> Um, not particularly, since I find the current "requirements"
> for "solved" to be unrealistic.  Similar requirements applied to
> other energy sources would likely render them all unusable as
> well.  (Oh wait.  That's happening now re CO2 and global warming.)

Waste heat will be a problem for ANY energy we tap, except solar,
maybe.

Earth has a homeostatic balance of energy absorbed to energy shed.
We absorb it from the day side, shed it to from the night side.  Other
energy (I often wonder how much) is captured by plants, which die
(either eaten, burned, buried, or sink into the sea), where that energy
waits until someone fishes it out of where it went and releases it
back into the energy-sphere.

In the final analysis, as long as our energy usage keeps going up,
we're going to slowly roast our planet, no matter where the energy
comes from.  "Free" energy (as recently discussed) would be a
nightmare- overnight, huge amounts of thermal energy would be put
into play.

Efficiency is the key.  Instead of moving one person per 1.5 tons of
metal being shuffled around, move ten (public transportation).
Instead of releasing 80% of the energy devoted to lighting as
heat, release 5% (or whatever the incandescent vs. LED breakdown
is).  Stop making CRTs in favor of LCDs.

I read somewhere that in the 20-odd years since the massive
regulatory crackdown on refrigerator efficiency, that alone has
saved approximately one Arctic National Wildlife Refuge's worth
of energy.

Mike H.
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist