Offers an e-book titled Understanding and Installing Your Own Solar Electric System. Includes worksheets, resources and all information needed to get your own system going as soon as possible.

Naturally, oil and energy companies don't like these kind of of things to go around the web, and ther have been some attempts to prohibit them in some jurisdictios, but the issue is that with such ecological and environmentalist initiatives, you help both your pocket as well as our planet.

Since Plato described in his 'Fedon' Socrates talking about perpetual movement, mankind has been debating this question about energy, and if it would be possible to produce perpetual movement or we will always fall victims to entropy. The development of science and technology is also a history of such controversies: many an eminent researcher said that some things were 'impossible' to achieve, only to find someone a little later achieving them.Stahl's theory of combustion is a clear example; until Lavoissier demonstrated two centuries later that it was wrong, all researchers actually thought that they were finding evidence of Stahl's 'Flogisto' in flammable materials.

The problem was not that they saw something inexistent, but the fact that they interpreted what they saw as what they thought was expected. A change of focus was enough to dispel the question. The Wright brothers worked on their aircraft at the same time that Professor Langley, who had a budget approximately 70 times bigger that the fellows from Dayton, Ohio. However, the Wrights flew and Langley failed, and it was only because they addressed the problem of making a flying machine differently; Langley thought that it was a matter of applied energy, thus concentrating in the development of a powerful and lightweight engine, while the Whrights considered that it was firstly and foremost a matter of stability, and they were right.

So we can assume that the actual state of things regarding the use of energy is also infuenced by such problems of focus and perspective. A matter for debate should be the question if our current efforts to develop new energy sources are sincere, or just an attempt to accommodate geopolitical and corporate interests to a changing situation. The kind of companies that distribute fossil fuels and other unclean energy forms certainly have the power to attempt such things.

We are now in a possible bifurcation of our future path with epochal connotations: if we get the issue wrong, we will suffer the destiny of Langley, but at civilisation level because global warming and the greenhouse effect, merciless corporate policies, energy-related wars and such events will slowly erode the basis of our culture. There is proof that such things could happen: just look at the chronicles of the Chaco war between Bolivia and Paraguay.

They fought because U.S. oil interest prodded them to do so in order to secure oilfields that were supposed to exist in the area; bad geologists they had indeed, the oil fields are found in the northern province of Salta, in Argentina. For this mistake, millions died; even WMDs were used: mustard gas was common there in these days.

And indeed, in the Middle East there are good reserves of crude, something for which many are fighting, and the historical examples we have and plain common sense should be enough to deduce that the war in Iraq has little to do with terrorism or freedom, but with oil interests, because the only evident thing that has progressed in relation to Iraq is the price of crude, which has increased threefold since the initial invasion.

Now, Iraq has good reserves, but it does not represent 66% of the world's production, so why then the crude coming from everywhere else became more expensive when it is only what comes from Iraq should suffer an increase due to the risks involved in extracting it there?The notion that crude is a commodity is quite comfortable; if crude were sold like most things, extraction of crude from Iraq at the hands of U.S. oil companies would not be competitive. There is no real reason to justify an increase in the price of what comes out of Alaska, Russia or the North Sea.

And it makes no sense at a global scale to subsidy Iraqui oil production when it is driving all prices soaring in such a way, so there is no other possible explanation for this other than the fact that oil corporations that got contracts over the captured Iraqui oil fields are in collusion with the U.S. government to hide huge and illegitimate profits for them by driving prices up.

In other words, the way in which the disastrous campaign in Iraq is being subsidises is by passing the bill indirectly to everyone else in the planet.Face it: the war in Iraqi is a disaster, because the mightiest army in the world, after various years, is unable to prevail against a bunch of enthusiasts armed with rusty Kalashnikovs and RPGs.

Like in Vietnam, like Langley versus the Wright brothers.

This would stop if oil would be ceased to be treated as a commodity, at least when such distortions occur, and be sold for what is really worth, coming from different parts of the world.We should not only seek new energy sources, but a new set of ethics as well.

Shops, Auctions and Malls

Articles

Similar Sites

Páginas web relacionadas

Books

Forum