The Coming Energy Wars

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Saltydog_0 @ 06/02/2008 2:51:23 PM

    We love to pass the buck don't we? The politicians are causing this! The oil companies and their greed are to blame! OPEC is out to get us! China and India are selfish! Rich people are greedy!

    Blah blah blah. . .Just remember; anytime you point your finger, three more are pointing back at you. YOU are the problem and YOU are the solution.

    I say this with full knowledge of my own hypocrisy. Instead of trying to reduce my own energy use, I complain about the guy next door who has more money, uses more electricity and drives a bigger car. This is like Jeffrey Dahmer defending his killing 20 people by pointing out that Henry Lee Lucas killed 50. So what? Another's greater crime doesn't absolve one of their own culpability.

    The fact is, we Americans, all of us, are guilty. Our politicians only reflect our collective apathy. Oil companies only act in accordance with the business climate our actions create. Laying blame anywhere other than at our own feet is exactly the action required to ensure nothing changes. We've known for decades this day would come. We knew the earth's population was growing exponentially. We knew the world's oil supply was running out. We knew the pollution we spewed was rising to catastrophic levels. What did we do about it? We buried our heads in the sand. We blamed others. We bitched and moaned about our government while increasing our individual energy consumption.

    Well, now it's time to pay the piper. What will we do now? Nothing. the end we'll waste alot of energy crying crying about how we've been stabbed in the back; which is true enough. However, we'll never open our eyes to the fact that the hand holding the knife is our own.

    Go ahead. Blame the politicians. Blame the corporations. Blame other countries. Just don't expect anything to change.

  • Posted By: jerbella2008 @ 06/02/2008 2:28:06 AM

    What if we ran plug-in hybrids on ethanol?

    • Posted By: Beady_El @ 06/02/2008 2:51:15 PM

      Ethanol from corn is more-or-less carbon neutral. That is, the carbon released is the same carbon extracted from air and soil by the corn it's made from, only months or years earlier - rather than carbon that was stored deep underground eons ago. But using food crops to make auto fuel - or more generally, using farmland to operate our cards - has consequences of its own.

  • Posted By: Flash Drive @ 06/02/2008 12:34:30 PM

    Politicans and Oil Companies who have/are benifiting from super profits due to price increases are all holding the consumers as hostages. Congress has no inclination of moving in any direction that will reduce the burden from us.
    We can talk as much as we want but there will be no action until we begin holding out representatives accountable.
    I like many of us strongly believe that we should presrve the environment for future generations, however this does not restrict us from drilling provided we put in place adequate systems in place. Also we seriously need to relook our policy w.r.t. nuclear power. There are many other things that can be done such as increasing the CAFE standards, making more use of electric trains to commute,increasing the energy efficency standards of new homes.More use of ethanol produced from suger cane( higher yield that that of corn). Promote the use of solar and wind power. The list can go on and on, however don't get me wrong, there is a huge cost associated with alternatives, but it will worth it in the long run.

    • Posted By: Saltydog_0 @ 06/02/2008 2:50:17 PM

      We love to pass the buck don't we? The politicians are causing this! The oil companies and their greed are to blame! OPEC is out to get us! China and India are selfish! Rich people are greedy!

      Blah blah blah. . .Just remember; anytime you point your finger, three more are pointing back at you. YOU are the problem and YOU are the solution.

      I say this with full knowledge of my own hypocrisy. Instead of trying to reduce my own energy use, I complain about the guy next door who has more money, uses more electricity and drives a bigger car. This is like Jeffrey Dahmer defending his killing 20 people by pointing out that Henry Lee Lucas killed 50. So what? Another's greater crime doesn't absolve one of their own culpability.

      The fact is, we Americans, all of us, are guilty. Our politicians only reflect our collective apathy. Oil companies only act in accordance with the business climate our actions create. Laying blame anywhere other than at our own feet is exactly the action required to ensure nothing changes. We've known for decades this day would come. We knew the earth's population was growing exponentially. We knew the world's oil supply was running out. We knew the pollution we spewed was rising to catastrophic levels. What did we do about it? We buried our heads in the sand. We blamed others. We bitched and moaned about our government while increasing our individual energy consumption.

      Well, now it's time to pay the piper. What will we do now? Nothing. the end we'll waste alot of energy crying crying about how we've been stabbed in the back; which is true enough. However, we'll never open our eyes to the fact that the hand holding the knife is our own.

      Go ahead. Blame the politicians. Blame the corporations. Blame other countries. Just don't expect anything to change.

  • Posted By: CJ66 @ 06/02/2008 12:05:45 PM

    The oil crisis is in reality "The Environment Crisis". The price of oil is irrelevant. The strength of the dollar is irrelevant. The only hard fact is that we must stop burning fossil fuels. The continuing release of methane gas that was locked up in the shale beneath us must stop! If we don't, we are dead. It should be obvious to all that the vertical rise of Co2 on the graph is related to all these "super storms".

  • Posted By: denmason @ 06/02/2008 11:31:18 AM

    Back in the 70's, Henry Kissinger made a deal with the Saudis. We buy their oil, they get rich. They also had to do all oil business in U.S. Dollars, and take on paying OUR NATIONAL DEBT. This is the reason we are not getting the Alaskan oil. Doing so would cause the Saudis to drop the deal and America would CRASH. We are sitting on two (2) of the largest oil fields in the world (Alaska) and we are afraid of using them. Wake up Americans, and read about OUR Forefathers and how they wanted the U.S. to be run.

  • Posted By: andystractors @ 06/02/2008 11:25:19 AM

    In my research, I have found a couple of major problems for the best solutions on the drawingboard. One is funding, nobody is willing to cut their own throat. That means many who can invest in technology are unwilling to do so. An example is auto makers, there is a mindset that goes back to Henry Ford, 'they can have any color of tin lizzy they want, as long as it is black', they will continue to build vehicles which reap profits from the technology that has been used for decades, why change? At best, a new automobile is obsolete technology. They will not invest in developing new technology until market share forces them to. Oh, they will add little things to enhance sales, you can get a radio, AC, PS, etc, etc, but no major improvements which require investment, why should they, the fools just keep buying! Then there is distribution and taxation of fuel, we do have a system in place, you go to the gas pump, you pay tax, this supports the building and maintenance of roads, etc. We want good roads to drive on, well, money has to pay for them. Government is comfortable with the status quo. In order to get government funding for R&D, it is easier to persue avenues that don't rock their boat. The private sector is reluctant, because more efficient methods would affect their ability to get return on their investments. So, where do you turn? R&D is expensive! Electric is good, hydrogen is good, renewable is good, but there are these problems to address, first.

  • Posted By: Xerxes500 @ 06/02/2008 11:23:06 AM

    So all of this means that within the next couple of decades or so, Moslem Arabs would be Sultans of the world and the rest of the world would be left with no choice but to comply with every single one of their wishes, desires and wants. So we would be going back to the dark ages!
    Cheers for capitalism !

  • Posted By: jericho4119 @ 06/02/2008 7:57:51 AM

    Electric cars need to hit the market in force by the year 2012; our government needs to subsidized the purchase of these cars by our citizens as we replace or retire our current fleet of gasoline powered cars. Gas taxes need to be raised to encourage the transfer to electric cars and driving needs to be discouraged at the same time that mass transit is encouraged. A much higher percentage of our travel across the NE corridor needs to be transferred from planes and cars to trains - particularly electric trains.

    Our power plants need to shift away from coal and natural gas. Our coastlines and the mid-west should be dotted with wind power plants by 2015; our southwest should become a solar energy producer to rival the oil fields of Saudi Arabia. Concentrated Solar Power plants can produce low cost power around the clock, as they store up the sun's energy during the day, by converting it to heat used to power turbines. Any CSP plant on our shorefront can convert saltwater to freshwater, which can become part of the solution of relieving the extended droughts that we are facing.

    • Posted By: xescvs @ 06/02/2008 8:21:26 AM

      I agree we much change the way we do thinks in America, I have read many of the comments here, they from two camps rely on oil of try to get away from it. Ultimately we much move away from oil because of greenhouse effects so we should not spend much more time improving this technology since we can not sustain it for the next 100 years.Secondly I we can not afford as country to totally re invent the wheel, this will take decades, Solar is ok but presently too inefficient to solve our problems, we need to transition for the next 10-20years.
      The US will fail as a superpower if it does not have a serious 10-20 year foward looking energy policy. Our presidential candiates have not one word of vision about this looming crisis. My suggestion can help this country solve this crisis, it is has two steps first we need energy with a zero carbon footprint and no pollution to get it or make it.
      This is clearly ATOMIC ENERGY , I know you all get frightened at even the thought, but if we do not embrace atomic energy soon the authors doomsday scenario might come true. Lets face it atomic energy in the US/ Europeans hands has been safe for over 30 years. Oh yes we should build them in sparsely populated areas and yes the fuel rods if there is nuclear waste can be put on an Altlas rocket and put into deep space. This would require electric cars. P.S. that technology is already developed. Secondly we must conserve.

      So here is the greatest challenge to our policy makers, give people jobs creating 200-1000 new atomic energy powerplants improve our electric transmission infrastucture and as a by product save the world from world war 3 the energy war.

  • Posted By: xescvs @ 06/01/2008 10:18:40 PM

    The author does point out some interesting facts and it is true that the US will fail as a superpower if it does not have a serious 10-20 year foward looking energy policy. Our presidential candiates have not one word of vision about this looming crisis. My suggestion " called the "Schwarzwald Plan"can help this country solve this crisis, it is has two steps first we need energy with a zero carbon footprint and no pollution to get it or make it.
    This is clearly ATOMIC ENERGY , I know you all get frightened at even the thought, but if we do not embrace atomic energy soon the authors doomsday scenario might come true. Lets face it atomic energy in the US/ Europeans hands has been safe for over 30 years. Oh yes we should build them in sparsely populated areas and yes the fuel rods if there is nuclear waste can be put on an Altlas rocket and put into deep space. This would require electric cars. P.S. that technology is already developed. Secondly we must conserve.

    So here is the greatest challenge to our policy makers, give people jobs creating 200-1000 new atomic energy powerplants improve our electric transmission infrastucture and as a by product save the world from world war 3 the energy war.

    • Posted By: seanw3 @ 06/01/2008 10:48:30 PM

      Yes, but would the enviormentalist allow us to build more nuclear reactors?

      • Posted By: xescvs @ 06/02/2008 8:10:55 AM

        Well thats a maybe, but lets think about it fro a second we have now loss of jobs, global warming from ossil fuels, possible wars over oil. Then there is Nuclear energy is clean and safe , No Carbon emissions, made right here in America , create jobs , put food on the table instead of someones gas tank.

        America must WAKE UP and get going on this issue, look at your kids in the morning and decide to get behind an susutable energy policy or we will hand a country to our kids thats in decline that will to go to war for OIL!!!

    • Posted By: WRAY EDWARDS @ 06/02/2008 12:36:50 AM

      NUCLEAR ENERGY?? Have you taken a look at the carbon footprint ("Global Warming" is a religion, not a scientific fact) it takes to build one of these millstones? Have you studied the energy needed to refine the uranium isotopes from yellow cake through hexaflouride cycles, and finally spent fuel pellets and irridiated reactor parts. There aren't enough rockets on the planet to throw our nuclear cigarrette butts into outer space. Nuclear reactors are the reductim absurdem of man's fascination with fire in metal boxes. It's just another internal combustion engine. Trouble is, the exhaust is radioactive. How perfect it is that the French (fertility rate 1.2) are the world's leading nuclear fanatics. Then again, at 1.2, there won't be enough of them around to bother cleaning things up. By then the Muslims (fertility rate 6+) will predominate and they are welcome to the proceeds of the nuclear age of all those Jerry Lewis fans.

      • Posted By: xescvs @ 06/02/2008 8:04:44 AM

        I must disagree with your comment, there is NO carbon foot from a nuclear power it produces steam which generates electricity. It will remove TONS of carbon over its 50 year life span , thats a negative number. New designed reactor's use light water technology , waste is not a problem.
        PS despite our feelings about the French they do not seem to have a problems with waste while they generate 85% of the countries electrcity from nuclear. We may not like them but , you know they are in much better shape on this issue than is America, lets not be so conceded as a country not to learn from others.

  • Posted By: enduser @ 06/01/2008 10:20:31 PM

    xescvs.... you are right on the money i think... that is the only viable answer to the problems we face... the only problem with that solution is that it will take years for those plants to come on line.

    • Posted By: xescvs @ 06/02/2008 7:50:05 AM

      thank you for your comment, yes it will take time but americans need jobs now this is great opportunity to put people back to work, retrain if needed someof our work force. We also need to conserve. All the anger I see in the comments from some of the other readers should be directed to gettting our nation energy policy to move and make a goal of at least 50% of our electricity from Nuclear Energy. PS I have no vested interest in nuclear xcept to have my kids free from the OIL curse and dependentcy on it.

  • Posted By: eaglwlker12 @ 06/01/2008 10:42:44 PM

    All the idiots are missing one big point. We have enough oil in America to last till the next century. Why are we not using it? I guess so the rich can get richer and the US can go down the tubes. How is it that iran gas is .42 and we are almost 4.00? And turkey is 11.00. WHO is controlling this. And why do other countries have many types of vehicles that get 60+mpg and we don't. WHO is controlling this? People stand up and fight or we will cease to be a free country.

    • Posted By: xescvs @ 06/02/2008 7:44:05 AM

      onr thing you missed is carbon dixoxide,,,, go nuclear safe clean no emissions

  • Posted By: Jimbo49 @ 06/01/2008 10:55:32 PM

    We have known since Jimmy Carter days that the Arabs have us over a "barrel" yet we haven't done a thing about it, not Republicans and not Democrats. We could be drilling off our coasts and in Alaska but the environmentals scare us too much. And now Bush has listed the Polar Bear as "threatened" which will put even more of Alaska off limits. We have enough coal to last many years but are afraid to use it because it might pollute. Maybe we needed to research this a bit and figure out ways to use the dirty coal. Hitler finished WW2 by converting coal to oil. WE have more oil tied up in oil shale in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah than the Arabs have oil. Utah is trying to develop environmentally friendly oil shale but Congress is blocking it. Honda and GM have some pretty interesting prototypes than run on fuel cells or hydrogen so why hasn't the country made the investment in these type of cars to make them commercial? When was the last Nuclear Plant built - nobody can remember that long. Why don't we have wind farms around all our small towns and Sun Farms in the Southwest? It's not like we didn't see this coming. Why have plants been forced to go away from coal? The "environment" is not going to mean squat when our country is completely broke and the only thing separating us from third world countries are our nukes. Besides, we could figure out better ways to use coal, better stack scrubbers and etc. Your normal guy and gal who pack a lunch box to work can see all these things but our politicians don't seem to have a clue.

    • Posted By: PmK. @ 06/01/2008 11:08:23 PM

      The intial investment in wind or sun resources is too much and nuclear waste is well nuclear waste. Also, hydrogen we don't really have a way to make it cheaply. I agree with the coal idea though.

      • Posted By: xescvs @ 06/02/2008 7:41:55 AM

        Nuclear waste by the way is no longer a problem, look at France 85% of electric generated from nuclear, do you here about waste.? No. PS Deep space is a good way to get rid of it. No greenpeace people lie anywhere near Pluto .

  • Posted By: Beady_El @ 06/01/2008 11:21:44 PM

    I'm liberal, and I'm in favor of expanded nuclear power in the US; IF accompanied by a full disentanglement of the NRC from the Nuclear power industry. Nuclear reactors can be made extremely safe; disasters like Chernobyl can be made effectively impossible

    • Posted By: xescvs @ 06/02/2008 7:38:11 AM

      I agree Nuclear atomic energy is they to make the US an Energy superpower again and save the planet from global warming.

  • Posted By: tomcat631 @ 06/02/2008 7:36:12 AM

    Hey even if the public isn't fully aware, the government is fully aware of what???s going on and does nothing about it. Billion dollar profits equal billion dollar hidden monopolies and get rich interest groups. These oil companies have no interests in reinvesting their profits to provide a better future, so why do we continue to let them rape our economy. Tax them like everyone else and establish legislative reform to insure they alter output accordingly and not conveniently.

  • Posted By: Bob Johnson @ 05/31/2008 9:16:53 PM

    The article said: "Meanwhile, Nissan unveiled a $115 million new plant outside Tokyo designed to build lithium-ion fuel cells to power a new generation of battery cars." Actually, Nissan will build lithium-ion *batteries*, not fuel cells.


    • Posted By: adirondack_1 @ 06/02/2008 7:31:19 AM

      Also, carbon nanotube batteries which are far more efficient and lighter will make advances in electric transportation.
      Once the market figures out how to profit from hydrogen power, like selling water or leasing the units at a price that would require a mortgage, the cost of electricity will drop to where using fossil fuels is just plain dumb. Congress has the power to put this technology in the publics hands but is letting the free market system shun it for its lack of return on investment.
      We need government to set up a public company to provide development of hydrogen power, Similar to the rural electrification act that spawned the transformation of this country from a wilderness to an industrial giant. That "carbon fed giant" needs to change his diet now to hydrogen. Solar-electric generation of hydrogen can support our entire energy needs where that energy must come during darkness.

      Sun-collector/ electrical-high efficiency battery- replaces oil entirely
      Sun-collector/ electrical- hydrogen generation- storage-use (the only way this market can be used as a commodity and traded)
      Sun- heat collector- phase change storage- home heating, also replaces oil entirely
      Wind- generator- electric-use

  • Posted By: rudhrach.madadh.alluidh @ 06/02/2008 7:25:00 AM

    "The one I work at has about 270000 barrel a day refining capacityand is only running about 80000 barrels a day. sounds like we could be getting more gas if Big OIL wanted huh?"

    You obviously don't work at an oil refinery. The lowest monthly US barrel production was in 2004 with 4.86 million barrels, still at over 90% efficiency. Average efficiency today runs at 98%, combined with constant work to meet new standards to even suggest that more could be produced is ridiculous. From someone who does contract work at refineries, we're stretched to the maximum already, as is every single refinery in this country. Of course, the US produces so little compared to other parts of the world that to even cut our production in half would affect prices by no more than a couple percent, so to say that the refinery you claim to work at is affecting prices by producing so little (which none in this country report numbers close to what you're claiming) makes no sense. Even if your numbers for that refinery were correct, it wouldn't create a change at the pumps. The US as a whole barely affects prices, we use so little compared to other major nations that if we stopped using it entirely production around the world would still be required to maintain the same levels it's running at and prices would only be affected by a mere few cents. Nothing we do in this country strongly affects barrel prices, a huge portion of what we pay comes from land taxes and federal and state taxes that the gas station owners must pay. Again, we're only paying 30 cents more based on inflation than we paid in 1910, the price we pay being cheaper than the vast majority of the world.

  • Posted By: rudhrach.madadh.alluidh @ 06/02/2008 7:14:52 AM

    "Get the facts America. Big Oil cn still raise output at the refineries. Ours can output 270000 barrels a day and is only running about 80000 barrels a day now."

    I don't know what refinery you're working at then, because the lowest producing refinery in the states right now is running at close to 94% efficiency, with the average US refinery efficiency at 98%. This with constant work and billions of dollars a year per refinery to upgrade all of them to match new standards. Even with each oil producer individually spending more on upgrades than the cost of the Iraq War, they're still keeping efficiency at higher levels than we've seen in decades. There's not a chance of output in US refineries being raised, we're being hard pressed to maintain these steady levels as is, which is one reason we're paying so ridiculously little for gas right now, only 30 cents more based on inflation than almost 100 years ago and half what a huge percentage of the world is paying.

  • Posted By: Ceunei @ 06/02/2008 7:03:26 AM

    It seems no one wants to give up gasoline. Tsk. Tsk.
    I am very saddened by this.
    The United States didn't learn it's lesson in the 1970's and we are repeating history. Will we learn this time?
    Truly, I wonder if anyone really cares about the planet being able to sustain our lifeform. The planet will survive; it has recycled countless lifeforms. But, as humans in the United States, we just don't seem to care if our geneological replicas in the form of great and great-great grandchildren are able to easily survive.
    Future be da**ed and give us our oil we seem to say.....quit hurting our pocketbooks so we can continue to travel really fast and tailgate those in front of us in our private chariots.
    Why oh why did I choose to procreate, now? My poor baby, being born in interesting times. I hope I can raise her well enough to resist the U.S. society's short-sightedness, selfishness, and self-destructiveness. And, the older generations wonder why the younger generations don't seem to care. We were taught well, my elders, by the fact you all don't care.

  • Posted By: harleyj @ 06/02/2008 6:46:02 AM

    The USA has a 500 year supply of coal, an estimated 1-3 trillion barrels of oil in oil shale, mega deposits of natural gas, oil in Alaska, untaped oil in the Gulf and we haven't even looked off the east coast. What this nation lacks is the will. A once can do nation has become the nation of 1000 reasons why we can't while the rest of the world passes us by. Our own reserves in conjuction with nuclear, solar, geothermal, wind and biofuels and conservation there is no reason why we should be buying energy from OPEC or anyone else. You can blame big oil, you can blame OPEC, however the blame should be directed to those beltway do nothing politicians who over the course of 30 years have done nothing to ensure this nation is energy selfsufficient.

  • Posted By: OnTheInsideLookingOUt @ 06/02/2008 5:43:14 AM

    Get the facts America. Big Oil cn still raise output at the refineries. Ours can output 270000 barrels a day and is only running about 80000 barrels a day now. All about greed and Money. Better get a farm with that horse because you can't afford to feed it with these huge gas prices.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse