In line with some prior posts I've made about Progressive ideology and feel good-inane proposals I wanted to talk today about something thats crucial to us all . . . Energy. How we use it, where we obtain it, and most important of all, the future of collection and utilization of energy.

The majority of energy used in the U.S. is derived from fossil fuels: it's estimated that 40% of the nation's energy comes from petroleum, 23% from coal, and 23% from natural gas. The remaining 14% was supplied by nuclear power, hydroelectric dams, and miscellaneous renewable energy sources.

We are currently experiencing a crisis in the cost of most of these fuels; whether because of OPEC pricing policies; restrictions on allowing recovery of these fuels, or unduly burdensome environmental policies. All of these factors are raising the cost of these vital energy sources to the point of unsustainability.

We are keeping ourselves tied to the volatile sources of petroleum in the Middle East and South America; while disallowing resource recovery in our own baliwick. We have cut down our refinery capacity by over 75% over the last thirty years, and there are no current plans to boost capacity anytime soon.
We have reduced overall refining capacity and increased the cost of using petroleum products by mandateing so called 'regional blends' of gasoline. We have forestalled building new coal fired electrical generation plants by imposing draconian regulations on all new capacity, in the name of clean air and water, even though new technology makes such new facilities compatible with meeting that goal. it's not good enough that the majority of pollutants are controlled; the Green lobby insists that NO pollutants be produced at all, clearly an impossible mandate.

Most, if not all of the well-meaning folks of the Green Revolution simply are naive when it comes to the nuts and bolts reality of energy production/consumption cycle. They advocate conservation, which is a worthy goal that should be pursued at every opportunity. They also advocate using more electrical power in lieu of fossil fuels, which sounds good on the surface; but they forget the fact that electrical power is generated in large part through the use of fossil fuels. They seem to think that putting outlets in the walls of their homes somehow magically causes electricity to exist.

They tout the use of so-called alternative bio-fuels...again, a worthy aspiration, until you delve into the economics and the unintended consequences of these fuels.
"Use Ethanal/bio-diesal/(choice of poisen here)" they cry. The fact is that if we converted our entire current years worth of corn/soybean production to such fuels, the resulting amount wouldn't keep an industerial nation like ours running for more than three months or so, and the environmental damage may even be higher than our current fuels today. And the demand of bio-fuels versus the need for food production pitts the different uses of the same agro-products against each other in an ever upward spiraling cost cycle.

Solar energy is simply too inefficient with todays technology to be even close to cost effective.

Wind Turbine technology holds promise, at least to limited local use, but it keeps running into the NIMBY attitude. Yes, use it, but don't put the turbines in MY backyard. Home use? A typical American home uses about 10,000 kilowatt-hours of energy per year. Depending on the average wind speed, a 10 kilowatt turbine with a 20-foot rotor diameter could supply most of the electricity for a house. Such a system will likely cost around $40,000.
According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), a person who is living in a windy area (about 10 mph average wind speed or better) — and is eligible for certain government rebates or tax credits — could expect a payback time of 15 years on their small wind system.
It's like you are prepaying your electricity bill for two decades.... but by the time you break even, it's time to replace the turbine. Just...NOT....practical.

Hydroelectric is the best of the current "clean" technologies, but just how many dams are you willing to erect, with the concurrent change in ecosystems? And don't forget that there are maintainence requirements attendant with such systems. Hoover Dam requires constant cleaning of it's water conduits to prevent build-up of marine flora and fauna that threaten it's viability as a power generator. Cost? Several millions of dollars annually. (gee Blanch, I don't know if I can pay the cleaning lady this month....LOL)

Nuclear energy is the best short term solution, but the political considerations attendant make it unviable at present, and the long term environmental costs will be large.

My favorite fuel, Hydrogen, is too costly to generate large scale (that problem of needing a fuel to produce a fuel again) and too unwieldy to ship/store at present, although I feel that future technology can overcome most if not all of those objections.

So, what can I suggest as my solutions? If I knew THAT; I'd be the next Rockefeller and Ford rolled into one. But Hubris leads me to what I think are some common sense stopgaps in the interim:

I. CONSERVE, CONSERVE, CONSERVE

2. Drill ANWAR/ Fla. Coast reserves

3. Relax the restrictions on new refineing facilities for petro-products and power generating plants, no matter the fuel used to run them.

4. Fund research into more cost effective ways of generating, transporting, and storing Hydrogen.

5. Fund further research into solar and wind technologies.

6. USE solar and wind technologies wherever economically feasable; streamline environmental policies and put the onus on so call "Green" to prove that the technology shouldn't be used in a particular area because of DIRE consequences, not just because "it would spoil my view" or "it's for the birds".

7. Explore/Open new areas of OUR continent to mining and drilling of gas,oil, and coal.

8. Require that all energy production restricting legislation be sunsetted after five years; requireing revisitation at that time as to efficacy/results.

Just my .02 worth, for what it's worth.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 06:46 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 1006 words, total size 8 kb.