Illusion Of The Public Philosophy Related To A New Energy Supply

The public philosophy is examined in respect to beliefs, alleged here to be irrational, concerning the lastingness of coal, acid rain, alternatives to energy sources which cause environmental damage, the dangers of hydrogen, a dependence upon a supposed ‘government energy overseer’ and the individual's powerlessness to affect energy progress. Energy scientists are alleged to believe that a nuclear base to the energy supply can avoid plutonium; that fusion would lack environmental hazards, and that ‘energy costs are small’ so that, for instance, doubling them will not greatly affect the economy. Such thinking is short term: it lacks an ecological component; suffers from inertia, and from projecting the position of the seller, never that of the buyer. Barriers to a change to inexhaustible energy sources are socio-political, and economic. A positive step is suggested for remedying this situation.