What effect should the Gulf oil disaster have on U.S. energy policy?
Posted at 5:00 AM on July 19, 2010
by Eric Ringham
(11 Comments)
Filed under: Environment/Energy
Last week, BP seemed finally to make some progress in stopping the undersea oil gusher in the Gulf of Mexico. Today's Question: What effect should the Gulf oil disaster have on U.S. energy policy?
Comments (11)
I have a hard time taking seriously anyone who arrogantly derides arts, history and social sciences as "not education," having once held that opinion myself and come to realize it's ridiculous. It makes me wonder what else that person is closed-minded about.
Just a note - alternative sources like wind are a bit like the people of ages past burning a part of their harvest to appease the gods - its useless. At best, they have close to zero EROI to date, with the exception of geothermal, hydro and solar in deserts. Most people think !free fuel! but forgo the fossil fuels REQUIRED and UNREPLACEABLE necessary for the manufacture of wind turbines as an example. Plastics, metals - all require FF to process or are FF derived directly.
The best EROI out there, nuclear, will of course be passed over because imbeciles with no education (No, a degree in ecology, gender studies, english history or other arts and social sciences is not education) will supress it on pathological fear of the unknown. Current gen tech which uses about 1% of energy contained in mined fuel has an EROI of about 70. A complete fuel cycle with reprocessing fuel could raise that to 500 with technology from the '60s. The only real reason for supression is - once everyone has a nuke reactor, the Atomic club is going to grow rapidly - which would upset the global balance of power and could lead to more wars.
For gods sake, you should be more afraid of carcinogenic PCBs, overuse of antibiotics leading to new strains of MRSA, soil erosion and water table depletion in the Midwest, presence of Cadmium and Mercury in your flour, and plastic softeners which act similar to female hormones causing increasing levels of sterility and directly affecting the brains of the younger male generation than some bullshit spewed by uneducated hippie wannabes.
I have traveled around Europe (which I am from) and I can tell you I have not seen more untouched, unspoiled corner of nature than in one spot - the Chernobyl inner closed perimeter. Since I work in a hospital as a radiology tech, I took my counter with me - on my entire week trip there, I recieved the same dose I do in four days I spend at work. Time to stop being afraid of your own shadows - the most radioactive elements are not in Ukraine anyway, they are in Byelorussia, the neigboring state. All the precautions you have to do - dont eat mushrooms - as saphrophages they concentrate Cesium and transuranics.
Oil and natural gas do not just fuel vehicles. It is used for a myriad of products and services the average person is not aware of (e.g., makeup, perfumes, asphalt for driving, plastics products like cell phones, inks, etc.). Which are people willing to forego? Then of course idealists want wind but organizations oppose them in their back yard. A major solar project in California is being taken to court due to the potential environmental impact. Agricultural products "demand" water which is in jeopardy of being depleted not to mention the impact on core products to feed those less fortunate. Coal, readily available at a reasonable cost, but then there are those who are fearful of pollution. Then of course nuclear is clean readily available and cost efficient. But there are those who complain about disposal.
Perhaps it is just better to abandond all technologies and move back to nature kind of like the med-evil days. Oops forgot about the plague which current wisdom and technologies seem to keep in check.
Regardless of which way we turn, there will be risks. What are you willing to give up and risks do you want to take?
Policy should push us off-planet- solar in space. 24/7 energy flow and no (direct) eco-system disruption. space is also a great place for nuclear, on a tether to let the energy flow.
The effect should be a turning point in America's energy future — but it won't be.
Unfortunately the cheapest energy possible will continue to be the order of the day in a market based economy/political system dominated by oligarchs. The environment will always come second to the $ in America. And so too in China, as it works hard to supplant America in our rush to oblivion.
I hate to say it, but this question is a pointless exercise in cliche. What we SHOULD do has little relation to what we probably WILL do. I can't see us having any sort of rational conversation with the opposition about this subject. Because we can't have any sort of rational discussion with the opposition about this subject, we'll just keep muddling along no matter what the cost.
Perhaps that's the question we should ask before we deal with energy policy, global warming, and health care: What can, and should we (ethically) do about the opposition?
This oil diseaster (the worst in modern history) should be a wake-up call for the government to reexamine our energy policy and aggressive explore alternative energy sources and really tighten controls on the oil industry from top to bottom!
Hydrogen economy...
This is the future of zero emissions and energy independence.
Either hydrogen on demand technology, hydrogen from electrolysis or bio-chemical hydrogen can replace ALL fossil fuels.
The ICE (internal combustion engine) that runs on fossil fuel is going the way of the dinosaurs. Retrofits have been made to run current ICE technology, looking forward fuel cells are the perform technology.
If our political leaders could pry themselves away from kickbacks / “contributions” from the big oil corporations and advance this technology we could be free of our oily handcuffs.
SANDIA national labs http://www.sandia.gov/mission/energy/ need free reigns such as a Manhattan type project to get the USA ahead of the world.
The USA has THE best scientific and engineers minds in the world! Let's not get left behind and let the Chicom's beat us to the mass production of this goal.
DTOM
THINK BORON
I think this is just another reminder of why we should be trying to develope alternative energy. I can't see why Boron technology is not being rigorously developed? Boron has three times the potental energy as gasoline when burned in an oxygen enriched atmosphere, is completely emission free and can be reprossessed and reused indefinetly. Why does'nt either the Gov. or private industry develope this? If for no other reason, for our children and grandchildrens futures! Transpotation is not an addiction, it's a nessessity. NPR- Lets see a show dedicated to this idea!!!
This oil disaster should have a bigger effect than it probably will. Policy-makers will likely be swayed by the argument (made by their big-money campaign contributors) that we mustn't be too hasty about change, for fear of harming the economy. By that logic, we'd still be trying to find a way to abolish slavery without impacting our GDP.
The right thing to do is move as quickly as feasible to alternative energy sources and quit putting fragile ecosystems at risk, but the plutocrats who call the shots in Washington won't let that happen. When we can't do what's right because it's bad for the economy, we've made the economy our god.
I would fear an overreaction to oil exploration and a hasty, poorly planned attempt to switch to alternative energy. Alternative energy development may be needed, but we need to make the switch in a deliberate and well thought out manner so don't disrupt an already fragile economy.
| July 2010 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Master Archive
Recent Entries
- Have changes to the airline passenger experience affected your willingness to fly?
- Should marijuana be available for medical use in Minnesota?
- Do the struggles of Minnesota's business icons signal trouble for the state's economy?
- Do you know whether insurance would cover your losses in a major storm?
- What kind of recycling program would you be likely to use the most?
- Would you support paying people for organ or tissue donations?
- Have personal relationships in the workplace ever presented a problem for you?
- Do you think Facebook is a passing fad?
- Will you be less likely to visit the Minnesota Zoo without its dolphins?
- Should authorities in the Twin Cities change the way they warn people about tornadoes?
Public Insight Network
The Public Insight Network draws upon your experiences to help shape our coverage.More
Categories
Services
In The Spotlight
-
Sound Learning
Looking for ways to ensure your students are doing quality research from credible sources? Sound Learning is a launching point to Minnesota Public Radio's content on the Web. -
The Current Music Blog
Your daily note for good music, news and pop culture. With attempted jokes.
- Become a Member
- Member Connect Accounts
- Leadership Circle
- Sustaining Members
- Member Discounts
- Become a Sponsor
- Tax Information
- Planned Giving
- Vehicle Donation
- Donate Stock