On May 30, 2007, at 4:16 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
It was concrete and executable.
I do not think you can engineer a breakthrough. If we were talking
about building a new Internet or a highway system, with existing
technology or incremental improvements, then a centralized planning
and funding organization might be a good choice.
I'm glad we agree. I agree with the latter statement
wholeheartedly. In fact, that was my goal, to provide a mechanism to
solve our coming energy crises, a mechanism at which the US Congress
could throw money when it became clear money needed to be thrown.
Congress is great at responding to clear needs and providing money.
Congress is not great at debating engineering principles. It seemed
to me a dollar a barrel tax on oil was a pittance to get things
rolling. However, what is needed as a solution today is far greater
in magnitude than the internet or the highway system. Further, it is
not only a US problem, but a world problem. I think there is a world
based solution within grasp even now:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BigPicture.pdf
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/EnergyCosts.pdf
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/HotCold.pdf
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BusIdea.pdf
We in the US have the opportunity now to lead. We have sold off our
much of our manufacturing capabilities, and are in the process of
selling off our high tech sector services and products. We will
eventually have nothing left to sell for energy but our other
resources. We will be the third world. We can turn this around and
break down the renewable energy barrier at the same time. We have
the capacity now to *sell* the world energy, and thus water and food.
All we need is a little vision and not a myopic focus on protecting
big oil, even though it is big oil that has the muscle to pull this
all off and should. We need a new generation of management in big
oil. If government can not lead the charge then we are left with big
oil to lead the charge and many of those folks are in full retreat or
defensive postures, if not suicidal. (I should note that some oil
and gas companies disgraced themselves in Alaska recently with their
testimony to the State Legislature and through bribery for which some
legislators have pleaded guilty and more are to be prosecuted. Like
many Alaskans, I'm not feeling so great about some of them these days.)
I can not personally engineer a cold fusion breakthrough. I don't
have the resources or ability. However, from the data to date, it is
clear that it is likely *someone* can. I think it is our duty as
citizens is to make that possible. It is now just a matter of
incentives, funding.
I would like to further point out that the plan was primarily a means
to deploy profitable renewable energy facilities, not research. It
states: "On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals,
distribute 5 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income
to research, using about 0.5 percent, 1/10 of the 5 percent, to
support research in non-conventional, controversial, or long term
development areas, like zero point energy (ZPE) research, low energy
nuclear reactions (LENR), hydrinos, etc. The non-conventional
research program is intended to be modeled after NASA's Breakthrough
Propulsion Physics program. However, it is reasonable to commit up to
half of the 0.5 percent to infrastructure development for amateurs,
small collaborations, and small businesses working in related areas."
The plan was reasonable and practical to a fault, though maybe too
late in Jan 2003.
"My concern is not about our long term adaptation to a world beyond
oil. Through our inattention, we have wasted the years that we might
have used to prepare for the lessoned oil supplies. The next ten
years are critical. It's going to be on-the-job training. Learn
while doing: not always the best way of adapting.", Kenneth S.
Deffeyes, *Beyond Oil, the View from Hubbert's Peak", Hill and Wang
(2005), p. 12.
Regards,
Horace Heffner
