The New Age of Fossil Fuels

There's a must-read article at Salon.com called, "Everything you've heard about fossil fuels may be wrong." It's amazing that it even appeared at Salon. An argument strongly in favor of fossil fuels that debunks various environmentalist predictions of doom, at Salon? As I read it I was anticipating the shrieks of outrage that were sure to greet it. Check out the comments for entertainment value. Liberals aren't fond of challenges to their cherished assumptions. Here's a couple excerpts from the article.

If gas hydrates as well as shale gas, tight oil, oil sands and other unconventional sources can be tapped at reasonable cost, then the global energy picture looks radically different than it did only a few years ago. Suddenly it appears that there may be enough accessible hydrocarbons to power industrial civilization for centuries, if not millennia, to come. ... The abundance and geographic diversity of fossil fuels made possible by technology in time will reduce the dependence of the U.S. on particular foreign energy exporters, eliminating the national security argument for renewable energy. And if the worst-case scenarios for climate change were plausible, then the most effective way to avert catastrophic global warming would be the rapid expansion of nuclear power, not over-complicated schemes worthy of Rube Goldberg or Wile E. Coyote to carpet the world’s deserts and prairies with solar panels and wind farms that would provide only intermittent energy from weak and diffuse sources.

The whole article is definitely worth reading.

Germans Protest Clean Energy

Germany plans to extend the life-span of its existing nuclear power plants, but that idea brought out thousands of protesters.

Waving banners with slogans like “shut down the government now,” demonstrators trudged through rain to urge Merkel to backtrack and uphold a pledge made by her predecessor Gerhard Schroeder to switch off Germany’s nuclear power plants by 2021. ... Green Party flags and banners could be seen every step of the way as the protest descended on her office in Berlin.

This is exhibit A as to why many environmentalists just can't be taken seriously. It's pretty funny that the Green Party is actually opposing the one proven viable large-scale alternative energy source. Maybe they should change the name to the Oil & Coal Party. If you shut down nuclear plants, that energy will have to be replaced by other means. And pie-in-the-sky dreams about solar, wind or other left-wing environmentalist-approved energy just won't do the job. Anyone worried about climate change and limiting the use of fossil fuels should be a huge supporter of nuclear power. If Germany is stupid enough to shut down its nuclear power plants, maybe they could do us a favor, ship them to America and reopen them here. We could definitely use more.

Expand Offshore Oil Drilling

There's an article at Bloomberg today called "Halt U.S. Offshore Drilling After BP Oil Spill."The author, Michael Brune, is a member of the Sierra Club, so it's not like he supported offshore drilling before this accident. But let's see what he says.

The death of 11 oil workers and the devastation of the Gulf Coast’s ecosystems and economy by the toxic sludge gushing from a BP Plc accident site is a tragedy that may well change the course of our nation.

By that he means cutting back on our domestic energy exploration. Let's hope not.

Americans are horrified.

I'm not horrified. Accidents happen. There have been very few major offshore oil accidents. There's no reason to panic and shut everything down because of one bad accident.

Leaders who had been willing to give offshore drilling the benefit of a doubt have abruptly changed their minds, including California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who said he no longer supports a plan to allow limited drilling for oil off his state’s coast.

Schwarzenegger is a typical weasel politician. He wasn't that enthusiastic about drilling to begin with, and now he's seized on this accident to change his position, almost certainly because he thinks that's the way the political wind is blowing in California.

They’re right. There is no safe way to drill for oil in oceans.

There's no completely safe way to do almost anything. No matter how many precautions you take, accidents can still happen. The rest of the article is the usual utopian nonsense about our "clean energy future," and a call for more big government intervention.

In reality, there is no replacement for fossil fuels in the near or even readily foreseeable future. We should definitely be working on gradually shifting toward cleaner forms of energy, including a major expansion of nuclear power, something the Sierra Club opposes, even though it's the only proven large scale alternative energy source. But even as we work toward bringing cleaner sources of power online, we will need more, not less oil, since our energy demands continue to grow. For various well-known reasons, domestic oil sources are preferable to over-reliance on foreign suppliers.  The vast majority of the U.S. is not willing to sacrifice its standard of living and damage the economy to satisfy radical environmentalists like members of the Sierra Club. In direct contrast to what the Michael Brunes of the country think, the U.S. should not pretend that we can somehow make a quick switch away from fossil fuels. The U.S. government should ignore environmentalist hysteria and overreaction to an accident, expand offshore drilling, and build more refineries. We need the oil and gas.

Huge Solar Project in Africa

A consortium of twelve European companies announced a major solar energy initiative today. The ambitious $400 billion project aims to supply 15% of European energy needs by 2050, with the first energy flowing to Europe by 2015.  At its start, the project will utilize the abundant sunlight in the Sahara desert.

The first stage will be to build massive solar energy fields across North Africa's Sahara desert, utilising concentrated solar power technology (CPS), which uses parabolic mirrors to focus the Sun's rays on containers of water.

It will be interesting to see how this progresses, and if it can be kept on schedule and within budget.

Obama's Press Conference

Unlike many on the right, I don't have a big problem with Obama's response to the Iranian situation -- other than his ridiculous notion that he can somehow negotiate away Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. Most of what he said on Iran I expected, and most had little meaning. There was one remark that caught my attention. The president said,

The Iranian people have a universal right to assembly and free speech

Well, obviously they don't. Otherwise some of them wouldn't be getting gunned down in the street by security forces. 

Obama went on to discuss energy. Most of what he said in this section was nonsense -- as usual.

These incentives will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy.

Yeah right. I doubt even Obama believes that. Barring some kind of amazing scientific breakthrough, fossil fuels will be our primary energy source for the foreseeable future. There's nothing wrong with promoting some alternative energy measures, but Obama's remarks are just delusional. If Obama really cared about clean energy, he'd be doing everything possible to push the construction of our one major proven technology -- nuclear power. But of course he isn't.

Finally, the president addressed healthcare. Here Obama is either lying, being intellectually dishonest, or is just utterly clueless. He's pushing the fantasy that a massive government intervention in healthcare, estimated at $1 trillion (and likely to cost far more), is somehow going to bring down costs. He also pretends that a government insurance plan, paid for with tax money and backed by the weight of the federal government, is somehow going to be able to compete fairly with private plans that actually have to take profit/loss into account.  It would be nice if Obama were actually honest about the implications and costs of his healthcare proposals, and if he just tried to sell them on the merits. But that's too much to ask.

Building New Nuclear Plants?

There's actually some good news today about energy. According to a short report in the Wall Street Journal, four utility companies will get 18.5 billion in loan guarantees to start constructing new nuclear power plants starting in 2011. The first plants are projected to come online by 2015.

The U.S. should have been building nuclear plants regularly. Hopefully this new construction effort, which the Journal calls "the biggest step in three decades to revive the U.S. nuclear industry," won't be delayed or sabotaged by the usual suspects. 

A Cool Idea

At Green Inc., a New York Times blog, there is an interesting article up about the use of seawater for cooling and energy. The author, Kate Galbraith, points out that cold seawater already forms the basis for an air-conditioning system at several sites.  

At around 40 degrees Fahrenheit, chilly seawater can be used to air-condition buildings. The seawater “can chill fresh water in a heat exchanger or flow directly into a cooling system,” according to the Department of Energy.

Although the air-conditioning technology is already functional, Galbraith also links to another article of hers, "Generating Energy From the Deep," that looks at a much more dramatic effort to use seawater to create energy. Lockheed Martin and other companies are working on methods that use the temperature differential between cold & warm sea water to produce renewable energy. As with most alternative energy proposals, there are all sorts of problems and drawbacks, including massive cost, but it is an interesting idea to keep an eye on.

Coal-to-Liquid Loans in the Stimulus

The Vine, an environmental blog at The New Republic, has a piece up attacking provisions for coal-to-liquid plant loan guarantees in the stimulus. They call it "The Senate's Insane Coal Idea." Their argument is that coal-to-liquid plants are big polluters, and that liquified coal produces more emissions than gasoline. I find their objections silly, and another example of why we shouldn't listen to environmentalists when making any sort of serious decisions.

I oppose the stimulus outright, but if we must have it, this provision isn't any worse than most of the garbage contained within it. The Vine article acts like we are just going to start pumping out liquid coal and be burning it like crazy. We aren't. We need alternatives to oil, and this is a possible alternative. Who cares if it is too dirty at the present time. If we don't develop it, we'll never find out if it can be made into a cleaner technology. Dismissing technologies out of hand because of prejudice based on current conditions is what's insane.

Electric Cars in Israel?

A company called Better Place has begun construction of a nationwide network of recharging sites to support electric cars throughout the state of Israel.  They also have pilot projects underway in Hawaii and elsewhere.  Their cars are built in partnership with Renault-Nissan, and have similar acceleration and top speed as typical gas-powered vehicles.

I'm highly skeptical of electric cars in general, but I find this company interesting.  They understand that you can't sell electric cars without first having a support network in place.  Their website puts forth all sorts of grandiose plans, but it appears that they are taking things one step at a time, in a more realistic manner than some of their propaganda might suggest.  It will be interesting to see if they succeed in creating a support network in Israel, and whether or not the cars themselves can be commercially viable.