Can Coal Deposits Explain the Fermi Paradox?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between coal deposits and the Fermi Paradox, exploring whether the unique geological conditions that led to the formation of coal on Earth could be a significant factor in the development of technological civilizations elsewhere in the universe. Participants examine the implications of coal as a primary energy source in the context of industrialization and the potential for other energy sources in pre-industrial societies.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants highlight the unique geological conditions during the Carboniferous period that led to the formation of coal deposits, suggesting that these conditions may be rare and could limit the development of technological civilizations elsewhere.
  • Others argue that there are alternative energy sources available to pre-industrial civilizations, such as hydro, wind, and biofuels, questioning the necessity of coal for technological advancement.
  • A participant posits that the assumption that coal is essential for civilization development may overlook the possibility of unknown energy sources on other planets.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the argument that the specific conditions on Earth are necessary for advanced civilizations, suggesting that such reasoning lacks sufficient data.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of assuming that without coal, the development of an industrial civilization would be significantly hindered, with some participants challenging this view.
  • One participant acknowledges the speculative nature of the discussion regarding the Fermi Paradox, emphasizing that conclusions drawn are based on informed speculation rather than definitive evidence.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the necessity of coal for the development of technological civilizations. Multiple competing views are presented regarding the importance of coal and the existence of alternative energy sources.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about the geological history of Earth and the conditions necessary for the emergence of advanced civilizations. There are unresolved questions about the availability of energy sources on other planets and the implications of these factors for the Fermi Paradox.

  • #31
Vanadium 50 said:
I don;'t think we should, since we don't know the alternative. Whale oil? Slave labor?
That’s a bit of a straw man, I’m afraid. You must accept that our consumption (civilation?) is not sustainable.
no one needs to starve if the major consumers consumed less. We may need to forego some consumer pleasures and pay a bit more for what we do use but that won’t hurt you or me.
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #32
It seems that you have moved away from the topic of this thread as a historical what if.
 
  • #33
Vanadium 50 said:
It seems that you have moved away from the topic of this thread as a historical what if.
Not sure about that. It's more a matter of defining terms like 'civilisation'. The narrower the range then the less probability of the situation arising.
 
  • #34
PeroK said:
One could argue that we were unlucky that no one like Newton was born in ancient Rome.
Actually, we were unlucky that someone like Newton was born in Ancient Rome (ok, Ancient Greece). His name was Archimedes and he got stabbed to death by an ancient Roman soldier.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU, sophiecentaur and jim mcnamara
  • #35
TeethWhitener said:
Actually, we were unlucky that someone like Newton was born in Ancient Rome (ok, Ancient Greece). His name was Archimedes and he got stabbed to death by an ancient Roman soldier.
Perhaps lucky after all, otherwise Attila would have had nuclear weapons ...
 
  • #36
BvU said:
Perhaps lucky after all, otherwise Attila would have had nuclear weapons ...
Attila might have ended up an historical footnote if Rome or Constantinople had had nukes.

On the other hand, if Archimedes had been born in Enlightenment England, we might be learning Archimedes’s three laws of motion today...
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and BvU
  • #37
I take umbrage with the notion that genius springs ex nihilo. Newtons' development of calculus (contemporaneously with Liebniz) relied on the work of Fermat, among others. Einstein's Special Relativity uses Lorentz's transformation. "If I have seen further it is by standing on the sholders of Giants" -Isaac Newton
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and 256bits
  • #38
What about hydropower?
 
  • #39
caz said:
What about hydropower?
how do you do that at scale without cement and steel?
 
  • #40
BWV said:
how do you do that at scale without cement and steel?
Roman_Cornalvo_dam%2C_Extremadura%2C_Spain._Pic_01.jpg

The Cornalvo Dam is a Roman gravity dam in Badajoz province, Extremadura, Spain, dating to the 1st or 2nd century AD. The earth dam with stone cladding on the water face is still in use.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, PeroK and Frabjous
  • #41
BWV said:
how do you do that at scale without cement and steel

Beavers. Very large beavers.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, BillTre and Frabjous
  • #43
Vanadium 50 said:
Beavers. Very large beavers.
Can modern civilation stand without a full spectrum pastry selection?

Fowler - ”In a world ruled by a giant beaver, mankind builds many dams to please the beaver overlord. The low-lying city of Copenhagen is flooded, thousands die. Devastated, the Danes never invent their namesake pastry.”

Statistically, one should assume that you are in the middle of something. Why should you be special and be there at the beginning or end. Therefore we only have a couple of hundred years left. We do not know if technological civilizations are stable.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and BvU
  • #44
BWV said:
and how does it generate electricity?
How do concrete/cement and steel generate electricity?
 
  • #46
Forget it, I’m done here
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU
  • #48
The only reason Humans tamed fire in the first place was to keep warm in the cold weather. We feel uncomfortable in the cold the way a frog (for example) does not. An ectotherm would have no reason to desire fires in the first place and may just view them as a danger or a nuisance. All other uses are secondary to that primal need. If humans were cold blooded the stone age might never have ended.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
  • #49
Propose to close the thread ...

##\ ##
 
  • Sad
Likes   Reactions: Keith_McClary
  • #50
Folks,

This is a silly debate. We must argue based on the evidence and not on mere speculation. The author is right - energy dense fuels played a key role in the development of man's technological civilization. Our civilization is extremely energy intensive. Neither wind or solar power is a likely path. And please no nonsense about renewable energy. Wind and power today only account for 2% of the world's primary energy. The path to an advanced technological civilization is much easier with energy dense fuels like hydrocarbons than wind, solar or crops. The later professor David McKay of Cambridge, a well known physicist, calculated the massive land usage required to use low density energy sources to support our civilization. The land consumption would be so high as to crowd out our energy intensive agriculture.
 
  • #51
cybernetichero said:
The only reason Humans tamed fire in the first place was to keep warm in the cold weather. We feel uncomfortable in the cold the way a frog (for example) does not. An ectotherm would have no reason to desire fires in the first place and may just view them as a danger or a nuisance. All other uses are secondary to that primal need. If humans were cold blooded the stone age might never have ended.

That is clearly wrong. Modern civilization is in all aspects energy intensive ranging from transportation, manufacturing, lighting, etc. Invariably intelligent creatures would want greater control over their environment and expend resources to create an artificial climate.
 
  • #52
The energy density (MJ/kg) of coal is ~25, wood is ~16 and oil is in the 40‘s. The US electricity generation is 63% fossil fuels, 20% nuclear and 18% renewable.

We went down a certain energy path. It is not clear that there are not others.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
  • #53
Enough speculation. We cannot support speculation and un-cited claims about history "woulda-been". PF does not work that way.

Thread closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K