"The potential cost-effective windpower in the Dakotas could make as much hydrogen as the world now uses—enough, if used in efficient fuel-cell vehicles, to displace all oil now used by U.S. highway vehicles," Amory Lovins, June 2003.
The Energy Action Project is a non-profit service organized to provide information and suggestions to citizens interested in working towards solutions for California's and America's energy problems. Thirty years ago the oil crisis opened our eyes to our system's inefficiency and over dependence on foreign oil. Since then we have failed to aggressively implement energy efficient strategies and alternative energy supplies, such as hydrogen powered fuel cells. Even though we claim our space program is developing new technologies which will develop new industries and solve problems on earth, our government has not actively brought fuel cells to the market place. Fuel cells have been advanced and perfected by NASA, yet Honda has built the first fuel-cell car accepted by the EPA in the U.S. So were is the carryover from our advanced space technology to real-world markets? Why do overseas companies continue to beat us to the punch in converting emerging technologies to consume products? The President's commitment to spending $1.2 billion on hydrogen technology is in the right direction, but a drop in the bucket compared to the 100s of billions spent on developing and promoting nuclear technology. All the major technologies used by utilities to operate nuclear power plants have been paid for and subsidized by the Federal government, including waste disposal and storage, and plant decommissioning.
The Hydrogen Economy vs. Oil
Oil shapes our foreign policy. Countries who aid us in getting oil are our friends. Those who could jeopardize our need to import 60% of our annual consumption are considered threats. We have gone to war over oil twice. The recent war will cost U.S. taxpayers $80 billion for the first six months alone. Yet we are now more dependent on foreign oil then ever with the share of over seas oil rising from 40% in the 1970s to 60% presently. To pay for this foreign oil we have burdened our nation with an annual balance of payments deficit of over $40 billion for the last 30 years. The Federal government has failed to aggressively take steps to make the U.S. more efficient and self-sufficient on the strategic, industrial, and domestic level. If you don't want your children to go to war in the middle east every ten years over oil, work for the hydrogen economy.
Often industry is out in front of our national governments. Here is what some major corporations are saying about the hydrogen economy:
- "It could well be that the first country to seriously address the issues of creating a market for renewables would become the central location for a major new international business sector - with all the positive consequences that carries in terms of economic activity and employment. There is great scope in all of this for government and business to work together to build the right conditions for renewables." Rodney Chase, Deputy Group Chief Executive and Chief Executive of BP
- "By the second decade of this century, mass production of
automotive fuel cells will result in first, a glut in the world oil
supply and then, in a total rejection of oil as a vehicle fuel."
K. Atakan Ozbek, VP Energy Research, Allied Business Intelligence - "As evidenced by the Hy-Wire, we want Californians to see first-hand that General Motors is very committed to leading the way to a hydrogen economy," said Elizabeth A. Lowery, GM vice-president, environment and energy. Sacramento, Feb 10, 2003
Efficiency vs. Energy Production
California's recent energy problems could have been addressed quickly and more economically through conservation and efficiency measures. When the State needed a reserve of 4000-5000 megawatts of peak electrical capacity during the recent summers, we told consumers to turn off their lights. Yet motors in equipment in industry and refrigerators and air conditioners in houses use the bulk of our electricity. More efficient, economical motors are available that can save 10% on energy costs, and there are several steps that owners can take to reduce their air conditioning bills by at least 10%. The State began a public campaign to encourage conservation, but California never aggressively adopted efficiency measures which can reduce power plant needs 24 x 7, 365 days of the year, regardless of the conservation steps taken by the public. Statewide efficiency measures in the early 1990s reduced electricity needs by 10,000 megawatts (MW). But more can be done. Here are some examples of how we can take the efficient path first and reduce 1300 Power Plants to 490.
Take Action
First, the long-term solution is the hydrogen economy. See our list of suggestions for citizen action. Did you send a letter to your U.S. Senator and Representative protesting allowing more oil drilling in Alaska? If not, check out the following suggested sample:
Dear Senator or Representative,
We need a national energy policy that includes an aggressive embrace of energy efficiency. Why pour more water into the tub before you plug the drain? That is exactly what we do when we dump more oil and electricity into wasteful transportation, lighting, and power systems.
People don't want oil, gas, or electricity. They want transportation, lighting, heating and cooling. We have improved ways of delivering these services. Check out the Rocky Mountain Institute (http://www.rmi.org) for copious examples.
For example, we now have the lowest auto fleet fuel efficiency average since 1980! We have wasted two decades of potential progress. Revive the requirements for auto manufacturers to improve average fuel efficiency by 2 m.p.g. per year. That alone will easily save more gas than is in the entire Alaskan oil reserve. And if today's SUVs and light trucks were as efficient as passenger cars, we could save more gasoline than is economically recoverable from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in less than 3 years. Save those resources for our children.
Another alternative would be to require that replacement tires equal the quality and friction reducing properties of new tires that come standard on new cars. That would save 5.4 billion barrels of oil over the next 50 years, or about 70 percent more oil than can be economically recovered from the Arctic Refuge over the same time period.
Pumping more oil down the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline System will actually make our nation more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Half of the 800 mile long pipeline is above ground and has been deemed indefensible by the Army. And if it is attacked or damaged during the winter, the conditions are so severe that it can not be repaired until the following summer. Why set up America to be strategically vulnerable?
Practical alternatives are staring us in the face. Will you introduce legislation to return to mandated improved fleet fuel efficiency? Before we rush to Alaska, or Montana, or Colorado, can we not first ensure that our tires are efficient and banking oil for future generations. If the lower 48 states would use efficient tires, we wouldn't need oil from the 49th state. I urge you to propose a national energy policy which will maximize opportunities in energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. The day that efficiency is deemed bad for our economy is a sad day for America!
Please Contact the Energy Action Project if you have any further suggestions for citizen action.