The Energy Crisis: What's the Fix?

[ZacFields]

The Democrats say we should just go green. Focus our money on natural energy like wind power, hydrogen, etc. The Republicans want more drilling on our own turf, but they seem to be lax on a solid plan to push our country towards renewables.

Paris Hilton (through somebody else's words, probably) thinks we should do a little bit of both. Is it possible that an idea that came out of Paris Hilton's mouth (again, most likely not from her own brain though) is the best idea?

Personally, I think so. The reason is because Hilton's idea is bi-partisan... and that is exactly what is needed to fix the energy crisis, IMO. We need a molotav cocktail of action in many different areas. More drilling will decrease the amount of oil needing to be imported from other countries, a focus on wind and solar energy will "green up" our electricity use, and doing everything we can to get hydrogen and electricity powered vehicles on the road will only further help.

It's no secret that there doesn't exist a "quick fix" to this problem. Sorry... it's not going to happen. Going "green" will take a decade or longer to make a dent, and there's speculation that even more drilling or more refineries won't have any effect soon. Regardless of what is chosen, we have ignored the issue for so long that it's going to hurt for the foreseeable future.

What do you think needs to be done? And most importantly, why will it help? Why won't some popular ideas help?

[TheGhryphon]

Drilling in country, isnt the answer. Number of reasons, for one, lack of oil isnt the issue. Its the lack of ability to refine that into gasoline, which creates the high costs of gas that we all hate so much. Increase refining capabilities, you increase output of gasoline, you lower the costs of gas.

Drilling in house only makes more money available to the oil companies, as they are already racking up 21 billion a quarter in profits, i dont think that they need much more.

Going green....the technology isnt there to make a massive impact, yet. Investing money into going green is a good idea though. Creating tech jobs in america bent on researching and developing green technologys = good idea.

Either way you look at it, going green, drilling in house, will take at least 5-10+ years to make any sort of a difference in the country. But its a decision that needs to be made, and rather soon so we can begin to move towards it.

Bottom line from me, in house drilling = not the answer

[ZacFields]

Going green....the technology isnt there to make a massive impact, yet. Investing money into going green is a good idea though. Creating tech jobs in america bent on researching and developing green technologys = good idea.

You've got an extremely good point there Sean. Creating jobs in a sector that you know is only going to get larger, more profitable, and more stable as time goes on is never a bad idea. Take Clipper Wind Power in Cedar Rapids. A buddy of mine on the site (Eric H.) works there, and the employees out there make good money, and IMO their jobs are secure for life. With more and more billionaire investors and politicians pushing for the country to use more wind power, life is good for those who are in the wind power industry.. it should only get larger.

There are cars coming soon that will be affordable and push the limits of your imagination as far as fuel economy goes. The Aptera ( http://www.aptera.com car set to be sold in 09) is rumored to get 300mpg equivilant on their all-electric version and well over 100mpg on their hybrid version.

http://www.aptera.com/images/home1.jpg

The car is not incredibly attractive, but for 300mpg, I'll drive it in a heartbeat. Set to launch only in California at first for testing purposes in 2009, thousands of the vehicle have already been reserved.

[Drifte]

ok, so I hear a lot working at the center for energy and environmental education. The frustrating thing is, we have a lot of the technology to be free from oil. Everything gets stopped by big companies or the government. When electric cars were already on the road, and doing great with zero emissions, big car companies like ford and gm said we need to go hydrogen. Hydrogen is far from ready for sale, its fragile, still leaves you needing some oil, and has very short drives per tank.

Their seems to be some kind of conspiracy, between the government, the oil company and big car companies. We not only had the technology for electric cars, they were being produced. Once the law was removed that car companies need to make zero emissions vehicles in california, not only did car companies stop making them, they took ALL of the electric cars from their owners (all leased) and crushed them.

When advanced technology for batteries came out allowing extended travel between charges, GM bought the rights to the battery, and for a short while installed them in their electric car. Then after wards they sold the rights of the battery to an OIL company. Who told the inventor he cannot advertise about the batteries or anything.

We currently are running many wind energy power plants. My dad works at Acciona Wind Power in West Branch as well as my brother. Then a few others I know work at Clipper. The stories I hear from them are amazing.

The amount of power that can be produced/ used at a given time is regulated. When we over produce they call up the only clean source of power and say shut down. Incredible right? We finally are making good clean power and they shut them down, but they cant really just shut down the other plants is the excuse. So what did they do before the wind turbines were around to regulate the power?

Soon pv panel technology will have reached its goal. They have began research and development on liquid pv that can be sprayed on like paint. Its a few years yet in the making i believe. But that means your car can be painted and produce electricity off of that. The wind turbines could be painted in PV and produce even more power (though not needed, and little usable surface area).

So my opinion is, get the electric car into mass production, its a technology we already have. Hydrogen cars in iowa winters....i dont think so.

Drill for oil: if you want to, it doesnt matter what we say, the oil companies are going to get to do whatever they want, especially with Bush...
You know Bush supported Hydrogen cars...thats where our money went.

Tesla roadster, performance and zero emissions.
http://www.teslamotors.com/images/content/wallpaper_5007_300x225.jpg

[ZacFields]

I like debates where actual useful information is given rather than simply slamming different political parties. Lets keep it this way :)

Now, here's my stance regarding the idea of simply not drilling more oil in the states. We can build more refineries and I think that's a good idea, but the idea of drilling for oil here is that it is usually much cheaper for a country to use oil it drills domestically because it costs much less to use your own oil than it does to purchase it from other countries and have it shipped from across the ocean. Statistically, each of the top 10 countries for lowest gas price drill almost 100% of their own oil. Of course more refineries would be nice, but the fact is that even with the refining capacity we have now, we're still purchasing a large chunk of our oil from OPEC countries, and our costs could be lowered if we were using more of our own oil and less of theirs.

I think more refineries also equals much more money to the oil companies. They can sell more oil faster if we had better refining capabilities. If we created a surplus, the government would start buying it up anyways to put in the reserves. Pretty much anything we do with oil is going to equal more money in the oil companies' pockets.

Here's where I'm going to throw a curve-ball at you all: What if we're able to decrease our dependence on foreign oil through the use of renewable energy within the next 10 years? Say somebody comes out with a 150mpg plug-in hybrid for less than $20,000 and about 20% of Americans decide that they have to get one. From what I've read, it takes a long time to build refineries; wouldn't it be horrible if we built new refineries and then we couldn't keep them running at full capacity for very long as our demand for gasoline begins to decline? This is the downfall of drilling more oil and building refineries: You're creating jobs that are doomed in the long-run. Workers on oil rigs/refineries make lots of money, but if by some miracle someone made a breakthrough in renewables technology, they will be the next GM: Laying off thousands of workers with no likelihood of rehire.

It's a sticky situation... and I think whoever is elected has a lot of thinking to do before they make any decisions. I think the smartest choice is to concentrate more on renewables, but I just don't think we can afford to ignore drilling for more oil. As oil becomes more scarce, OPEC will run our lives even more than they already do. I've heard speculation (back when oil dipped below $100/barrell) that OPEC was planning to cut production to try to keep oil prices right at $100 or above. Dirty bastards! I think we need a hedge against the renewables technology not coming along as quickly as we hope.

[ZacFields]

I also agree with Colton. I don't know if it's the government or more likely the oil companies, but the technology exists to end these problems. When I was investing in alternative energy when I was younger, I saw MANY examples of electric cars and hydrogen cars that were affordable and effective. And when I say examples, I mean there were people who had the cars built already! Of course further testing would have been needed, etc, but it seems like most of the projects just disappeared.

Then again, if you came up with an affordable hydrogen car, or some electric technology that would make electric cars better and more affordable, and some oil company offered you a few billion dollars for it, would you take it? I'm not saying that's what is happening for sure, but things similar to this happen all the time. You are more than welcome to offer someone money for their idea and make them sign a contract never to speak of it again.

Hydrogen is used in different ways, also. I am a proponant of Hydrogen technology because hydrogen actually produces the most fuel efficient vehicles on the planet currently (though the vehicles I'm talking about are smaller than the electric cars out at Prairie). They've created "bubble-like" tiny hydrogen cars that get several hundred miles to the gallon equivilant. It's good technology, but it's FAR from being ready I think.

[Drifte]

One thing to remember, is actually how fast we have come up with new technologies to take over what we have been used to living with for over a hundred years. It is estimated that we will make a significant switch from gasoline, oil to other renewable technology within 50 years. We have already made a lot of progress, the problem is one thing effects another, so a lot of regulations are in place to keep us from having an economical disaster. However, I think we will have new business to replace the old, for the most part. Other countries such as Greenland ( I think it was) already uses a geothermal powerplant and has for years. It emits some green house gases, but its the same amount that the earth was releasing already. We dont really have that option, but we have wind and sun...we should be fine.

A lot of people believe nothing will be done untill it has to be, I like to believe we will take care of business in this country and not procrastinate and cost all Americans Thousands in the process.

Its inconvenient our economy's state and our need for all the new technology, but I think once this technology does make it, our economy will be restored to better than we have seen.

Watch: "who killed the electric car" and "cars of the future". For some entertaining and excellent info.

[Caleb]

I just want to know if you guys know exactly why the oil in Iraq is important to the U.S. Im just curious to see as what you guys know. And it does somewhat tie into this debate.

[TheGhryphon]

Its not so much that its important....

Worldwide demand is increasing which creates increased demand from oil producing countries IE the middle east. Because its the middle east...there's lots of conflict and uncertainty, which leads to higher costs of oil since demand is there (well that's just ONE of the many reasons why costs of oil spikes and drops rapidly). Iraq really isn't a massive producer, its more Saudi and Kuwait that is the massive producers of oil, but Iran and Iraq still produce a good amount as well.

LIl bit of statistics

Top Ten Oil Exporting Countries

* Saudi Arabia (8.73 million barrels per day)
* Russia (6.67)
* Norway (2.91)
* Iran (2.55)
* Venezuela (2.36)
* United Arab Emirates (2.33)
* Kuwait (2.20)
* Nigeria (2.19)
* Mexico (1.80)
* Algeria (1.68)

Iraq isnt even on the list for this.

Now nibble on this....

Top Ten Oil Importing Countries

* United States (11.8 million barrels per day)
* Japan (5.3)
* China (2.9)
* Germany (2.5)
* South Korea (2.1)
* France (2.0)
* Italy (1.7)
* Spain (1.6)
* India (1.5)
* Taiwan (1.0)

Last figure....

Greatest Oil Reserves by Country (2005)

* Saudi Arabia (262 billion barrels)
* Canada (179)
* Iran (126)
* Iraq (115)
* Kuwait (102)
* United Arab Emirates (98)
* Venezuela (77)
* Russia (60)
* Libya (39)
* Nigeria (35)

These numbers are a year or so outta date, im not motivated enough to find actual up to date stuff, sorry :P

Oil is important everywhere :P Not just Iraq. IMHO, since we are already there conquering the entire country, why don't we manifest destiny those bastards and just take all the oil rigs for ourselves ;) no no, just kidding.

[Drifte]

Reminds me of a movie I saw a preview for, it looked very interesting and my environmental technology professor suggested I watch it as well. I just remember some comments made like the United States Emperical Power or something like that. And "when war becomes this profitable theirs going to be problems.."

I'll have to find that video and get you guys the name, I think its gonna be a good one.

[69gt4speed]

I just want to know if you guys know exactly why the oil in Iraq is important to the U.S. Im just curious to see as what you guys know. And it does somewhat tie into this debate.

Why, it has one of the most proven reserves, I will always believe the underlying reason was that to go there. Sooner or later when other reserves are running out where will the proven oil be? Now maybe a miracle will happen find all kinds of oil here in usa... I'm sure they already have a good idea where. Meantime I agree as I have said many times need to move from oil based economy. I want you guys to have decent jobs bulding maintaining wind, solar farms, bio plants, and no it is not cut and dried in politics I believe both parties have seen we need diversity. Oh we need to drill but I don't think as far as proven reserves we have the resources and all the easy oil here was gone in the 70's. I'll put it this way once co. cried over pollution control it ended up ok.

[ZacFields]

Good information Sean. Here is a list (as of May 1st of this year) of cheapest gas by country:

1. Venezuela 12 cents **
2. Iran 40 cents **
3. Saudi Arabia 45 cents **
4. Libya 50 cents
5. Swaziland 54 cents
6. Qatar 73 cents
7. Bahrain 81 cents
8. Egypt 89 cents
9. Kuwait 90 cents **
10. Seychelles 98 cents

I put two stars next to the countries on that list that are among the highest exporters. It's simple logic that the higher exporting oil countries are going to have the cheapest gas out there (next to the countries that have almost zero demand for gas, as is the case with many others on that list). "If you know how to cook and have your own ingredients, you eat cheaper."

I agree with you Rob. It would be nice to find some more oil on our own turf, but as a whole we need to be the front-runners for new alternative energy technology. We've got to get on top of this stuff so that we can create infinite-lasting jobs in the alternative energy industry.

[Drifte]

Yea, we need this country back as the front runner. Get it back to others looking to us as to what to do. Japan owns us lol...nintendo joke.

[ZEE]

There are many many countries that pay more for gas than the US. Just because we are the leading consumer of oil doesn't mean we are paying the most.

http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/ ... gasprices/ (http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/)


I'm not against alternative fuels. It's just that they are not even close to replacing oil. We still need time to perfect the technology. But in the mean time we still need the oil. It cannot be replaced with the technology that exists now. So in the short term we need to do what's necessary to make sure there is enough oil and enough refineries to take care of our current needs.

[Caleb]

My friend told me about the "Petrol Dollar" and was taught/shown this from his Political Science Professor at Iowa State.



Op-Ed: The Petrol Dollar
Daniel Gunter
Staff Writer

"We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th attacks," Bush said in September of 2003, a year after the Iraq war was waged using the Twin Towers collapse as a pretext.

In response, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the White House "led the American public into believing there was a connection in order to build support for the war in Iraq."

But if there was no connection, why did the administration want the war in the first place? As demonstrated by the invasion, Saddam Hussein’s wimpy army could hardly be considered a global threat. Was it for oil then, or to finish the job his father started? No, Bush did not invade for any of those reasons. Bush sent us to war to secure the petrol dollar, and it is a matter of national security.

All countries need energy. Oil is energy. Because of a masterfully concocted agreement signed with OPEC back in the 1970’s, all oil is currently traded exclusively in dollars. See how that works? It is the reason why the US is the only country in the world that can run such a high deficit and still do business; since all countries in the world must buy oil, and in order to do that they must first buy dollars, the US can borrow massively against future monies. The recycling of the petrol dollar gives the Federal Reserve carte blanche on printing money. This is what Dick Cheney was referring to when he famously said, “Deficits don’t matter.”

The problem with Saddam was that he decided to make extra money by simply trading his oil in euros. Sound like a pointless threat? Well it wasn’t. A switch to the Euro by oil producing nations would mean the US could no longer grow the deficit, and if the rest of the world thought that the US couldn’t pay back the debt already owed, and began withdrawing funds from US banks, it would effectively enter the US into a depression worse than any it has ever experienced. In a matter of hours the peso would be worth more than the “almighty” dollar.

This frightening financial vulnerability of the United Sates is the reason why it maintains an army larger than the second 7th largest armies combined. It is also the reason why we are on a collision course with Iran, which has threatened to switch to the euro if it is made to come before the Security Council. As stated by U.S. Congressman Ron Paul, “The dollar-oil relationship has to be maintained to keep the dollar as a preeminent currency. Any attack on this relationship will be forcefully challenged as it already has been."

There was more to go along with this, but I can't remember where it was. So tieing this into the debate, drilling in our own country will only go so far. Thus making renewable energy sources a lot better option if were looking to become more independent. The oil issue from the looks of it, will always be around as long as our currency is tied in with the selling of oil.

[ZacFields]

Interesting info Caleb. That's a lot better than the "Bush did it to avenge his daddy" argument... which I've always found hilarious. I like a little factual evidence with theories, rather than the usual conspiracy blabber that gets tossed around way too often.

Good good point. Actually about 6 months ago I believe OPEC started to threaten to start trading oil using the Euro rather than the dollar because the dollar is so weak currently. I remember that being a pretty big problem but at some point it seemed that they just dropped the issue.

[Caleb]

I'm just worried if the Dollar keeps depleting in value they are going to want to replace it with the Amero. And then eventually push the North American Union treaty and make us a border-less country with Canada and Mexico to stabilize our economy and market if nothing gets done to it within the next few years.

[TbTalon94]

Here's a little twist for you guys.

There are other forms of energy besides Hydrogen/Electric/Wind/Solar.

Magnetism, gravity, and more.

Magnetism:
There have been motors and mechanisms that run solely off magnets. Not only will they run for a LONG time if not forever, but they do it for FREE. All you need is a little push to get things going, and they run forever. My brother made a simple design of a circular "wheel" you could say with an array/pattern of magnets spinning on an axis. You move another magnet close to one side of the array on the wheel, and it starts spinning. You move the magnet in/out at a specific timing and the wheel spins faster and faster untill reaching terminal speed and will spin forever so long as the connecting magnet stays in it's respective location. This is all very cut-down and not into detail but you get the idea. This could in turn power anything...for free, and forever.

Gravity:
This is simple. Gravity has an enormous amount of energy. You harness it, and you can imagine the possibilities. There have been a few "experiments" but you'd have to search awhile and know where to look to find them.

There is also the atmosphere. There is again an enormous amount of energy in the atmosphere that can be harnessed. Tesla did it, but was shut down. There are a few concepts out, but again you gotta know where to look. Even they cannot come out with their inventions because oil companies will either buy them out or shut them down...or worse.

I have researched the concept of "free energy" for awhile now and you wouldn't believe some of the things that we have, that could power an entire city for free...for years, for a very small price. The problem is the people who provide energy would be out of a job, and wouldn't make billions of profits on continuous energy usage charges.

Oil is not the answer, wether it be local drilling..or importing. Simply put it's not the answer and shouldn't even be concidered anymore. The only reason it is, is because there are too many upper forces that are in Oil and know that if it goes out, they lose money. Money/greed/power runs this world, and too bad for us..because there could be a lot better things our power and energy could produce.

[Caleb]

I almost forgot about Magnets, then I remembered why my Cousin Craig, wants all my spare harddrives that are dead, because he uses the magnets out of them for creating this little electrical motors.

[DustinsDuster]

personally, i think we need to start raising money for Mr. Fusion r and d. if it can power a time machine with garbage, it could save the world....

[Drifte]

GM buys up Pacific Electric Red cars Trolley system and shuts down.
GM and shell work with President Bush and get 1.2billion dollars for hydrogen research
GM crushes all electric cars created (ev1)
GM purchases controlling stock of Oshinskey new battery technology
GM sells controlling stock of batteries to Chevron Texaco
Oshinskey censored for publisizing battery achievements

Combined profits of Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, Conoco Phillips:
-2003: 33 billion
-2004: 47billion
-2005: 64billion

GM buys Hummer from AM General Dec.1999
GM drops EV1 January 2000
$100,000 tax break for vehicles weighing 6,000+ lbs 2003.
GM drops ev1 due to its "low profitability"

-Bush administration
Dick Cheney- Former CEO of halliburton
Conduleeza Rice- Former member Chevron board of direvtors
Andrew Card- Former VP of GM

Todays car mpg less than 20 years ago.

Clinton administration puts Hybrid cars in motion, Bush moves in stops Hybrid move. Japanese companies already in works so we have those.

Ave. fuel economy 2006:
Japaneese Hybrid-42mpg
American Hybrid- 25mpg

Bill Reiner of Toyota USA: expects 30+ years for Hydrogen cars to be mass produced. Hydrogen cars are not practical, dont do well in cold weather and are fragile.

Joseph J Romm:
hydrogen- much tougher alternative fuel than any other fuel tried before. Require fueling infrastructure, costs per vehicle to come down from $1million per, Cars cannot store enough hydrogen on board to travel even as far as electric cars, Hydrogen is 2-3 times more expensive than gasoline, and hydrogen cars will have to hope their are no improvement in other technologies or they will quickly be replaced...

"It took a law to get seat belts into the car, It took a law to get air bags into the car, It took a law to get catalytic converters into the car, and it took a law to get mpg from 12 to 20mpg."

[Caleb]

I have researched the concept of "free energy" for awhile now and you wouldn't believe some of the things that we have, that could power an entire city for free...for years, for a very small price. The problem is the people who provide energy would be out of a job, and wouldn't make billions of profits on continuous energy usage charges.

There's Tidal, and Wave energy as well that could easily power city's and towns all along the east and west coasts.

Maybe you guys should check out this video and skip to 1 hour and 16 minutes. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 7695921912 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912)

It goes over natural resource's as shown and mentioned and the Theoretical Maglev train looks awesome. If you are interested in everything leading up to the Venus System Project mentioned in the video. Watch the entire thing, its very enlightening. Its in my other thread I made which I will consistently bump.