This page has been put together in an attempt to educate people on the needs of the world for energy, present and future. Hopefully this page will encourage change and innovation, and how they are perceived by the people of the world, companies, and governments. Today's direction to develop new fossil-fuel based powerplants and the lack of employment of alternative energies should not be considered an acceptable option.
Automobiles, first mass produced in the 1920's, quickly became the world's primary means of transportation. Before automobiles, the world's need for oil was quite limited to the generation of limited supplies of electricity, and the production of lubricants and plastics. Today, the world's thirst for oil and other fossil fuels is enormous and showing no signs of slowing down. Our energy use is more efficient, but an increasing population and more automation leads to increased amounts of energy used every year. You can read more about the US's projected energy needs in this report - http://?. Note that the report was released by the US Department of Energy, and says that electricity demand will grow sharply over the next 20 years. In other words, we'll have to employ at least one new electric powerplant each week in order to keep up with minimum demand. But, today's power grid infrastructure is not capable of accepting electricity from these new powerplants.
Why?
Let's take a look at why, in today's world of high tech, we still use electrical generation and transportation technologies which are well over a hundred years old. Why do we continue to believe that fossil fuels are still the most efficient way to generate electricity and to move people from one place to another.
Why are "solutions" and "progress" a last minute ditch effort with no "proven" results?
Why is there no clean form of energy collection or production yet?
Why are people allowed to advertise "alternative energy" when these energies still damage the environment? For example, "clean burning" coal is being pushed at the moment as the solution to our energy problems. Coal still polutes no matter how "clean" it is burned.
Why can people stand up saying that they are doing their part, without reducing polution world-wide?
Why aren't alternative fuel vehiciles viable?
Why can't alternative energy be used in an SUV?
Why does NASA spend so much on space exploration when we haven't addressed the problems surrounding energy production?
Why are people afraid of alternative forms of energy?
Why are current wind, solar, and alternative fuel technologies so expensive?
If we're capable of building facilities to collect energy cheaper than what it costs today to burn fossil-based fuels, why does alternative energy cost more to the consumer?
Why does the word "alternative" have an "expensive" connonation when used by companies, government, and other institutions? It seems counterproductive that the DOE (Department of Energy), in their projections, assume that by 2020 alternative sources of energy won't contribute significantly to the need for energy.
Why do companies look to sell existing solutions, but not look to understand and embrace new solutions?
Why don't we look to other, cleaner, more efficient ways to collect, transport, store, and use energy? One reason is because we have a multi-trillion dollar worldwide infrastructure, all based on coal, natural gas, oil exploration, refinement, and transport which is replaced every few decades (approx. 30 years).
Hope!
As everyone knows, past performance is no good indication of future expectations. It's time to look for something better.
Great efforts, not in terms of size or money devoted, but in terms of contribution to research, have been made in wind, solar, fuel cell, and other alternative fuel technologies. All of the last 7 US presidents, both democrat and republican have funded huge research projects in these areas, with no luck in riding the US of its dependence on foreign oil. The bottom line is that these technologies still don't produce enough energy to move cars, and especially large trucks, efficiently. What fuel other that gasoline can be stored in a tank the size of your washing machine and carry the car and its passengers over 400 miles without stopping to refuel.
In response to our lack of alternatives in alternative fuels, we have to believe that there are ways to transport ourselves without using significant supplies of fossil fuels such as natural gas and gasoline. The industry and the people of the US do show signs of believing, producing and buying hybrid cars, electric cars, and fuel cell cars. There are many great examples of houses which generate their own electricity using wind or solar technologies. There is hope that Americans are turning towards new, innovative ways to collect energy and to use it to live a cleaner, more environmentally concious life.
The fact is, there are several possible solutions to the problems of energy production. These technologies show potential, and our inventors next door are dreaming up ideas which could very well lead to our 21st century solution for energy production. The solution is already here, we just need to see it implemented and give it room to expand. And the people of the US need to want a solution to our energy needs. We need to develop that need into a plan. Of course our plans and expectations should be realistic. Technology is developed over years, and we need to remember that as we invest in these technologies, providing for both the funding of the ideas and the patience needed to realize the slow incremental learning process that every new technology needs in order to succeed.
Imagine a world where energy flows freely. Cars would stop at the gas pump, not to fill up with a petroleum based gasoline, but to pick up a new store of energy which would produce zero emissions. A world where salt can be separated from sea water and pumped over land. Imagine a green world where desert was before. Imagine a world where tensions over depleting supplies of oil don't lead to war in the middle east.
If you think about the complex technologies that we would need to develop to realize such a world, then you would also think that this imaginary world is far from reality. That one day, maybe one day in the very distant future, we would see such a world for our children. But what if the technology that is needed for this futuristic world is available now? What if the technology isn't really that complex?
Hybrid cars are being mass-produced by companies like Honda and Toyota. Fuel cell research has been put at the top of the list by the Bush Administration. Car companies like Honda, Daimler-Chrysler, and GM are releasing small numbers of hydrogen-based, fuel cell technology cars which produce nothing but water as a result of combustion. Solar research continues, and solar cells are becoming more and more efficient each year. Wind powered turbines are receiving attention from big business, such as Warren Buffett's Mid-American Energy Corporation, which is planning a 310 megawatt wind farm for the countryside of Iowa. Every day, people are turning on to alternative sources of energy. And even the federal government recognizes the need to push acceptance of alternative fuels by giving tax incentives to do so. This is a very exciting time for alternative energies.
Robert Dold, an independent American inventor of technology with a German heritage, has been on a quest the find a solution...
Facts of fossil fuels:
One "Barrel" of crude oil contains 42 gallons, not 55 gallons.
It takes one barrel of oil to get four barrels to market. In other words, 20% of oil pumped from the ground is used as energy for pumping,transportation, and refinement.
One quart of oil will contaminate the surface of one square mile of clean water, making it unsuitable to drink.
Oil is lighter than water, that's why it floats on top.
"The percentage of gasoline produced from one barrel of crude oil varies depending upon the crude type, the refinery design and processing conditions. The range is from 20% to as much as 75% of gasoline produced. A typical fuel refinery will obtain 19 gallons of gasoline from each 42 gallon barrel of crude.", Christopher Skisak, Health and Medical Manager at Pennzoil-Quaker State.
The U.S. imports over 60% of its daily oil consumption. In the year 2000 total daily consumption was conservatively estimated at 19.5 million barrels per day. So imports were estimated at 11.5 million barrels per day.
The U.S. consumes approximately 6 billion barrels of oil per year, and is increasing.
All seven presidents of the past 30 years, Republican and Democratic alike, have unsuccessfully attempted to reduce U.S. oil conumption.
A rise in oil prices would cause severe impacts on the U.S. economy, but at the same time lowering prices would also cause severe impacts on the U.S. economy. In 1986 George H.W.Bush, then vice-president, traveled to the Persian Gulf region to urge Persian Gulf countries to lower their output and increase oil prices by 50%. Which they did.
Overall-, Germany, France, and Japan, require only half as much oil as the U.S. to produce the same amount of economic growth.
Remaining U.S. oil reserves are becoming increasingly costly to produce because much of the lower-cost oil has already been depleted.
The U.S. is the major oil consumer of the world.
U.S. demand for refined petroleum products currently exceeds our domestic capacity running at nearly 100% during paek consumption season. Requiring increased imports.
New England has no refineries, and it's small oil pipeline system is not connected to the interstate pipeline system. New England must rely on tanker and barge shipments of petroleum products from the south as well as from overseas imports.
OPEC produces about 20% of U.S. oil imports. Iraq produces about 2%.
In the 1980's it cost OPEC. a couple of dollars to produce a barrel of oil.
Tax on a gallon of gas is currently at an average of 41 cents.
In 1970 total U.S. energy was estimated at 82.9 billion dollars.
In 1999 total U.S. energy was estimated at 560.1 billion dollars.
In 2000 total U.S. energy was estimated at 703.2 billion dollars. A 143.1 billion dollar increase in one year.
Energy use in the U.S. increased 17% from 1991 to 2000. While during the same period U.S. production only increased 2.3%. Resulting in increased energy imports.
From 2000 to 2020 the U.S. will require between 1300 and 1900 new electric powerplants. Equivilant to between 60 and 90 per year. Equivilant to 1 or 2 per week, every week until 2020 just to keep up with demand. This is not happening, putting pressure on existing power plants to run at peak levels. But a bigger problem is if powerplants were to be built, there is no infrastructure to accept supplies of electricity and transport of the current reliably.
The largest source of U.S. electric generation is from coal.
Coal produces emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, and other toxic materials.
Building new coal powerplants is being discouraged in an attempt to lower carbon dioxide and other emmisions. A key reason the U.S. is relying heavily on growing the number of electric powerplants fueled by natural gas.
In 2000, domestic railroads transported an average of 14.4 million tons of coal a week. Transportation costs account for 30% to 50% of the final delivered price of coal to utilities, increasing "just in time" shipments to reduce inventory costs.
There is nothing natural about burning natural gas.
The U.S. currently consumes 22.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas per year.
Natural gas electric powerplants produce fewer emissions than coal-fired powerplants, but still do produce carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and other toxic emmisions.
Last year alone natural gas prices quadrupled.
Liquified Natural Gas, LNG., carrier ship imports into Boston increased by 350%.
It can take 3 weeks to move a tanker from the Gulf of Mexico to the West Coast.
The amount of natural gas used for electricity generation is projected to triple by 2020.
There are 158,000 miles of transmission lines for electricity in the U.S., and expantion of these lines is expected to be slow over the next ten years. Additions estimated to tatal 7000 miles creating transmission constraints as demand increases.
Another major problem is earth's magnetic feild which can cause additional current to enter transmission lines, which at times has caused regional grid collapse, and has destroyed power plant electrical transformers. Given sufficient warning to geomagnetic storms, protective measures have required northeastern powerplants to "shed" 20% of their loads during geomagnetic storms.
Politics:
"How OPEC keeps America hooked on oil imports" - A very interesting article describing the efforts of American presidents to either rid our dependence on foreign oil, or to force foreign oil producers to play by their rules...
