Democrat Calls for US Energy Independency in a Decade
Chive Mynde
WASHINGTON, DC, January 25, 2002 (ENS) - Representative Dick Gephardt,
Democratic leader of the House, is calling for tax breaks and other
government incentives to develop clean new energy sources and make the
United States independent of foreign energy suppliers by the end of
the decade.
"Every time there is a crisis in the Middle East, or overseas oil
producers decide to fix output, our nation feels it at the pump and in
our pocketbooks," Gephardt said Thursday before the Democratic
Leadership Council (DLC). "How many more cycles do we need to live
through to convince us that America needs a new energy policy?"
Gephardt's remarks centered on the need to reduce U.S. dependence on
foreign energy, which he said has grown from 36 percent of supplies in
1973 to 56 percent today.
"At this rate of growth, by the year 2020, we could be importing
nearly two out of every three barrels of oil," Gephardt said. "Even if
we allowed drilling off every coastline and in every wildlife refuge
in America, our economy - and our security - would still be dependent
on foreign oil."
He recommended that the United States launch an "Apollo Project,"
similar to President John F. Kennedy's call to send Americans to the
Moon. The new goal would be to develop "environmentally smart,
renewable energy solutions" which would provide 20 percent of the
nation's energy production by 2020.
"We need to begin today to reach the goal of making America energy
self sufficient, using clean and safe sources of energy," Gephardt
said. "I believe that with strong leadership - and a real energy
policy - we can meet this goal within a decade."
Clean, affordable new energy sources would also create jobs for
Americans, Gephardt argued.
"We should use the newest technology to get more work done with less
energy, and find new ways to make renewable energy at the lowest
possible cost," he said. "We should increase energy production while
also cutting air pollution and protecting the environment."
Congress should set the goal "of ultimately converting America's
passenger transportation to fuel cell vehicles running on hydrogen,
the ultimate 'green' energy resource, whose only byproduct is water,"
Gephardt said.
"By 2010, our goal should be to produce 100,000 fuel cell vehicles -
expanded to reach 2.5 million by 2020," said Gephardt. Tax incentives
for private industry and new federal research dollars would help the
nation reach this goal, he said.
"Some studies have shown that there is up to a $1 trillion market in
the world today for energy conservation technologies and alternative
energy sources," Gephardt said. "We are just on the cusp of
discoveries that will be made in these areas that can be just as rapid
and breathtaking as a lot of the information technology developments
of the last decade."
-
Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
Jacques Jedwab
chyve...@yahoo.com (Chive Mynde) wrote:
> GEPHARDT CALLS FOR ENERGY INDEPENDENCE WITHIN 10 YEARS
>
> WASHINGTON, DC, January 25, 2002 (ENS) - Representative Dick Gephardt,
> Democratic leader of the House, is calling for tax breaks and other
> government incentives to develop clean new energy sources and make the
.......................
> Congress should set the goal "of ultimately converting America's
> passenger transportation to fuel cell vehicles running on hydrogen,
> the ultimate 'green' energy resource, whose only byproduct is water,"
> Gephardt said.
>
.........................
> Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
OK, but who will tell us whence hydrogen will come? Looks like the
ultimate "deus ex machina". J.J.
Graham Cowan
Gephardt's constituency is tax beneficiaries.
Because of their hydrocarbon tax interest,
they want research into oil replacement technologies
that can be counted on to fail.
For the non-conflicted, these suggestions will be welcome:
nuclear-generated hydrogen,
nuclear-generated liquid hydrocarbon,
or my favorite, nuclear-generated boron
(http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/boron_blast.html#lycbo).
And internal combustion, not fuel cells.
FUEL CELLS ARE A SHAM.
--- Graham Cowan
http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/boron_blast.html --
let the baby play with matches in the fuel storage room!
Frank Logullo
> OK, but who will tell us whence hydrogen will come? Looks like the
> ultimate "deus ex machina". J.J.
Local rag suggested we use aluminum as hydrogen source. Save your old storm
windows for the new models ;)
Frank
Steven A. Levy
electricity (most hydrogen they use being from H20, they use the electricity
created by burning fossil feuls to split the H20, and then they have hydrogen
to run the fuel cells). I'm a big proponent of alternative power, not hydro
for that damages ecosystems, but definitely solar and geothermal, as well as
wind where it can be efficient, and tidal where it too can be done without
harming organisms that live along the shores. I know Iceland is big into this
and geothermal, hopefully the US can come out and be a leader in this field
Steve Levy
Lloyd R. Parker
: you're right about feul cells being a sham, for to get the hydrogen, you need
: electricity (most hydrogen they use being from H20, they use the electricity
: created by burning fossil feuls to split the H20, and then they have hydrogen
: to run the fuel cells). I'm a big proponent of alternative power, not hydro
There's a new system that uses sodium borohydride; DaimlerChrysler has an
experimental fuel cell car with that.
: for that damages ecosystems, but definitely solar and geothermal, as well as
:
Graham Cowan
"Steven A. Levy" wrote:
>
> you're right about feul cells being a sham, for to get the
> hydrogen, you need electricity
Wrong (http://inisjp.tokai.jaeri.go.jp/ACT97E/05/0504.htm,
http://inisjp.tokai.jaeri.go.jp/ACT00E/09/0903.htm).
> (most hydrogen they use being from H20,
Wrong today, might someday not be.
John S. Watson
> GEPHARDT CALLS FOR ENERGY INDEPENDENCE WITHIN 10 YEARS
We would have been energy independent now, if the Democrats
hadn't quadrupled immigration levels in the 70's,
thus making the US the fastest growing industrialized nation
in the world.
Do the Democrats call for reducing immigration levels
so the US population stops growing?
If not, there is no way the US can become energy independent.
Only more and more dependent, with the US Census projecting that
we'll be a billion strong by 2100.
Unless maybe we build about 1,000 nuclear power plants in the
next 10 years (and more later since the philosophy seem to be
of growth forever).
I won't hold my breath waiting for the Democrats to champion either
of these two choices.
JW
Lloyd R. Parker
: chyve...@yahoo.com (Chive Mynde) wrote in message news:<3af22a53.02012...@posting.google.com>...
: > GEPHARDT CALLS FOR ENERGY INDEPENDENCE WITHIN 10 YEARS
:
: We would have been energy independent now, if the Democrats
: hadn't quadrupled immigration levels in the 70's,
: thus making the US the fastest growing industrialized nation
: in the world.
Considering that we import half our oil, your claim is ludicrous.
:
: Do the Democrats call for reducing immigration levels
: so the US population stops growing?
Our nation was founded on the principle of immigration.
:
: If not, there is no way the US can become energy independent.
: Only more and more dependent, with the US Census projecting that
: we'll be a billion strong by 2100.
We certainly won't get independent by just drilling and damming.
:
: Unless maybe we build about 1,000 nuclear power plants in the
: next 10 years (and more later since the philosophy seem to be
: of growth forever).
:
: I won't hold my breath waiting for the Democrats to champion either
: of these two choices.
How about energy conservation? Increasing efficiency? If trucks got the
same average mileage as cars, we could cut out oil imports drastically,
for example.
:
:
: JW