CRASHiC
Smash Hero
Weather we've hit peak oil or weather we are reaching peak oil in the future, the issue is always relvant and one of the most importance crisis of modern United States living. One potential solution that came from an unsurprising source, from an American Oil man himself is one that combines natural energy sources abundant in the United States with our own version of fossil fuels. Is this the answer america needs to our potential energy crises?
One of the major elements of the Perkins plan is Natural Gas, used primarily for transportation. When you consider the vast majority of our patrolieum use is consumed by are various forms of transportation, disproportionate even, its a good place to shoot down our oil dependence.
However, there are some issues with this. In replace of diesel, 60% fuel efficiency is found.
http://www.p2pays.org/ref/38/37568.pdf
It is possible that the cleaner burning energy of Natural Gas is offset by this increased production.
The other issue is of course converstion over to Natural Gas, which would require heavy American subsides. Consider that only 0.017% of all transportation vehicles within the United States run on Common Natural Gas. Our history doesn't bode to well for us either. Abandoned plans to get us off of patrolmen based transportation include:
Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975
Alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988
EPAct of 1992
Energy Policy Act of 2005
The question is, has this round proven bad enough that we could accomplish what we've been trying to achieve for decades?
Of course, I by no means that this is impossible. Many countries already run on Natural gas. I think if you combined this approach with lowering America's dependence on personal transportation we could see massive improvement in affordable, long lasting reliable energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_natural_gas#South_Asia
Another major element to his plan is to run major electricity by wind power, and as he is correct, wind power does indeed have a powerful oppurtunity within the States.
The most intestesting thing about this is that much of the wind farms would be planted in traditional farm land, which is ideal for the States. A wind farm can cover the size of New York city, while in actuallity only taking up 1/2 an acre of land in its use, the ground below can be still be used for farming or other uses. Another advantage is off shore wind farms.
http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WindyLandownersFS.pdf
On of the problems is efficiency. Currently, wind power runs at only 40-59 percent efficiency, however, new, more efficient designs are rapidly being developed as the world wide demand is rapidly increasing.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6790007.html
The cost is also currently high, but as our wind farms and wind turbine efficiency increase, the price of wind based power will fall.
Again, as with CNG cars, the alloted time for this transition to wind power will take quite some time, and our entire energy grid would have to be moved. Of course, this isn't an entire con, as it provides America with a healthy blue collar job, and helps distribute wealth to currently underdeveloped parts of the nation.
These are the main two elements of the Pickens Plans, though there are others such as solar. Other opponents claim that this is NOT for any environmental good, but for his pure economic gain, and I respond, what is wrong with that? Sure, Pickens has a lot to gain in this, but so does a lot of America. Yes, this isn't a completely clean energy source, however we don't have time to consider such things. We need to address America's growing energy problem to help put food on the table. This does provide some relief to the environment, but the main point is America's economic security.
One of the major elements of the Perkins plan is Natural Gas, used primarily for transportation. When you consider the vast majority of our patrolieum use is consumed by are various forms of transportation, disproportionate even, its a good place to shoot down our oil dependence.
However, there are some issues with this. In replace of diesel, 60% fuel efficiency is found.
http://www.p2pays.org/ref/38/37568.pdf
It is possible that the cleaner burning energy of Natural Gas is offset by this increased production.
The other issue is of course converstion over to Natural Gas, which would require heavy American subsides. Consider that only 0.017% of all transportation vehicles within the United States run on Common Natural Gas. Our history doesn't bode to well for us either. Abandoned plans to get us off of patrolmen based transportation include:
Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975
Alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988
EPAct of 1992
Energy Policy Act of 2005
The question is, has this round proven bad enough that we could accomplish what we've been trying to achieve for decades?
Of course, I by no means that this is impossible. Many countries already run on Natural gas. I think if you combined this approach with lowering America's dependence on personal transportation we could see massive improvement in affordable, long lasting reliable energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_natural_gas#South_Asia
Another major element to his plan is to run major electricity by wind power, and as he is correct, wind power does indeed have a powerful oppurtunity within the States.
The most intestesting thing about this is that much of the wind farms would be planted in traditional farm land, which is ideal for the States. A wind farm can cover the size of New York city, while in actuallity only taking up 1/2 an acre of land in its use, the ground below can be still be used for farming or other uses. Another advantage is off shore wind farms.
http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WindyLandownersFS.pdf
On of the problems is efficiency. Currently, wind power runs at only 40-59 percent efficiency, however, new, more efficient designs are rapidly being developed as the world wide demand is rapidly increasing.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6790007.html
The cost is also currently high, but as our wind farms and wind turbine efficiency increase, the price of wind based power will fall.
Again, as with CNG cars, the alloted time for this transition to wind power will take quite some time, and our entire energy grid would have to be moved. Of course, this isn't an entire con, as it provides America with a healthy blue collar job, and helps distribute wealth to currently underdeveloped parts of the nation.
These are the main two elements of the Pickens Plans, though there are others such as solar. Other opponents claim that this is NOT for any environmental good, but for his pure economic gain, and I respond, what is wrong with that? Sure, Pickens has a lot to gain in this, but so does a lot of America. Yes, this isn't a completely clean energy source, however we don't have time to consider such things. We need to address America's growing energy problem to help put food on the table. This does provide some relief to the environment, but the main point is America's economic security.
