iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Raymond J. Learsy

GET UPDATES FROM Raymond J. Learsy
 

Aspen Ideas, Natural Gas, Armenia Unheralded

Posted: 07/09/2012 7:58 am

The Aspen Ideas Festival brings together as panelists/speakers individuals of tested competence and talent. Such was the case last week with a gathering of Ray Lahood, our Secretary of the Department of Transportation, Lisa P. Jackson, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, and panel moderator the eloquent and erudite Vijay Vaitheeswaran (yes, I did get the spelling right) senior correspondent of the "Economist" taking on the subject of "What Will Fuel the Automobile of the Future?"

Of course alternative transportation strategies were touched upon such as electric powered cars, biofuels, hybrids, as well as C.A.F.E. standards all of which can add significantly to the search for solutions to overturn our gas guzzling and fossil fuel addiction.

Yet given the current advances, Secretary La Hood went directly to one of the core issues. The game changing potential of compressed natural gas with its attractive price and its vast reserves within the confines of the United States. A munificent resource accessible through new drilling techniques, bringing the nation to the cusp of energy independence. A fossil fuel, yes, but as a transportation fuel emitting some 25% less greenhouse gases than petroleum based gasoline, and now being domestically sourced and cheaper by far. Environmentally, in terms of national security and economically (natural gas at today's quoted price of $3.00 mmbtu delivers an energy quotient that would require crude oil to sell at $20bbl or less compared to today's price of $85bbl) therefore a win, win, win.

Secretary La Hood shared with the audience his recent visit to Carbondale Colorado where the entire bus transport system had been converted from gasoline powered engines to buses fueled by compressed natural gas. Among early steps in a policy shift that in time will have broad implications for metropolitan transport throughout the United States. But yet, as we will see, it is only a small beginning.

Also present was Lisa P. Jackson , the fiery and all hands on Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Inevitably the issue of fracking came up given its important role in the production of the newly accessible shale gas resources near nationwide.

When confronted to comment on a recent Wall Street Journal Editorial ("A Fracking Rule Reprieve" 06.01.12) hailing the temporary suspension of federal fracking regulations covering everything from disclosure of drilling chemicals to well integrity as "redundant" to the plethora of state regulation, going on to berate the Environmental Protection Agency as in, "has tried to dig up pollution stories." Castigating the Department of the Interior and the EPA for bringing on, in the WSJ's view, obstructionist and burdensome regulation hampering the production of gas and the expansion of these new drilling methods.

Mrs. Jackson was fierce in her defense of the EPA's actions and policies. Significantly, she stated clearly and unambiguously her understanding of the enormous importance this new resource and the potential that shale gas represents to the nation both economically and in terms of energy independence. But simultaneously she was clear that it is incumbent on federal agencies to set standards in keeping with the environmental well being of the nation as a whole, and in the interest of future generations. Yes, drill and frack, but it must be done responsibly to issues of water safety and air quality, and the federal agencies such as Interior and the EPA must serve as guardians of the nation's environmental well being. It was quite a performance.

But here we are at the cusp of a vast change in our energy destiny and given Secretary LaHood's vision, veering in the right direction. Yet we still remain without a true national commitment to wean ourselves from gasoline to natural gas as our foremost transportation fuel. The transformation of occasional municipalities to natural gas fired transport from gasoline engines is but a hesitant beginning. Consider Armenia!

What you ask, and why Armenia? Barely known to most everyone, Armenia leads the world. 75% of its automobile and truck fleet is propelled by compressed natural gas (CNG) (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-26/natural-gas-cars-can-drive-us-toward-a-better-economy.html). An amazing accomplishment for a country hardly in the forefront of public discourse.

Showing the way, Armenia serves as example of what needs be done nationally- a full bore program to set up a national distribution system (pumping stations) for compressed gas, incentives to Detroit and consumers to changeover to natural gas powered cars. During World War II Detroit retooled itself in six months and became the Arsenal of Democracy. With our government pitching in it can this day become the arsenal of our energy independence and our environmental protector (in that natural gas is significantly less polluting than gasoline emmisions).

Let's show Armenia we can do it too!

 
 
 

Follow Raymond J. Learsy on Twitter: www.twitter.com/raymondLearsy

FOLLOW BUSINESS
The Aspen Ideas Festival brings together as panelists/speakers individuals of tested competence and talent. Such was the case last week with a gathering of Ray Lahood, our Secretary of the Department ...
The Aspen Ideas Festival brings together as panelists/speakers individuals of tested competence and talent. Such was the case last week with a gathering of Ray Lahood, our Secretary of the Department ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 27
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
04:01 AM on 07/16/2012
There isn't enough water for fracking. Fracked gas is considerably worse than gasoline, unless that gasoline comes from fracked oil. Not to mention the CO2 problems, heavy metals and sulfur.

What we need to do is get electric plug commuter cars to cover 90% of our current oil use, then provide the remaining oil and gas needs from waste to fuels.

That backs up solar and wind.
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
02:29 PM on 07/11/2012
Just say no to carbon fuels.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:40 PM on 07/09/2012
Raymond J. Learsy,

With this piece, you have hereby lost ANY credibility as a serious energy analyst. Here is a real one, for anyone who doesn't care to be lied to:

http://theautomaticearth.org/Finance/shale-gas-reality-begins-to-dawn.html

http://theautomaticearth.org/Energy/unconventional-oil-is-not-a-game-changer.html
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jtt
-
02:30 PM on 07/11/2012
that's interesting - there are pricing and distribution issues as well I think but I liked reading that. Obviously some natural gas will be a part of the energy mix (unfortunately as it is a carbon fuel) minimizing its impact and not becoming dependent on it should be top priority.
photo
4eva
.-.. --- ...- . --..-- / -. --- - / .... .- - .
03:49 PM on 07/09/2012
We need to wean ourselves from using so much energy, regardless of the source.
photo
muysuave41
Spanish Olive Oil Producer
12:27 PM on 07/09/2012
Definitely need a commitment from government to purchase LPG cars to stimulate demand.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roosevelt Democrat
11:42 AM on 07/09/2012
Shhhhh already!

I bought a used CNG Honda 3 years ago when gasoline was selling for $2.59/gallon. They could not hardly give them away. I also bought a Phil Station for my house. The whole package cost me less than $25,000.00.

It cost me $0.92/gallon equivalent to fill at home in the summer. I have to specify winter vs summer because of the special rate. It's the same winter and summer because of the Phil Station which saves me $40.00/month in Natural Gas cost in the winter.

On $40.00 of natural gas I can drive 1600 miles.

It cost me bottom line about $0.025/mile in fuel cost. A typical SUV is 10 times greater!

So let's just keep this our little secret!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David in Dallas
Enjoy life! Pop the cork on some good Champagne.
02:08 PM on 07/09/2012
Great post. I have great fears about fracking, but if the gas companies would stop trying to hide their poisons used in the process and let America develop a common, safe, productive and cost-effective process to frack, I'm on board. I hope the EPA keeps everybody's feet to the fire while pushing them to prove they are safe.

Imagine that 3 a.m. call FROM the White House to Jeddah - "Abdulla, this is the POTUS. You can cancel all those shipments of petrol. Have a nice day. "
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roosevelt Democrat
09:39 PM on 07/09/2012
Funny thing is I was working on bio-degradable drilling auxiliaries in the 90's!

There are much better choices.

But unless they have a spill or they don't do their casing right it's hard to imagine a system where the chemicals come back into the ground water.

That's partly why the Cheney Loop Hole is more good Press than reality. The Supreme Court had already ruled on the limits of the Clean Water Act and Navigable Waters and fracking fluids a mile underground certainly would not have qualified.

All the Cheney Loop holes did was to prevent a bunch of Lawsuits that would have gone no where in my opinion.

This frustrates my Environmentalist Friends but they usually come around when they research previous court rulings.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roosevelt Democrat
09:43 PM on 07/09/2012
http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/CWAwaters.cfm

Forgot the link.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realitytrumpsbull
Two 'alves of coconut!
10:35 AM on 07/09/2012
There's Fischer-Tropsch, and there's T. Boone Pickens, two forces for the good, I think. As for the rest of the country, how bad do we, and all our attendant industries, want to become an energy-independent, and economically independent nation? Some people/companies are apparently perfectly content to use the military as tool of accession of America's energy needs. So it has been in the past, so it continues to be, today.
10:01 AM on 07/09/2012
Useless from climate change perspective. From Nat'l Geo, relating to coal, not oil:

"Although natural gas burns more cleanly than coal, a new study argues that replacing all the world's coal power plants with natural gas would do little to slow global warming this century.

"There are lots of reasons to like natural gas, but climate change isn't one of them," said physicist Nathan Myhrvold, lead author of the new study. "It's worthless for [fighting] climate change, as far as we can tell."

The reason for that grim assessment: The carbon dioxide burden already is so large, and its lifetime in the atmosphere is so long, that even a switch to completely carbon-free electricity couldn't stop temperatures from rising over the next 100 years. Switching from coal to natural gas would cut the warming effect in 100 years' time by only about 20 percent, while switching to renewable or nuclear energy would slash the warming effect about two-thirds to three-quarters."
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Toogee
2G or not 2G?
09:46 AM on 07/09/2012
Weening America off of fossil fuels will be accompanied by some hardcore withdrawals. And most Americans will fight it tooth and nail!
photo
roy brophy
Dyslexic F. O. "Sorry!"
09:45 AM on 07/09/2012
Natural gas is only a slight improvement over gasoline and is owned by the same energy cartel that owns the oil (and the Congress)
Look at the film "Gasland" and it shows a town just down the road from Carbondale where you can light the gas coming out of the water faucet in a family's kitchen thanks to fracking!
Fracking is a horror show and everyone who is not in the pay of Big Oil/Gas knows it!

fuel cells and electric cares are the answer but the greedy sociopaths on Wall Street and the Ol Cartel block it's development because it will cost them money.

Aspen is a great place for this dog & Pony show
10:05 AM on 07/09/2012
The author of the article must have investments in natural gas. It may be even worse than coal or oil for the environment:

"And a study published last month in Climate Change Letters argues that fracking can release underground methane — a powerful greenhouse gas in its own right — into the atmosphere. That may make burning natural gas from fracking worse for the climate than mining and burning coal."
10:32 AM on 07/09/2012
how well would those electric cars work in the power outages this week. and the faucet you speek of was proven to light on fire before fracking
photo
roy brophy
Dyslexic F. O. "Sorry!"
11:53 AM on 07/09/2012
electricy is what fuel cells produce.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
04:04 AM on 07/16/2012
you can't pump gas without electricity.
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
09:11 AM on 07/09/2012
Using fracking, the US has a 100 year supply of nat gas, true - but that's at current consumption rates!  Natural gas currently provides only 20% of total US energy. If nat gas provides all our energy, it will be gone in 20 years.

And Vermont has already outlawed fracking. If NY and PA do, your nat gas supply is gone.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roosevelt Democrat
11:51 AM on 07/09/2012
You know Natural Gas/methane is a renewable energy source? Lot's of ways to make it!
photo
4eva
.-.. --- ...- . --..-- / -. --- - / .... .- - .
03:50 PM on 07/09/2012
What energy souce do you use to make it?
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
04:05 AM on 07/16/2012
from waste would be great. not if you did it up from millions of year ago.