----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.rengen.info/
The Regen blogster's too-tame Dodge Dart is in need of some
'pimping' it would seem. (unless you are around teenagers, you may
not know that this word nowadays refers to the popular MTV show
'pimp my ride'). He states:
"Just as sure as the sun rises from the east, various groups have
reacted rather favorably to President George W. Bush's declaration
of America's "addiction" to oil, which he proposes to cut down by
75% over the next 20 years."
[Interesting that this is both achievable and underway - even if
Bush and DoE did nothing, zero, nada... and let free market forces
continue the present trend of alternative - but with proactive
intervention, how long would it take for oxidized fuels to
supplant 75% of our addiction ? Ans: You may be surprised that
our Prez is being conservative in the "20 years" estimate]
"One such group, which is beginning to gain significance in terms
of number and importance, are domestic ethanol producers in the
US. Currently, US Ethanol producers are the largest alternative
fuel producers, doubling their production of 2002 to 4.0 billion
gallons in 2005. Ethanol in the US is currently produced from
corn, amounting to about 14% of the total corn consumption and
supplying roughly 3% of the total gasoline supply."
[Hmm... lets see doubling every two years sounds a lot like what
we have seen as a sustainable rate in microelectronics - BUT - is
there enough available land? Ans: not for corn -no - but there is
enough subgrade-coal]
This is possible because oil is no longer cheap. At $25 per
barrel, oil really is addictive but at present levels of $50 per
barrel or higher, sprouting ethanol plants all over the Midwestern
part of the USA make sense, prompting experts to say that by the
end of the year, the US' ethanol production capacity may rise to
5.0 billion gallons a year.
[That is actually below expectations for a two-year doubling
rate - which requires the year-to-year rate increase of slightly
over 40%]
"To curb USA's oil addiction, ethanol may not be enough. But it is
a start. Right now, it is the most viable and competitive
alternative fuel available and as proven by countries such as
Brazil, can replace nearly all oil requirements. Of course there
are many other alternative energy resources available which will
be developed at a faster rate, now that there is government pull
and technology push."
[The very best resource - far better than this corn --> ethanol
stopgap measure is subgrade-coal --> methanol But this does
require large investment which is only possible with a DoE pump
mandate to go to 50% oxidized fuel content ASAP]
Bottom line - and let me pimp the blogster's ride here: If DoE
wants to move off the sidelines and into the arena - and really
get proactive in a national energy policy - and "do the smart
thing": which is to shift some of the oxidized fuel content from
ethanol to methanol, keeping those petrobucks at home instead of
in the mid-East then - yes -we can probably sustain the necessary
40% growth rate for the very few years (six) which it would take
to eliminate foreign oil in the USA - with a "Manhattan" approach.
This would probably require a mandated "mix" at the pump of 50/50
within two years - even without new Alaska oil, since the USA does
have severely depleted domestic oil fields which are coming back
into production due to the high price of crude (market forces).
IOW - we could get there (off of our foreign oil addiction) by the
year 2012 (an ominous sounding year) but this would require about
15-20 expensive large methanol plants, and the dreaded strip
mining of cattle grazing land - on the huge Western deposits of
subgrade-coal ... which land is now used for minimal economic
benefit, and can be returned to that use later once the coal is
gone.
BTW the best sites for large wind farms might well be adjacent to
such coal-to-methanol plants in order to minimize the otherwise
marketable fuel which is burned on site for the conversion
process.
You may say: No way! these plants take years of 'red-tape', even
decades, to get licensed, built and going full steam.
To which I respond, 'yes,' under normal conditions, this would
require too long to "wean the junkie" off his fix - BUT there is
the analog to 'intervention' which is the drastic variety of cure
which is now called-for by our helpless dependency.
In an historical note, at the time of another crisis - the largest
plant-complex in the world at the time (by a factor of 2), the
plant that won the war: the Y-12 plant at Oak Ridge, was
operational in 6 months - even thought we weren't even sure that
the technology would work at the time that groundbreaking
commenced, and even though the blueprints for the facility had not
been finished. That kind of 24/7 national commitment may be what
is called for in this time of impending crisis.
http://www.y12.doe.gov/about/history.php
BTW that Complex was constructed as part of the World War II
Manhattan Project. Construction began with the first shovelful of
dirt turned at Y-12 in February 1943, and operations began in
November of that year.
It is only when you get to these large $ billion investments,
requiring national "will power" that DoE and the Prez - and
sincere commitments by everyone other than the Sierra Club, can
make a gigantic difference in timing. But will they find the
necessary national will power in the Beltway ? ... that is, err...
instead of trying to take credit for what the American farmer is
already doing on his own without much help...
Now, this fast track ride is the looking more like Daisy's 'Cuda
than the old Dart, so 'pimp that ride', Mr. Regen Blogster....
Jones
