Forget the rantings of the "spotted owl" crowd -- when Exxon says we're running out of oil, we should get nervous. In the company's most recent fiscal report, it revealed that for every 100 barrels of oil it has pumped over the past ten years it has replaced only 95. While some will use this as an opportunity to renew calls to drill our way to freedom, a non-renewable resource will always remain just that. At some point it simply runs out.
If ever we are to confront meaningfully the issue of energy reform, we will first need to confront the three-headed hydra standing in the way. We all know how it works:
First, there is the tangled thicket of insider dealing. From Dick Cheney's secret meetings with energy executives in advance of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (also known as the Great Oil Company Giveaway) to the shameless horse-trading that preceded last year's health care bill, this "old boy" backslapping maddens and frustrates. Any new attempt at energy reform will almost certainly see these games taken to new heights, especially when entrenched energy interests realize that, given the depletion of conventional resources, the playbook necessarily must change.
Our anger at this backroom dealing then gives birth to the second element of this unholy triumvirate -- the emergence of certain self-designated "Champions for Real America." These characters decry the wrongs that Real Americans everywhere (or at least in non-urban areas) are forced to endure and promise to wage a new "War on Government" in the people's name. Any government-led efforts to shift resources from conventional to alternative energy interests will certainly rouse these never-quite-asleep giants.
These self-professed "champions of the people" then give birth to the third, silver-tongued head of this beastly creature. Its task will be to ensure that discussions about reallocating the $50 billion in federal subsidies that oil companies receive are transformed into a debate about "Big Government's War On American Industry and Jobs." Cloaking special interest protections in the mantle of furious patriotism tends to be good strategy.
Things are not looking good for the Sputnik Moment.
But halfway around the world a group of people faced down a far more forbidding beast and insisted upon a new way of doing business. As our monster pales in comparison to the tyrannies of a 30-year autocracy, we surely could do the same.
As certain of our Big Government-hating lawmakers should know, in the real world clients expect results: just as the necessity of getting a deal done will require proponents of cap and trade to think more flexibly about the next "big" approach, those who reflexively object to reform efforts might be forced to make good faith contributions to the conversation if they know that voters expect constructive action. Those heretofore anti-reform lawmakers might, for instance, take the opportunity to advance proposals that would promote the twin pillars of federalism and economic growth -- such as taking that $50 billion and using it to provide block grants to the states for the development of their own alternative energy projects. (Of course, any such proposal would require their counterparts to abandon their own reflexive thinking: "states rights" is a loaded term -- but allowing Kentucky the right to determine whether it will pursue carbon capture technologies rather than hydrogen power is not the same as allowing Kentucky the right to determine whether African-Americans can attend integrated schools.)
I recently took a test drive in a fully-battery powered vehicle developed by Arcimoto, an Oregon-based company (by the way, I have no business relationship with Arcimoto and never have). The vehicle is a blast. Currently slated to go on the market for $17,500, it has a driving range of up to 160 miles. It needs no gas -- ever. Less than 10% of the company's funding came from public sources, and that which it did receive came in the form of county and municipal loans and grants. The company could immediately go into a low-volume production on this three-wheeled wonder with an additional $1.5 million -- peanuts when compared to BP's $225,000 a day tax deduction for the Deepwater Horizon.
Arcimoto and other innovators stand ready to participate in a new energy revolution. Whether Uncle Sam will partner with them so as create that economic and environmental opportunity, or whether it will continue feeding an entrenched and hungry beast, is an open question. Stay tuned.
Tanya M. Acker is an attorney who represents environmental technology companies and a political and legal commentator.
Follow Tanya M. Acker on Twitter: www.twitter.com/tanyaacker
past ten years it has replaced only 95."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The price of oil is going up. It is time to get serious about an energy policy of greater
self sufficiency. It is time to transition to safe, clean alternative energy here at home.
Wind, solar, wave energy, geothermal, CNG and second generation biofuels can all
be produced here with local labor.
The price of oil and coal are going up. The price of wind and solar are coming down.
Simpol offers voters the chance to set the policy agenda and, by using their votes in a coordinated, cooperative way, to DRIVE politicians to act upon that agenda.
http://www.simpol.org.uk
Drill baby drill!
The real threat to fossil fuel dominance is nuclear power. Watch for more news about the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR), a fast neutron reactor technology developed in the U.S. in the 80s and 90s. The IFR has a closed fuel cycle, meaning it produces essentially no waste. Further, as its fuel source the IFR uses nuclear "waste" from conventional reactors, and plutonium from decommissioned warheads. The IFR was specifically developed to address cost, safety, waste and proliferation issues far in excess of the current generation of nuclear technologies. It succeeded brilliantly on all counts. General Electric has blueprints for an IFR on the shelf, ready to build; it's called the S-PRISM. To learn more, visit www.thesciencecouncil.com, and www.bravenewclimate.com (both non-industry supported groups).
Will we ever see nuclear reactors on fossil fuel company banners? I doubt it.
Step #2 = Solar/Wind/Bio-fuel/Sewage-based Methane capture/etc. to augment the geothermal;
Included somewhere in here, I think it is important to address energy storage. Most "on-demand" energy sources that are "Green", or CleanTech (if you're truly serious about the engineering) are intermittent, which is fine except our energy storage systems are kinda weak. Though I think capacitor arrays are evolving quite well, they're not quite ready to be the solution...and batteries fail. One of the slickest systems I've seen converts excess solar, etc. into hydrogen storage for on-demand energy generation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEdQRVQtffw
The staggering cost of new nuclear power
http://www.grist.org/article/Exclusive-analysis-Part-1/
America is perched upon revolution or renaissance, and though I prefer renaissance, I fear revolution is likely unless we take our economic and environmental situations VERY seriously. I understand there are some very wealthy industries purchasing our politicians, but these industries do not have the best interests of the American people in mind...in fact, I would say they are a threat to national security, since they are poisoning our food and water supplies.
It is a fact that without the tax-based subsidies that falsely lower the cost (or falsely increase demand) for some of these energy sources, home-based energy alternatives would make DRAMATICALLY more sense, especially given the likelihood of conversion of our personal vehicles to other energy sources. If these same subsidies would be redirected towards implementation of home-based energy generation sources, not only would each household see energy independence, but likely economic input through an energy market created by energy excesses.
Homeland security...without the invasive "pat down".
http://aptera.com/
*Grin*
...for as much I promote them, you would think they might sponsor me with one...but I want an amphibious version...perhaps one that can deploy as a dirigible too!
Technology will always move forward and if you have a choice between cheap to run electric/hydrogen or ever more expensive petrol, for the same cost and performance, What are you going to buy?
So, you either build and sell them or buy them from another country.
Think it's by accident that the patents for nmh batteries are owned by an oil company?
See Green Light at www.aesopinstitute.org for an overview of how to slay the hydra and some of the Black Swan alternatives that are on the way to completely changing the energy game..
From Asprin to Upholstery: 60 Surprising Products Made from Oil
http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/oil-in-products-460510