That just "struck you?" Humans figured that out 10,000 years ago. We call it the Agricultural Revolution. Why do you think there are periods in history called stuff like Bronze Age and Iron Age, And, I'm just guessing here, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Industrial Revolution is called a "revolution" because some people thought it was pretty damn important.
Nobody or Government forced anybody to do any risky job. Somebody`s future lies on his or her hands whatever risk you undertake is all yours either alive or death.Fossil fuel is a natural natural resources that created jobs for billions of people all over the world. In the absent of these fossil fuel, the world would be throne into Semi Armageddon War. See Crude oil Origin and Global Oil Peak. www.discoveriesofcenturies.com
Well, fossil fuels have helped the human condition. As a result of our access to a cheap, readily available fuel source we've built economies, advanced our technology, improved our quality of life.
That doesn't mean that burning fossil fuels at an ever growing rate won't have negative effects in the future.
The energy from fossil fuels has hugely helped the human condition. It's this energy that is providing all the good things that you've mentioned.
The byproducts of producing and burning fossil fuels are overwhelmingly negative, and not being paid for by the producers of the fuel.
Without a doubt, on the whole, fossil fuels have helped the human condition. That doesn't mean that they have helped everyone (think of the hundreds of coal miners that die every year in China, or the tens of thousands that will develop black lung disease), or that they will always help the human condition. Not only do our ideas of what's acceptable change with time, they also are dependent on population. Using coal and oil as a primary power source may be fine with less than one billion people on the planet, but with ten billion it will be disastrous. It's time to move on.
As for your link, it seems lack obvious industry propaganda, I'm surprised you would link to it.
EDIT: Pat, you're insane. How can grisly deaths directly attributable to fossil fuels have "nothing to do with anything" when the question is about whether fossil fuels have helped the human condition?
I think you need to read some John Donne:
No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
Did the horse and carriage help global economy or hurt it?
I sincerely wonder why the Center for Industrial Progress opposes progressing once again in our energy sources by moving away from fossil fuels and towards cheaper renewable fuels.
<<... would highly recommend reading this first: >>
What a piece of garbage!
The hydrocarbon age was an essential step in the evolution of human knowledge. Most of the new energy sources would never have been invented without metallurgy and electricity. But we are entering a new age where these new energy sources mean that we do not have to choose between hydrocarbons or living like bears in the woods.
The death of coal miners could be avoided by safer forms of energy, including nuclear power.
A glass of wine with a meal is good for your health.
Becoming an alcoholic is not.
Edit: If Flossie wants to enjoy central heating and a fridge, that is his business alone. Most of us want those amenities too, by the way, despite his childishly absurd implications. But if Flossie wants our descendants to pay for the cost of the damage done to the global economy by the energy sources that power his machines, that is another matter entirely. His endless stream of ignorant recycled nonsense here, about the science that proves the reality of the damage future generations will suffer due to our reckless addiction to fossil fuels, is yet a third matter.
Don't show ****** this! He'll fall off of his rocking chair again. He always cries when there's support for the fossil fuel industry.
-------------------------------
pegminer - The death of coal miners has nothing to do with anything. Why do you always pander to the sorrowful aspects of things when indeed they helped people with a betterment of life. That's the problem with your activism. Always bring forth the negativities. I would rather see you be mad at the tyrannical nature of people in power when it comes to forcing people to work in coal mines as China does. Or even be upset with our own Government's tyrannical nature.
-------------------------------
... and then there's your same ol' rhetoric about overpopulation. We are still a microscopic dot on this planet. The whole planet flourished into what it is today because of high CO2 levels and the history shows this. http://climatephysics.com/80/ Does 0.7% atmospheric levels of CO2 and 10 degrees C warmer ring a bell? What burned up?
You wouldn't be asking that question without it.
Reality bites. Kind of like asking why a veteran defends the right for free speech even though they know the consequences and outcome of those actions. One has to accept getting hit from all directions.
Whatever your initial thought to that question, I would highly recommend reading this first: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/84424264/Fossil%20Fuels%20Improve%20the%20Planet.pdf
One part that struck me is whether nature is really that friendly for those who don't have access to power; i.e. good shelter from weather, heat and cold, clean drinking water, burning wood, dung or other biomass, medical facilities, etc.
Help.
Let the loonies live in unheated yurts, eating raw turnips, rats, worms and beetles, I'll stick with my central heating and refrigerator.
