TIME
FOR FULL EMPLOYMENT
TO PRODUCE AN
ANTI-INFLATIONERY ECONOMY
At the beginning of my
career as an engineer I attempted to get U.S. carmakers, the railroad companies,
the Army, Navy, and Air Force to utilize hydrogen and/or fuel saving inventions.
I provided projections showing how by 2000 most of the world’s oil
would be controlled by multinational companies and countries that had goals and
beliefs that were not friendly to the well being of the U.S.
Carmakers told me that it
was not of interest to do anything about fuel efficiency so long as their
product met EPA requirements and performed well enough to sell.
Military planners said they could not imagine a time in
which they would switch to something other than diesel fuel and gasoline.
Senator Barry Goldwater tried to get the Air Force to use hydrogen but
his efforts were rebuffed by oil-company lobbyists insisting that “jet fuel”
had to be oil.
But it may be of interest
for anyone who might not have noticed recent activities of carmakers to get
hydrogen cars to the market or read the Spring 2006 edition of “Parameters”
the U.S. Army War College Quarterly in which an essay by Nader Elhefnawy states
in part:
"Even without
taking into account related problems like the greenhouse effect, the security
problems posed by the exhaustion of supplies of easily accessible, cheap oil and
gas are highly varied and daunting. The likely result would be the exacerbation
of familiar problems like resource conflict, weapons proliferation, and state
failure. However, other problems
are more novel, not least of all the potential for changes in the international
balance of power based not only on which countries control the lion's share of
the world's fossil fuel supplies, but which are
most dependent on those supplies."
This military strategist obviously realizes
that soaring oil prices will greatly increase the cost of fuel for our fuel
guzzling military, it would also shift the balance of economic and military
power away from energy-deficient
countries toward energy-rich countries.
In consideration of coal as an alternative, the Army’s Engineering,
Research, and Development Center noted:
"The days of
inexpensive, convenient, abundant energy sources are quickly drawing to a close.
Domestic natural gas production peaked in 1973. The proved domestic reserve
lifetime for natural gas at current consumption rates is about 8.4 years. The
proved world reserve lifetime for natural gas is about 40 years, but will follow
a traditional rise to a peak at about 2035 and then a rapid decline. Domestic
oil production peaked in 1970 and continues to decline. Proved domestic reserve
lifetime for oil is about 3.4 years. World oil production is at or near its peak
and current world demand exceeds the supply. Saudi Arabia is considered the
bellwether nation for oil production and has not increased production since
April 2003. After peak production, supply no longer meets demand, prices and
competition increase. World proved reserve lifetime for oil is about 41 years,
most of this at a declining availability. Our current throwaway nuclear cycle
uses up the world reserve of low-cost uranium in about 20 years. We will see
significant depletion of Earth's finite resources in this century."
Coal is far more abundant but the downsides
to coal are obvious from a strategic and environmental perspective.
Strategically, coal is a fossil hydrocarbon. Using it to generate electric power
doesn't eliminate our dependency on finite fossil fuel. But it could give us
time to shift to hydrogen and other renewable alternatives and/or risk
everything we have built by waiting for "the next great thing" in
energy generation as we watch the balance of power shift from our economy to
another.
Environmentally, coal produces mercury and
radioactive heavy metals, sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide. The
mercury causes birth defects and delays mental development. The sulfur and
nitrous dioxide cause lung and respiratory ailments. And carbon dioxide
accumulating in the global atmosphere is changing the Earth's climate.
What every community needs are opportunities
for virtually full employment to make, use, and sell enough renewable-energy
intensive goods and services to achieve sustainable prosperity.
We have proven technologies to enable new ventures in 7,000 communities
of about one million persons to achieve sustainable prosperity.
(See related article on the Renewable Energy Development Institute)