COST OF OIL vs. HYDROGEN
Raleigh Myers
From: Raleigh Myers <ram...@igc.apc.org>
It is insidious that the people of Chiapas are being robbed of their
land
due in part to U.S. and European oil interests when the real solution to
global energy needs is the Hydrogen Economy. The savings from the
consolidated infrastructure and other effects will be a tax break for the
whole planet. Profits from monopoly corporations are taxes plain and simple
and usually much higher than the same life support units we can provided
for each other or as common wealth ventures.
Alfred C. DeCrane, Jr. An oil executive told members of the Executives' Club
of Chicago that "petroleum and other hydrocarbons remain the most economic,
abundant, clean and safe energy source."
DeCrane also pointed out that, "at about $1.40 per gallon, gasoline is less
expensive today than popular brands of cola and mineral water, which cost
about $2.00 a gallon and $7.00 a gallon, respectively." Unfortunately, he
failed to mention the current price of tea in China.
So lets continue to reach for the edges of the envelope which Alfred so
craftily shrank.
The Deception here is that the subsidies(depreciation allowances, tax
breaks, limited liability etc.), the destruction to the planet and the loss
to the unborn of a valuable non biodegradable building material are not
factored in and we need bottled water because of fossil fuel and
petrochemical pollution. The cost of soft drinks is so high because the
same stock holders own the soft drink companies and add agencies.
The windfall profits from the various oil scams have plunged the world's
nations into debt ie. the very oil windfalls profits loaned back to
supplement the rising cost of energy. This has been one of the leading
causes of inflation besides organized usury's cartel food scams and
commodities exchanges ie. free to mess with markets.
The European price of two hundred dollars a barrel or five dollars a
gallon is more realistic. Even at that price it does not begin to factor in the
acid rain losses to the environment or people who don't even use fossil fuel or
the disease and medical costs to those suffering from all this second hand
smoke. Next to tobacco disease second hand smoke from fossil fuel accounts
to the largest health care outlay globally because it's toxins and carcinogens
trigger and exacerbate so many other fragile situations.
The pollution equipment needed to burn fossil fuel, like scrubbers and
catalytic converters, are a hidden tax, a source of profit to the group who own
sixty seven percent of the stock, seventy five percent of the bonds and almost
ninety percent of the natural resources (Dow Jones) including the oil and the
media which perpetuates organized usury's think tank deception management
episodes like the DeCrane distortions
To look at it from a personal level we use four and a half gallons of oil
equivalent of energy in this country per person(Scientific American Sept 91,
DOE, Pimentel at.al.). This amounts to almost eight thousand dollars a
person per year at five dollars a gallon which only begins to cover the
destruction and economic strife(debt and inflation)
caused by the fossil fuel debacle.
As I point out in my lecture THE HYDROGEN ECONOMY STUPID, in our web site,
it would take aprox. Two thousand sq. miles of concrete concentrator solar
collector and end use equipment costing less than the S&L rip-off(the same
stockholders again) about two thousand dollars per citizen on a one time
basis to convert to Hydrogen in the U.S.. This tremendous reduction in
energy needs is due to the consolidation of the amenity infrastructure
eliminating the two thirds of the fuel wasted by duplication. A couple of
examples are two thirds of the fuel that could heat your house goes up the
stack for centrally produced electricity and fuel cell electric cars are
over fifty percent efficient compared to an average of ten percent for
fossil fuel transport.
The financing for the Hydrogen economy is derived from the already
allocated funding needed to install or refurbish the existing five part
amenity
infrastructure. The five part infrastructure is replaced by the HYDROGEN
ECONOMY consisting: on the end use side of a Hydrogen fired heating and
cooling, sewerage, trash and garbage pyrolyzing ELECTRIC GENERATING
water recovery unit ie. Mike Mulligan's space shuttle in the basement :). The
muni water supply is replaced by the hydrogen as it is used, the sewer works
can be shut down when you vaporize(destructive distillation) the sewerage as
well as eliminating the need for landfills- skyfills for whatever trash and
garbage you don't recycle. All this while you generate whatever electricity
you need, even some to charge the Hydrogen fuel cell electric
car(electrolysis of the exhaust water)as well as for industry.
That scenario alone will save almost two thirds of the energy we now
waste and we waste two thirds to three quarters of the energy we now use ie.
that is a tax, your treadmill TIME greening the petrotrade. What remains
belongs to the unborn for non biodegradable building materials. The
Hydrogen economy also eliminates almost all the pollution. We also save the
ten thousand dollars per citizen($50,.000 per family of five) to just
rebuild the old infrastructure(water, sewer, gas, electric, motor fuel,
trash disposal etc.) in any city over fifty years old. This amounts to over
a billion dollars per
hundred thousand population in almost every city on the planet.
The garbage collection and the personnel and fuel to do all that
is history. The tens of thousands of acres of land it takes to operate the
fossil fuel, coal, uranium, power lines, off shore leases, etc. are in the
hands of a few stockholders while there is a shortage of land to live on. It
is your money(Treadmill TIME) and it can be put toward a benign Hydrogen
economy allowing almost every body to be off grid ie. free
from organized parasitism. The oil we burn is tantamount to burning the
furniture to heat the house ie. a year's supply or so of heating oil and
motor fuel can build the house and the car and both can be operated on
Hydrogen. The planet really belongs to the unborn ie. empowering your
progeny should be job one. See theURL in the sig for more details that
discuss some of the fine points to initiate the political leverage to
orchestrate the necessary attitude adjustment.
We have the technology to feed and house all on earth with a
high standard of living. Question is: Are you in any way preventing that
from happening? 'Nothing' counts!
If your not part of the solution your part of the problem .
Eldridge Cleaver
In Solidarity
Raleigh
Raleigh Myers
Ra Energy Fdn
ram...@igc.apc.org
http://www.igc.apc.org/raenergy/raenergy.html
Raleigh Myers
Ra Energy Fdn
ram...@igc.apc.org
http://www.igc.apc.org/raenergy/raenergy.html
Andreas Haffner
altavoz <alt...@azstarnet.com> wrote:
>60 columns please , you are on the internet !
>If world pop' was 10 million , we could make electricity
>with briggs/stratton engines and not recycle anything .
>Population is the problem , not lack of renewable anything.
> This earth can handle 10 million people poluting as hard
>as they possibly can .
> Green just allows more people to exist on this earth , each
>using less resources . And im against more population .
> POPULATION IS THE PROBLEM , NOT RESOURCES UTILIZATION .
>___________...@azstarnet.com_________________
(# of people) x (consumption/emission per individual) = environmental effect!
We have to keep the product above on a sustainable level. To say 'population is
the problem' seems to me is putting responsibility to one side only.
Let's say 10 mill people is 1/1000 of todays population (isn't this quite
close?). So the avarage of resource consumption/environmental effect need only
be 1000-fold from todays avarage then even the 10-mill-population would have
managed the same resource consumption. I'm pretty sure there exist already
today some people in the world which use 1000 times more resources than
average!
Andreas Haffner
---------------------------------------------
This is my own opinion!.......?.......I think
Homepage..........http://home.sn.no/~ahaffner
altavoz
Harry H Conover
Raleigh Myers (ram...@igc.apc.org) wrote:
: From: Raleigh Myers <ram...@igc.apc.org>
:
: It is insidious that the people of Chiapas are being robbed of their
: land
: due in part to U.S. and European oil interests when the real solution to
: global energy needs is the Hydrogen Economy. The savings from the
: consolidated infrastructure and other effects will be a tax break for the
: whole planet. Profits from monopoly corporations are taxes plain and simple
: and usually much higher than the same life support units we can provided
: for each other or as common wealth ventures.
:
What is this guy smoking or drinking, and where can I get some?
Second question: Where do he plan to get his hydrogen, since at last
sanity check, production of hyrdrogen in significant quantities required
the expenditure of corresponding amounts of nuclear or fossil fuels to
produce?
Harry C.
gree...@sentex.net
altavoz <alt...@azstarnet.com> wrote:
>If world pop' was 10 million , we could make electricity
>with briggs/stratton engines and not recycle anything .
>Population is the problem , not lack of renewable anything.
> This earth can handle 10 million people poluting as hard
>as they possibly can .
> Green just allows more people to exist on this earth , each
>using less resources . And im against more population .
> POPULATION IS THE PROBLEM , NOT RESOURCES UTILIZATION .
So are you volunteering to get off to lighten the load? :)
Seriously, I agree with you half way: overpopulation IS a problem.
However, it is also true that in the "Western" part of the world we live
a ridiculously extravagant life style that is completely unsupportable
in even the medium term, let alone in the long run. I also believe that
living as extravagantly as we do is bad for the human spirit -- we lose
sight of the basic necessities of life: food, shelter, clothing, and a
purpose.
I have heard others berating the continually increasing population
problem, but it often sounds like an excuse not to change our own way
of living. It is best to start changing the world in your own back
yard (which is why conferences on solar energy and people actually trying
things for themselves is such a great thing).
These are my opinions, not always as humble as they ought to be.
Regards,
Bert Menkveld
altavoz
What kind of a mind would ask the top 5% of the pop' to leave ?
duh !!!!!
> Seriously, I agree with you half way: overpopulation IS a problem.
> However, it is also true that in the "Western" part of the world we live
> a ridiculously extravagant life style that is completely unsupportable
> in even the medium term, let alone in the long run. I also believe that
> living as extravagantly as we do is bad for the human spirit -- we lose
> sight of the basic necessities of life: food, shelter, clothing, and a
> purpose.You cannot "loose sight of the basic necessities of life.." when the pop
drops to 10 mil because you'll be on 40 acres and growing your own.
As pop drops , its difficult to find people to fill the cities, which is
where you learn to not appreciate the above "basic necesssities"
> Bert Menkveld++++++++++++++++++++++altavoz says +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bert , you want to take some elements of todays over populated
world and use them as arguments in a 10 mil world and thats not
right. This is simplicity ( left brained). With 10 mil, everything
changes !!
______End of text from alt...@azstarnet.com___________