energy victory
Danbob
I'm going to post a Q and A session with a guy named Robert Zubrin,
just below. Hope no one considers it inappropriate. I've been
reading his book, "Energy Victory," and it's pretty fascinating. At
least it makes me feel a little better about the rising price of
beer. db
Robert Zubrin is best known for his daring "Mars Direct" plan, but his
most recent book, Energy Victory: Winning the War on Terror by
Breaking Free of Oil is set a lot closer to home. His proposal on
solving America's oil addition is simple -- some critics would say too
simple. Here's what Dr. Zubrin has to say.
1. Your book draws a direct line between our dependence on
foreign oil and the distorting effect this has on American foreign
policy. Why do you think this connection isn't getting more play in
the presidential campaign?
I don't know. This is the most vital issue facing the country. This
year, the USA will import 5 billion barrels of oil. At $100/bbl that
is $500 billion dollars taxed out of the US economy by the collection
of foreign governments known as OPEC, some of whom are using it to
promote terrorism directed against the United states and numerous
other countries. When George Bush took office in 2001, we were paying
$90 billion per year for foreign oil. So the Bush administration has
effectively responded to 9-11 by increasing our financing of the enemy
fivefold -- and now we are actually paying OPEC more than we are
paying our own defense department (the US DOD budget this year is
about $435 billion).
Not only that, but this OPEC price rigging is driving our economy into
a recession. Consider this: The Congress just passed a law to take
$150 billion out of the treasury to pass out to taxpayers in the hope
that they will spend it and thus stimulate the economy away from
falling into a recession. However, even as Congress is raiding the
treasury to try to put $150 billion into our pockets, OPEC is taking
$500 billion out of our pockets. That is an economic de-stimulus
package three times as big as the effort Congress is paying for. We
need to fight back. The response from the candidates so far has been
completely inadequate.
A few weeks ago, I saw a speech John McCain gave in Texas. He
proclaimed we had to break free of foreign oil, and that is why we
need nuclear power. The same day, I saw Barack Obama give a speech. he
said we have to break free of foreign oil, and that is why we need
solar and wind power. So we are about to be entertained with a
dramatic right/left debate pitting nuclear power against solar and
wind power. But in fact, the US gets only 3% of its electricity from
oil, so neither nuclear, solar, or wind power have anything to do with
the issue of breaking us free from foreign oil. It's all pure farce.
Unless these people want to continue to fail to defend the vital
interests of the nation as badly as George Bush has done, they need to
get serious about this issue.
2. In the book, you propose a surprisingly simple solution to the
oil crisis -- making all cars biofuel capable. This seems like a very
easy out to what many view as a very difficult problem.
Yes, well the problem is fundamentally simple. The oil cartel has a
vertical monopoly on the world's fuel supply, and that is why they can
raise prices without constraint. To defeat them, what is necessary is
to create fuel choice. As I explain in the book "Energy Victory," the
US congress can deal the fatal blow to OPEC with a stroke of the pen,
simply by passing a law requiring that all new cars sold in the USA be
flex fueled -- that is able to run on any combination of alcohol or
gasoline. These cars are current technology. In fact this year Detroit
will be selling 24 models that have this option, and they only cost
about $100 more than the same model without flex fuel capability. But
they only currently comprise about 3% of the auto sales, because in
most places there is no upside to owning one, as there are no alcohol
fuel pumps to be found. and the reason, of course, why there are no
alcohol pumps out there is that service station owners have no reason
to set up such pumps while there are so few cars that can use them.
But within 3 years of enactment of a flex fuel mandate we would have
50 million cars on the road in the USA capable of running on alcohol
fuels, and under those conditions you would see E85 (85% ethano/15%
gasoline) and M85 (85% methanol/15% gasoline) pumps popping up
everywhere.
And here is the key thing: These alcohol fuel pumps would be appearing
not only all across the USA, but all over the world. Because if we
made it the law that to sell a car into USA it had to be flex fuel,
that would make flex fuel the INTERNATIONAL standard. The Japanese,
Koreans, and Europeans are not about to walk away from the American
automobile market. So they would simply switch their entire production
lines over to flex fuel. What that would mean is that any car being
marketed in any serious way anywhere in the world would be flex fuel,
and we would see hundreds of millions of them all over the globe in
just a few years. This would create an open-source fuel market, that
would force gasoline to compete at the pump everywhere against ethanol
and methanol produced from any number of sources all over the world.
This would break the vertical monopoly of the oil cartel, eliminating
forever their power to raise prices without constraint. The price of
oil would be forced back down to about $50/bbl, because that is where
alcohol fuels become competitive, and then pushed down further as the
huge non-monopoly controlled market mobilized capital into R&D to
drive cost-reducing process improvements.
3. A lot of calculations -- from back of the envelope to full-
bore university studies -- have suggested that we can't match out fuel
needs with the kind of biofuels we're producing today. Are they
wrong?
We can't replace oil with corn ethanol alone. Corn ethanol has
replaced 4% of our gasoline supply, which is an impressive
achievement, and it might be able to replace 8%. But certainly not
100%. However corn is just one crop. Any sugar-rich or starchy crop
can be used to produce ethanol using current technology. New
cellulosic ethanol technology is coming on line with allow us to use
currently worthless crop residues, which will vastly expand the
available ethanol supply. Methanol can already be produced from all
kinds of biomass without exception, as well from coal, natural gas,
and recycled urban trash. There is enough crop residues in the world
right now, that if they were all converted into methanol we could
replace all the oil of OPEC. And in fact we probably would only have
to replace about 20% of OPEC's production into order to break the
cartel and send oil prices tumbling. There certainly are the resources
available to do that. But we need an open fuel market to make it
work.
4. Many people feel that the increasing demand for biofuels plays
a major role in driving up food prices. Is this a major factor, or
has the competition between food and fuel been overblown?
It's completely false. Over the past year, food prices have risen 4%
internationally, while fuel prices have risen 40%. These higher fuel
prices impose increased costs on both farmers and fishing fleets, as
well as adding to the cost of transporting their products to market.
So in fact, it is rigged up fuel prices that are driving up food
prices, as well as the prices of many other types of goods.
People need to understand this: OPEC's price rigging amounts to a huge
extremely regressive tax on the entire world economy. Setting oil
prices at $100/bbl is harmful to the advanced industrial countries,
but it is brutally destructive to the third world. It is one thing to
pay $100/bbl for oil when you live in a country where the average
worker makes $45,000 per year. It is quite another when you make $1000
per year. Effectively, the high oil price amounts to taking hundreds
of billions of dollars away from the world's poorest people and giving
it to the world's richest people.
Think about this: In 2006, Saudi Arabia, with a population of 24
million people (15% of whom work) raked in $200 billion in foreign
exchange from its oil exports. In the same year, Kenya, with a
population of 36 million people (the majority of whom work) earned
$2.5 billion in foreign exchange in exports of all categories
combined. Distributed elsewhere, the $200 billion taken by the Saudis
for their overpriced oil would double the foreign exchange of 80
countries comparable to Kenya.
By switching to an open source fuel economy, we could make such
redistribution possible. Instead of paying out to buy their oil from
OPEC, tropical third world countries could grow their own fuel, and
not only that, gain precious income by exporting ethanol to the US,
Europe, and Japan, where huge markets for such produce would exist.
Effectively, we could take something like a trillion dollars a year
now going to the oil cartel, and redirect it to the world agricultural
sector instead -- without about half going to advanced sector farmers
and then other half going to the third world. This would create a huge
financial engine for world development, and allow hundreds of millions
of people to be lifted out of poverty. They would then become
customers for our industry, and create jobs and economic growth here.
Instead of selling controlly blocks of stock of our banks and media
organizations to Saudi princes, we could be selling tractors to
Africa. That is the way forward for achieving a just and prosperous
world.
5. How does timing factor into your solution? Nearly half the
cars on the road are replaced in less than five years. Does is make
sense to modify existing vehicles, or should we just require biofuel
capability in new cars as they appear?
It's much cheaper to simply mandate that new cars include the flex
fuel feature. There are modification kits for existing cars being sold
in the $500 range, but no one knows which of them are any good. A
government certification for such kits would be very useful in
providing consumers the confidence they need to buy them.
6. Do you think of biofuels as a permanent solution, or an
interim solution? That is, should we implement this biofuels switch
now, but place further requirements that would move our transportation
toward some form of electric vehicle in the future, or can we
implement the biofuel option and say "there, that's done."
The first step is to open the fuel market via a flex fuel mandate.
This can be done very quickly. The next step is to make the cars more
efficient by gradually transitioning to flex-fuel plug in hybrids that
could get much of their motive power off the electric grid. But that
will be a more gradual process.
7. Though 10% ethanol fuel has been common through much of the
country for over a decade, there are still few locations where you can
find E85 or biodiesel blends. Would simply equipping cars to be
biofuels capable be enough to encourage the availability of these
fuels?
Yes, absolutely. The problem right now is lack of market. If you own a
gas station, and you have three pumps, you are not going to dedicate
one of them to a kind of fuel that only 3% of the cars can use. But
within three years of a flex fuel mandate we would have 50 million
cars that can use alcohol fuels, and under those conditions the pumps
to sell to them will start appearing anywhere.
Any gas station owner can mobilize the capital to install a new pump.
Any group of small town entrepreneurs can mobilize the capital to
build an ethanol plant. But what they can't do is make automobiles.
That's why we have to tackle this with legislation at the demand end.
Once we have the market in place, all the rest will follow.
8. There have been a number of studies showing wildly divergent
results on the amount of energy returned by biofuels compared to the
input. There's no doubt that moving to biofuels would allow us to
decrease our dependence on oil, but would it actually increase our use
of coal and other fuels in generating the biofuels?
Coal, might, in certain places be used for process heat for biofuel
production. In other places biomass itself might be used, as it
currently is in the Brazilian ethanol process. These issues could be
addressed over time with regulation if increased use of coal presented
a global warming concern (it might not be, if such plants were
situated in places where extra CO2 produced from coal could be
sequestered underground.) Solar power (for small scale plants) or even
nuclear power (for large scale plants) could also be used to generate
process heat without greenhouse gas emissions. In any case, the use of
biofuels gives us the option to produce carbon neutral fuels which we
simply won't have if we stick to petroleum.
9. Right now, some independent truckers are calling for all
federal and state taxes on diesel fuel be suspended. Would broader
availability of biodiesel have any effect on the cost of fuel? Should
we implement any additional taxes on these fuels that could be used to
help steer changes in the infrastructure (such as research on new
technologies, or improving rail transport)?
Alcohol fuels are not used in diesel vehicles. However, by competing
against gasoline, they would force down the price of a barrel of oil,
and thus diesel fuel, jet fuel, and ship bunker fuel as well.
10. What about your own vehicle? Has it already been converted to
run on biofuels, and do you have availability of the fuels in your
area?
I'm still driving my old 1999 car, which is not flex fuel. But as soon
as it gives up the ghost, I'm buying a flex fuel vehicle. There are
only a few E85 stations in my area, but I think there will be more
soon enough, because we are going to win this fight.
Pensacola Beachcomber
This is very interesting. We have two cars: a Prius and a Solara.
One averages about fifty mpg and the other thirty-two mpg. You don't have
to think hard about which one we drove to and from the beach today.
We have one flex fuel outlet here. Not too many people are using it
but the farmers are starting to see the light. The average guy on the
street can't afford a new ethanol car as we are still on the comeback from
Hurricane
Ivan. Salaries are very low here. We have many people who buy a new used
car every year with their income tax refund and then run it into the ground.
We need better public transportation and jobs.
I took a Volvo station wagon to Brazil in 1979. In the states I used
BP hi-test. When I got to Brazil they stopped making high test. Their best
gas available to the guy on the street was 67 octane. My car would not go
up a hill at more than about two miles an hour. It was an embarrasment and
unsafe to
drive (I could go down the hills pretty fast though). I had to mix in some
aviation gas to make it go. That may have made
it run a little hot but I didn't care. I sold it for peanuts when my tour
was up. During that tour in Brazil we lived through the conversion to what
the Brazilians call alcohol fuel. Most of it's made from sugar cane. At
first people just started using it in their cars
because it was cheaper than gasoline. Their cars literally fell apart
because the gaskets were not made for the alcolhol fuel. Ford, Chevy and
Fiat started cranking out cars that were made for alcolhol fuel. Honda
joined in. When I last was in Brazil in 1997 one could buy an alcohol
powered Honda Civic for about $45K. Half of that was taxes. Half was the
cost of the car. The same car sold as a used vehicle was tax free but there
was no real drop from the MSRP of the car because of the law of supply and
demand. In a country where there is no such thing as a "totaled" vehicle
everything is worth fixing and driving. My Honda Accord was totaled in
Brazil in 1996. I brought in parts and had it rebuilt by hand. I brought
it back to the states and drove it for a few years before selling it to a
friend. When I sold it to him it looked like a car fresh from the factory.
It became the taxi cab for his high school kids. Sorry,
digression, I know. Anyhow, both alcohol fuel and regular gasoline are
available
in most of Brazil. Brazil has recently discovered oil fields that will
start producing in 2010 or so. They think they have as much oil as Saudi
Arabia. They also have a concession to drill in the waters off of Cuba just
south of Key West. So, what we have is a huge country that hopes to go from
alcolhol to petroleum based fuels. They will need their farms to feed
people. Brazil has not allowed an increase in the price of gasoline since
2005. The consumer doesn't have the cash to afford paying more than the
prices set in 2005. There are some minor fluctuations due to transportation
shortages but the prices are set by the central government as far as I know.
Today the price of a gallon of regular gas in the State of Bahia, Brazil is
U.S. $1.59; high test is U.S. $1.61 (not a whole lot of difference from
regular); and, the almighty alcohol fuel is US $1.01. I don't know what the
consumption rates are in an alternative fueled vehicle in Brazil today but
when I left those cars were using three times as much fuel as a regular
petroleum engine car. And, when they went by the exhaust smelled like
boiled onions.
Me, I'm unhappy about my choices for use of public transportation. No
AMTRACK train has gone through here since Hurricane Ivan. The tracks handle
many freight trains every day (in fact, we had a long train of propeller
blades for wind generators being put together this morning). I'd like to
travel by train. Can't. Air is getting too expensive. Trailways and
Greyhound seem non-existant. The monorail from Mobile, Alabama to
Jacksonville, FL that I suggested we build won't ever come to fruition
unless the Japanese decide to build it.
I lived in an Opec nation and went through the riots/gas rationing
when the government raised the price of gasoline from a quarter to half a
dollar a gallon. the rich were rich but the middle and lower classes were
not. Soldiers with rifles made sure safely I got my gas at a diplomatic
fuel pump. We had to run the gauntlet to get gas for our cars. When I read
science fiction about urban wars of the future (fighting for water, fuel,
food, whatever) I don't have to let my mind wander to know what it's going
to be like if we don't get a handle on the situation soon.
Zubrin has excellent points. I think the first step is to abolish
lobbyists and send Mr. Smith to Washington!! Tom
"Danbob" <calte...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2dab20e6-aa64-4358...@u6g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
Danbob
>
> read more »
Hi Tom,
I'm with you 210% on the mass transit. As much as I didn't like
living in Texas, you could go from any medium sized town to any other
medium sized town on those little puddle jumper planes. And people
used them. No big surprise that a sales rep would rather spend 45
minutes going from Dallas to Waco rather than 3 or 4 hours, right?
In California, they just keep building more freaking highways. The
highways are so clogged already that they're a nightmare, and the
solution is always, "Let's add more lanes." We live in NorCal and, to
get to Santa Cruz to visit Carol's son, we'd have to take a flight
from Redding to San Francisco and then take a bus to San Jose where
we'd have to take another bus to Santa Cruz. There's one AmTrak that
goes through Redding. Unfortunately, it goes through at 3:30 in the
morning. I mean there's that whole Central Valley that would be
perfect for a bullet train but it's not even under discussion. It's
infuriating.
Gene
>
> read more »
I'm beginning to think that the spiraling price of gas and food is
going to drive liberals and conservatives together, one way or the
other. I know I went to the commissary last week with a short list -
no meat of any sort, to include the flying and swimming varieties and
a few coupons. I spent $71+change on a few more than 25 items. No
arrtichokes, no caviar, no pate de fois gras - but almost $72.
And Washington seems to have no idea....
Gene
Danbob
>
> I'm beginning to think that the spiraling price of gas and food is
> going to drive liberals and conservatives together, one way or the
> other. I know I went to the commissary last week with a short list -
> no meat of any sort, to include the flying and swimming varieties and
> a few coupons. I spent $71+change on a few more than 25 items. No
> arrtichokes, no caviar, no pate de fois gras - but almost $72.
> And Washington seems to have no idea....
> Gene
Hey Gene,
Tell me about it! $278.00 for groceries yesterday. Of course, we
live in the mountains, and the one grocery store up here has a
monopoly so they're gouging the hell out of us. But still . . .
I do think that's one of the problems - the politicians don't do their
own shopping. Like El Presidente with that horrible gaffe about,
"Four dollars a gallon for gas? Where'd you hear that?" $4.09 at
Douglas City yesterday. If he'd filled up a gas tank lately, he'd of
known.