/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3959999
>Not to mention we have whole continent that so far remains untouched by mining-Antarctica.
First you have mile-thick ice you have to tunnel through to get to it. Then you have nearly no infrastructure on Antarctica so you have to build it from scratch, which costs a lot, driving up the price.
Then any meaningful amount of mining would generate heat which would melt the surrounding ice, flooding the mining complex as well as speed melting of the polar icecaps and destroy the surrounding ecosystem (if any.)

>And Arctic seabed of course.
If you're talking about drilling platforms, entirely impractical. First you have to make it in the ARCTIC, which freezes over every winter. That ice moves, which destroys the structural integrity of the well quickly. Then it's still a few thousand meters to the bottom of the arctic seabed, where there probably is enough oil in the entirety of the arctic/ANWR to supply the United States with oil for half a year.

>The whole Oil Peak won't really happen in forseeable future.
Oil is shitty for more reasons than 'It'll run out someday.'

>>3298691

>>1247400
>Michio Kaku and Kurzweil said it, it must be true
>implying there will be any flexible high resolution screen for less than $5 in the next 10 years