AMERICAN ENERGY INDEPENDENCE IS A NECESSITY

IF THERE WAS A WILL,
THERE WOULD BE A WAY

In comparison to the crime and heath care problems, the problem of energy independence is relatively easy. The solutions are already available, provided by modern hybrid and alternative fuel technology. The real problem is political. Becoming energy independent will hurt the Saudis and give the Neocons less of an excuse to pump more taxpayer dollars into the military-industrial complex.

Bush’s relationship with the Saudis is suspicious to say the least. Osama bin Laden’s eldest brother was an early investor in W’s first oil venture and 140 Saudis, including 24 relatives of bin Laden, got special permission from the Bush Administration to fly out of the country right after 9/11, never to be questioned on what they might have known about the attack. The intertwined history of the Saudi Royal Family and the Bush family is long and well documented. To make things even worse, the Saudis have the worst record on woman’s rights in the Middle East. In spite of all this, Bush never criticizes them for anything.

Power generation is essentially not a part of the problem. Only 3% of America’s electricity is generated by oil. As of 2003, 53% of our electricity production is generated by coal, 21% nuclear, 15% gas, 7% hydroelectric and 1% by other means. The United States is first in the world in coal production and has plenty of low sulfur reserves. We’re no slouch in gas either, wherein we rank 6th in the world. In addition, we can put nuclear power plants in low population areas, like our deserts, and send the power by way of electrical transmission lines to almost anywhere in the country.

The longest electrical transmission line in the world is 1050 miles and located in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It has been in operation since 1982. Using the same high voltage direct current technology, we can locate nuclear reactors in our own desert, and feed electrical power to almost all of the major American cities.

The solution is not to build additional refineries, as suggested by the Saudis, and backed by (surprise!) George W. Bush. A lack of refineries should cause the price of crude to go down, not up. We need less crude, not more, if we do not have the capacity to refine it!

Energy independence is served by producing more at home, and using less. This will eventually stabilize the cost of gasoline, leave us independent of the oppressive OPEC regimes, increase domestic employment, dramatically help us with our balance-of-payments problem, and control the climate changes due to fossil fuel emissions.

At the present time the United States imports 56% of its petroleum needs. Current government mileage standards, measured liberally, are 27.5 miles per gallon for new passenger cars and 20.7 miles per gallon for light trucks and SUVs. Making some very rough calculations, and risky assumptions, we come to the rough estimate that those numbers will have to be increased to 47 mpg and 62 mpg respectively if America is to become energy independent.

Hybrids are a significant step in the right direction. General Motors is introducing hybrid technology into its full-size pickup line for 2005 but claims that it will achieve only a 10-12% improvement in fuel efficiency. Passenger cars could average a 20% improvement in mileage. While these gains may be modest compared to what is needed for energy independence, the good news is that the concept is selling well. One optimistic forecast is that the hybrid sales in 2005 will equal all of the hybrid sales since they were introduced in 2000. Others have predicted that the projected annual sales in 2025 will actually be met in 2010.

Regardless of the Bush Administration’s lack of incentive to promote fuel economy, the Japanese will not be stopped. Japan has almost no oil of its own, and must depend entirely on imports. (Remember that the attack on Pearl Harbor was a result of America’s oil blockade of Japan.) Toyota seems to be in the lead with its Prius. Honda is a distance behind Toyota with its Insight and Civic Hybrid.

Hydraulic Hybrids, which use a hydraulic drivetrain, and other modifications may achieve a 30-40% improvement.

The ultimate gasoline economy concept is the hydrogen-powered vehicle, which uses no gasoline at all. While almost all major auto companies are seriously involved in the development of hybrid vehicles, BMW has chosen not to get into hybrids at all and is focusing all of its efforts on hydrogen.

The energy independence problem is almost entirely due to our need for gasoline. Tom Friedman, in a June 17 editorial in the New York Times, feels that we have that problem already solved. His information came from an interview with the co-chairman of the Set America Free coalition, a bipartisan alliance that believes that reducing oil consumption is a national priority.

Set America Free advocates adding a plug-in feature to hybrid cars. If such cars were routinely plugged in overnight, the battery power could deliver the first 20 miles each day without the use of any gasoline. As mentioned before, electrical power generated remotely by the use of natural gas, coal and nuclear power and delivered via high voltage direct current transmission lines, can easily supply the needed extra electrical power. The Set America Free estimate of mileage that can be achieved in this way is 100 miles/gallon for a compact car. While this estimate seems optimistic, we need not achieve a number anywhere near it in order to realize energy independence.

Set America Free goes further to argue in favor of what is called flexible-fuel cars, which with minor modifications of current cars, can burn any mixture of ethanol, methanol and gasoline. Combining plug-in hybrids with a flexible fuel system that burns 80% alcohol would yield compact cars that can get 500 miles per gallon of gasoline.

We won’t go that far, but it is easy to imagine that automobiles with some combination of hybrid technology, plug-in overnight recharging and flexible fuel can meet America’s need for energy independence. And if that isn’t quite enough, we have yet to discuss finding more of our own petroleum.

An oil well does not have a meter that reads “empty”. Oil is available at a price. When the price is too high for it to be pumped and refined at a profit, then it is “empty” but only for practical purposes that may be temporary. As the price of raw petroleum rises, it becomes practical to utilize sources that are more expensive, such as deeper deposits, or areas where the likelihood of drilling success is diminished. It also becomes more practical to refine the heavier crudes which may yield more waste and less gasoline. Therefore, the higher the price of imported petroleum, the easier it will be for America to become energy independent.

I would like to end this article with a very controversial suggestion. Why doesn’t the United States put a tariff on imported oil, or, even better, a tariff that is scheduled year after year, until it just won’t be practical to import any more? I hope that this idea is controversial enough for you to Email me with your opinion

LHS