or any other alternative energy source that would replace the dependence of oil. Just think how important politically oil has been. Middle Eastern economies would drop like a bucket since their other industries are too weak to support their populations. Especially in Saudi Arabia for instance would it weaken the monarchy as the saudis have been spoiled, literally, by the money the saudi royals have thrown at them to make life easier so that the people would not revolt against the monarchy and demand democracy.
As a potential major unrest it can cause in the Middle East by their safety net falling by the way side in terms of public funding for health care, infrastructure, having foreign labour do their work on the cheap.. it could perhaps also force those nations to 'grow up' economically and work ethics wise. Now I am not calling all saudis and others as lazy, but from experience ( and other expats would concur), the majority does not know 'how' to work or how to be ethical and work hard. A lot of the work is considered beneath them (as in, work to be done by some poor Asian male), but think.. If those countries had to resort to boosting the diversity of their economy, do you not think that that would be the impetus for change towards democracy? I even daresay that Islamic fundamentalism would take a backseat because when it all comes down to, economics trumps fundamentalism. People need to be provided for and the conservatism in Islam that is counter to economic growth as it seeks to control ideas, science and female work participation, that will be thrown out out of sheer pragmatism.
So that's one angle I have been mulling over. Also, consider the big money from Western oil companies. Public relations and campaign contributions are common in this country (US) so I have been wondering how they would try to undermine a possible cut to their profits and business. Hill and Knowlton anyone??
Just brainstorming here.
Anyway, as I was doing my daily walk this morning with my friend, we discussed the safety issue of a potential nuclear energy switch. Not the waste aspect, but the fact that government would need to be left out of it. I figured we would need a non partisan watch dog with some actual power, not some FDA version where they know things and keep quiet anyway. One aspect that would need to alleviate concern if the majority of people were to support nuclear energy is the fact that it would be used for peaceful, energy purposes only.
Perhaps this supposed recent development in Japan could help where a new technology that has the plutonium NOT being seperated from the uranium, could also be used to control weapons of mass destruction by selling that to Iran , North Korea etc. I know it must sound like a version of legalizing marijuana; you actually take part in the production/sales aspect, you control all the deaths and abuse associated with it..
alright. Enough brainstorming.. thank you Randy Leavitt, dv8 2xl and karen street for your reading recommendations. I'll try to locate them this week.