was control of central Asia's oil. Now, Britain hardly matters and India and China, which were subjugated countries during the last round of the game, have emerged as key players. The struggle is no longer focused mainly on central Asian oil. It stretches from the Persian Gulf to Africa, Latin America, even the polar caps, and it is also a struggle for water and depleting supplies of vital minerals. Above all, global warming is increasing the scarcity of natural resources. The Great Game that is afoot today is more intractable and more dangerous than the last.

The biggest new player in the game is China and it is there that the emerging pattern is clearest. China's rulers have staked everything on economic growth. Without improving living standards, there would be large-scale unrest, which could pose a threat to their power. Moreover, China is in the middle of the largest and fastest move from the countryside to the city in history, a process that cannot be stopped.

There is no alternative to continuing growth, but it comes with deadly side-effects. Overused in industry and agriculture, and under threat from the retreat of the Himalayan glaciers, water is becoming a non-renewable resource. Two-thirds of China's cities face shortages, while deserts are eating up arable land. Breakneck industrialisation is worsening this environmental breakdown, as many more power plants are being built and run on high-polluting coal that accelerates global warming. There is a vicious circle at work here and not only in China. Because ongoing growth requires massive inputs of energy and minerals, Chinese companies are scouring the world for supplies. The result is unstoppable rising demand for resources that are unalterably finite.

Although oil reserves may not have peaked in any literal sense, the days when conventional oil was cheap have gone forever. Countries are reacting by trying to secure the remaining reserves, not least those that are being opened up by climate change. Canada is building bases to counter Russian claims on the melting Arctic icecap, parts of which are also claimed by Norway, Denmark and the US. Britain is staking out claims on areas around the South Pole.

The scramble for energy is shaping many of the conflicts we can expect in the present century. The danger is not just another oil shock that impacts on industrial production, but a threat of famine. Without a drip feed of petroleum to highly mechanised farms, many of the food shelves in the supermarkets would be empty. Far from the world weaning itself off oil, it is more addicted to the stuff than ever. It is hardly surprising that powerful states are gearing up to seize their share.

This new round of the Great Game did not start yesterday. It began with the last big conflict of the 20th century, which was an oil war and nothing else. No one pretended the first Gulf War was fought to combat terrorism or spread democracy. As George Bush Snr and John Major admitted at the time, it was aimed at securing global oil supplies, pure and simple. Despite the denials of a less honest generation of politicians, there can be no doubt that controlling the country's oil was one of the objectives of the later invasion of Iraq.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: oil, water, water scarcity, water shortage, resource wars

John Gray is author of Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia, published by Allen Lane in paperback on 24 April.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Water! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Oceans and sunlight will likely lead to enough distilled water.
Posted by: aouie01 on Apr 7, 2008 12:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hopefully sooner rather than later almost all the coastal cities will get enough distilled water from the oceans to leave more inland water resources for all the animals in the wild that rely on those sources. Wonder if much like the Great Salt March led by Mohandas Gandhi, people will have to have a Great Water March to the oceans to distill our own water using rudimentary equipment, before "big money" is stopped from capitalizing on water at great cost to the planet and its inhabitants.

Sincerely,
Aouie

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Apr 7, 2008 2:23 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who decides how to allocate resources?

We do


Direct Democracy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

TS Eliot where are you?
Posted by: talkville on Apr 7, 2008 2:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"There is no alternative to continuing growth..." What can this mean??

The assaults on Latin America, once again beginning; the assault on Africa, never really ended. The US led IMF WTO assault on just about every majority-world country in raiding state assets and resources and privatizing them all (which include land, water, air-space, and mineral holdings) in this rapidly progressing Wasteland called Earth simply cannot either ecologically, economically or humanly continue under this thoroughly ideologized blob-word called 'growth'. Alternatives exist, just as several different meanings and senses are available when referring to 'growth'; and lest we forget: sometimes allowing the atrophy of certain things and ways of thinking can do marvels for saner 'games' as well as for sanity.

Let's not forget: The Club for Growth is a VERY exclusive one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Growth (as in cancer)! Posted by: Cathyc
When in the past has the U.S.
Posted by: drfun on Apr 7, 2008 2:59 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
co-operated in sharing resources? Why should it expect that developing country's limit growth in order for mutual use of remaining supplies?
The U.S. has been boasting about free enterprise and free markets, but when no-one wants the $ anymore America cries foul.
It's a cruel world out there and the U.S. deserves what is about to have inflicted upon it, with all the mis-guided imperialistic cockamamie shenanigans past administrations have done throughout the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are obvious limits to growth ON EARTH.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Apr 7, 2008 4:21 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Disclaimer: I own stock in Liftport, the space elevator company
[www.liftport.com] and in Spacedev [www.spacedev.com], which was intended to
be an asteroid mining company.

Our solar system as a whole can support at least 10 times as many of us as the
earth alone can. It is just that at least 90% of them have to be someplace other
that Earth. As soon as we invent a way to make carbon nanotubes both long and
strong, we will be able to build the space elevator. A space elevator is like a
vertical railroad. Once we have space elevators, we can spread out into wide open
Space. The only sources of energy out there are solar and nuclear. Solar doesn't
work when you get as far from the sun as Jupiter is.

The Club of Romeand Thomas Malthus are "inside the 'box'", or
stuck on earth, thinkers. See http://www.liftport.com. The Space Elevator will
allow us to move into space in a big way. We might have to have a rule like: "If
you want to have more than one child, you have to move to Mars first". We need
colonies in space as a hedge against disasters on earth, such as giant asteroid
impacts, ecological collapse, super-wars, etc. anyway.

Space and the resources in space may as well be infinite. The sun always shines
on structures orbiting the sun. There are billions of other solar systems in this
galaxy alone that we could inhabit or infect. Let's have a positive attitude and
some creativity!

Space, the high and infinite frontier, is a new frontier and we HAVE to go there.
We can expand almost forever, or at least for millions of years, if we colonize our
whole galaxy. There is no moral dilemma and no environmental dilemma in
expanding into space. Take a look at the "Cosmological Forecast" at
jetpress.org/volume12/CosmologicalForecast.htm.
According to the Cosmological Forecast, for every century we delay the onset of
Galactic colonization, there will be 5 times 10 exponent 46 fewer human lifetimes
between now and the time the galaxy dies. That is 5 followed by 46 "0"s. Our
population explosion may be allowed to continue as long as it happens in space,
not on earth. [If we build a Dyson Sphere, the multiple for the solar system alone
is much larger.] Once we have filled the solar system, we can move on to the
Centauri Cluster. We should even take enough people off of the earth to reduce
the population of earth. Note that evolution will occur. Space is a harsh place
where stupidity will be rewarded with instant death.

Check out http://lifeboat.com. Some of us are working on surviving in space
while the rest of you undergo your ecological disaster. We can repopulate earth
much later.

We have to colonize space for another reason. In only 33,000 years, Proxima
Centauri, a red dwarf star, will enter our Oort Cloud, causing a period of "Heavy
Bombardment." Earth will be struck by giant impactors like the one that killed the
dinosaurs unless we humans are out there preventing it. We are the only possible
defenders Mother Earth can hope for. We have to do it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Spaced Out Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Spaced Out Posted by: jstepp590
» Are we smarter than yeast? Posted by: manderson
» RE: Are we smarter than yeast? Posted by: jstepp590
» RE: Help with that elevator Posted by: Sissi_phus
Every merchant in every town beats the drum for growth.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Apr 7, 2008 4:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Merchants have not been affected in the least by the
environmentalists. Alternet has accomplished nothing
because the merchants have such huge influence.
Just try to make a speech on global warming or limiting
growth to the "Chamber of Commerce."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Get real, man Posted by: rockpicker
» The ORGY is over Posted by: Cathyc
Of course the are alternatives to growth!
Posted by: kazz on Apr 7, 2008 5:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I have no argument with the overall premise of this article I have to take exception to the idea that economic growth is the only way for humans to survive on earth.
What a deeply entrenched and thoroughly bogus paradigm our current economic structures have become. It is a fact that only a very few truly benefit (materially) from these systems, while the rest of us spend our lives propping them up.
It is also a fact that continued growth, far from being our only means of survival, will actually be the death of us if left unchecked!

All humans need to survive is food, shelter, water, clothing and love/company/community. These we can provide for ourselves easily enough, as individuals and in small groups, whilst maintaining the soils capacity to grow food and other materials to provide our energy needs.
The problem is that we have bee herded into cities where we are force to participate in the current economic structures, mostly without even giving it a second, or even first, thought. Our agriculture has been intensified and mechanised, resulting in soil depletion, (not to mention the unimaginable cruelty inflicted on live-stock in factory farms) in order to keep the cities fed, in order to keep the waged in place ripe to be exploited for the benefit of those few who actually gain from this system!
Unsurprisingly, the alternative to this planet killing, dehumanising madness, is simple, yet seemingly impossible.

Stop.

Apply the breaks, and rethink your needs and how you can meet them without destroying the resources that our survival ultimately depends on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not necessarily. Let's cut out all the doom and gloom and cut to the chase.
Posted by: maxpayne on Apr 7, 2008 6:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, controlling oil has led to controlling water. However, did we not forget that instead of supporting phoney "Democrats" who keep playing into Big Oil, we could instead blow them out through PRIMARIES and even 3rd party progressive independents. From there, we could win the war against Big Oil, Chemical, Coal, etc ... and put solar, wind, geothermal, hemp, etc ... first. Let's do to the Blue Dog / DLC scumbags what Paul Kersey (hint: Charles Bronson) does to muggers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Prom Kings and Queens Posted by: Cathyc
we knew this was going to happen
Posted by: dsmidiman on Apr 7, 2008 7:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My father use to love to watch the futuristic si-fi movies and TV shows all the time. Running Man, Blade Runner etc. He said the only thing he didn't like about them was that he had seen enough of them over his lifetime to realize that much of the things in the movies actually do come to pass as time moves forward. And he was right...

Our world is becoming increasingly over populated and the resources we need as humans to survive are depleting ever so rapidly.

If you put too many rats in a cage without enough food and water for all, the rats will eventually start killing each other off in order to get the food and water. It is simply "survival" As sophisticated compassionate and educated as we humans think we are when it comes down to living or dying we will do whatever we have to in order to survive. It is simply one of the laws of nature.

The world is rapidly changing around us and we are in panick mode. The sad thing is that we cannot as human beings seem to get together and work on ways to keep this planet working for all of us. We are not driven by a compassion to make it good for all. Instead we are driven by power and greed. That has been the downfall of humans time and time again over the course of our existence.

The last 8 years we have been ruled in this country by an administration hell bent on grabbing as much power and control as possible at ANY expense which could be seen again as simply a law of nature (survival) The problem is that the driving force behind this administration is not simply one of survival for itself or it's peoples it is driven by greed. We are not in Iraq fighting just to get our share of thier oil so that our people can survive. We are there fighting to make money and that money is being made by the people driving the bus in this country so that they can have more/ ultimate power and control over everything and everybody. They are using our tax dollars and our childrens tax dollars to fund thier ambitions for ultimate power and control.

The obscene amounts of money they are making is not being used in this country to make life as good as possible for it's people, rather it is being hoarded and used to make themselves even more powerful so that they have the ultimate control over all that they so desperately want.

We are on a path to self destruction and sadly it is too late to do anything about it in my opinion. Thunder Dome here we come!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Maybe... Posted by: Cathyc
Gregory Lynn Kruse
Posted by: Gregory Lynn Kruse on Apr 7, 2008 7:22 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The optimist in me can see the human race maintained by its own ingenuity for many centuries on earth at the cost of a few animal species that we can't save by teaching them new sex moves like we are with the panda. The pessimist in me has the upper hand though, because we always choose the easiest solution in the end, which is to have a war in which millions of us are killed, solving the problem but creating a big mess. Those who are left will pick up the pieces and have a good life for long enough to build back up to crisis. What distinguishes me from a cynic is that I hope that space elevators and distillers will be the solutions of choice, because my decendants will probably not survive a war of the anticipated magnitude. Global war will be attended by civil war if the climates change as severely as some expect. As for the other species on this planet, their best hope is that we kill ourselves off.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No Way To Win
Posted by: Southern Gal on Apr 7, 2008 7:50 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This country can not play the same role or the game that it has been playing for the last sixty plus years. The "Super Power" does not have the financial resources or the energy resources to be the Big Dog in the world and to win the battle for control of natural resources. We should invest in alternative energy development to create jobs and to try to take a leadership role in the world in this energy area. Other countries have put many more financial resources and much more commitment into alternative energy than has the US, but with the dollar so cheap maybe we can get investors into the US to develop alternative energy to make it more affordable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

limited thinking
Posted by: jstepp590 on Apr 7, 2008 8:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are rapidly reaching a point where the planet is going to have a hard time providing the resources we need to survive. This is because the earth is resource poor. Luckily we aren't limited to this one poor planet.

That we are even thinking in terms of conflict for the last of our resources displays limited thinking on the part of our "leadership". The truth is that we, this planet, is surrounded by massive amounts of all the resources we could ever use. Space and the asteroids around us will turn us from resource poor to resource unlimited if we can solve the problem of cheaper access to space. This is why, even though I am a space enthusiast, I believe our presidents plan to take us to Mars is ridiculous and ignorant. NASA needs to have it's entire budget dedicated to building cheaper access to space and the infrastructure our companies will need to make space profitable.

There are so many economic reasons for us to be in space that I cannot do a good job in this post. However, the best website I have ever seen that deals with the economics of space explains it better. That site is www.permanent.com and is well worth the time spent reading every page of it. I spent weeks studying it when I found it and I wholeheartedly agree with the website author.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not you, thoughtcriminal. Posted by: AsteroidMiner
Sad state of affairs
Posted by: premarachel on Apr 7, 2008 8:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The sad thing is we do not have to be dependant on oil. Homes can be built that are off the electricity grid in much of the country. Existing homes can be much better insulated. Mass transit can move both goods and people. Auto’s can run off the enormous waste we generate. We have these technologies available and the only reason we are not using them is those companies that exist today supplying the oil, the electricity and the water are monopolies that see ever increasing wealth as the demand increases and they continue to raise prices. Does it matter that oil goes up to $200 a barrel to these people? Of course not! The more oil goes up the more they stand to make. Paying $10 a gallon is not going to matter to the very wealthy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

zepher
Posted by: zepher on Apr 7, 2008 9:53 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pictures of the filthy and polluted water streams in and around populated areas and corporate dumping streams are certainly compelling and sad. But could it be that a conglomerate or government entity may swoop in and say "I can fix this for you and your water will be safe (i.e. mine). Could this happen?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The power of obsolete thinking
Posted by: willymack on Apr 7, 2008 10:11 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oil & water, huh? We live on a planet which is 70% covered with water. We have virtually unlimited, virtually free energy from the sun, wind, and movement of water. Only a species as stupid as us could jointly conspire to poison our water, air, and everything else around us, and render it useless and dangerous to life. We keep thinking that if only we could find (or steal) enough oil, or (far worse, coal), or create or produce enough stuff to BURN, we'd all be happy forever after and could go right on with our insanely destructive "way of life". Wrong! We need a crash program to produce energy WITHOUT BURNING ANYTHING, and we need it NOW. The answers are there for us to discover, but we need protection from the criminals in the energy industries to conduct any real, concerted research. As for water, the state of California, as usual, is pioneering the way toward recycling waste water. Of course, not polluting the water in the first place should be the prime goal. One last thing: without a halt to our runaway population growth, NOTHING we do will prevent a megadisaster.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If we'd run out of fossil fuels 50 years ago, we'd be fine today.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 7, 2008 10:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sunlight, wind and photosynthesis without fossil fuel inputs - that's the future . That will be how the we'll generate and store energy in the absence of fossil fuels.

Sunlight falling on the Earth is an incredibly abundant energy source - it just has to be tapped. The equatorial regions have the highest inputs of solar - 1000 watts/ square meter. These regions are now called "The Third World" but they will be the energy powerhouse regions of the future.

Solar photovoltaics, storage batteries and solar hot water heaters can provide all the energy needed for individual homes. A lot of people live off-the-grid already, and as solar gets more efficient, you can expect a doubling of the electrical output from a set of solar panels.

More northerly regions will rely heavily on wind power, which is also an abundant and largely untapped energy source. Already, old oil drilling rigs are being converted to gigantic floating offshore wind power generators.

So, If you add on wind power and a better electricity grid, you can move beyond renewable powered homes to renewable powered communities and cities. They're already building them in Germany. You can then use electric cars with clean power generation sources for transportation.

Still, cities and communities rely on agriculture to survive - and industrial agriculture is heavily dependent on fossil fuels, but fossil fuel free, organic, solar-wind powered agriculture works just as well. That's right - we can make agricultural production completely fossil free - and then we can start talking about sustainable biofuel development.

It’s basically rebuilding civilization with renewable energy technology. Get agriculture off fossil fuels and develop robust clean energy technology and you can start doing things like making steel and cement with renewable energy as well.

With this kind of strategy, there is no need for coal, no need for imported oil, no need for imported natural gas, and no need for nuclear power expansion (a real disaster in waiting). The truth is that we could already be running everything on energy-efficient renewables, but for the deliberate interventions of the fossil fuel and electric utility cartels and their networked monopolistic shareholder institutions, aka “banks” and "funds".

If we could just get all the U.S. pension funds to drop all their fossil fuel investments and put that money into renewables instead. . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Uncle is no help Posted by: solrev
bozhidar balkas
Posted by: bozhidar on Apr 7, 2008 4:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
a very nice article. yes. earth is getting poorer and rich people world-over fear losing their wealth. so they tow US line. they were told, You are either with us or against us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Gaia theory
Posted by: meetmeineleusis on Apr 7, 2008 8:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
would say that we are still part of the Earth, and we have a purpose (perhaps defending our Earthly mother from big fucking falling rocks?) but we are currently out of control.

Think of us as an auto-immune disease, more than a cancer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are several meanings for "colony in space"
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Apr 7, 2008 10:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The space station we have now is too small to be a colony. The
space station we have now does not count because it relies on
supplies from earth. We really need self-sustaining colonies for
the LifeBoat plan to work. That could be a city-size space station
in its own orbit. A colony could be an airtight space station-like
structure on or underground in Mars or the moon or an asteroid.
A colony could mean Mars modified to be like Earth. See "New
Earths" by Jim Oberg. Terraforming modifies the climate and
atmosphere of another planet to allow earth-life to live there in the
open. Anything in between also counts. The self-sustaining
colony has to be just big enough to survive without contact with
earth and has to have enough people to breed more people. In
other words, it has to have at least 1 woman and stored sperms.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet comments section used to be good.
Posted by: Sissi_phus on Apr 8, 2008 9:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
....... :(

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Global Water Crisis
Posted by: fanny666 on Apr 8, 2008 10:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From last week's issue of "Nature"

Global Water Crisis

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A non-fiction book on the space elevator is available from LiftPort
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Apr 9, 2008 7:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A prior book on space elevators was written by
Dr. Brad Edwards.

LiftPort is looking for scientists who have a process
for making carbon nanotubes or diamond nanowires
that are both long and strong. Weakening as length
[of carbon nanotubes] increases is holding up the
space elevator. The strength and weight of the
elevator cable are crucial.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

grouth
Posted by: wittler youth on Apr 10, 2008 2:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
holy shit i never heard more gob-gobble gook in my life..if we could save the world..but that would be a big waste of time..so lets all go to hell on the same train.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]