Uko,
I am not familiar with the WorldWatch Institute, but I have heard of it.
Just out of curiosity, I went to their Web site and extracted the following
information from http://www.worldwatch.org/alerts/010517.html :
"We are now in the early stages of an energy revolution that is as profound
and rapid as the one that ushered in the age of oil a century ago. This new
energy system-highly decentralized, efficient, and based increasingly on
renewable resources and hydrogen fuel-is already beginning to emerge in
other parts of the world. Without visionary leadership, the United States
risks falling behind its economic competitors and compromising its political
credibility on the international stage."
and, a bit further down the page,
""Micropower" is the term used to describe the unmistakable global trend in
power generation toward decentralized, efficient units, such as fuel cells
and microturbines, that operate primarily on natural gas. It is a shift as
profound as the move from mainframes to personal computers, creating equally
significant new business opportunities. Locking the U.S. power system into
the twentieth-century, large-scale, fossil and nuclear-based models will
cripple the global competitiveness of the U.S. energy industry while
exacerbating health and environmental problems."
next,
"Hydrogen: "Tomorrow's Petroleum"
Will the most abundant element in the universe be a missing element in Bush
energy policy? Automotive and energy companies, as well as startups, are
pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the development of
hydrogen-based fuel cells to power portable electronics, stationary power
systems, and motor vehicles. Hydrogen and fuel cell technology may reorient
the global energy system as profoundly as did the discovery of oil and the
invention of the internal combustion engine more than a century ago.
and, finally,
"Today, wind power is the world's fastest growing energy source at 27
percent per year, and is less expensive than both gas- and coal-fired
electricity. "
There are three points I want to make:
1. From the first excerpt, "this new energy system-highly decentralized,
efficient, and based increasingly on renewable resources and hydrogen fuel
..." and from the last excerpt, "... hydrogen and fuel cell technology may
reorient the global energy system ..." it appears that WWI considers
hydrogen a fuel. I wonder where they expect to drill for hydrogen! My
guess is that hydrogen will have to be generated by breaking the O-H bond of
water and that takes more energy that one gets by burning hydrogen (second
law of thermodynamics). So, basically, all that a hydrogen economy will do
is to provide us with a portable energy supply at an energy cost.
2. The second excerpt is precisely what I mentioned in my previous e-mail,
to Dave: decentralization of power; Note that nothing is said about
controlling the effluent of all these microturbines.
3. To claim that wind power is growing at 27% is a typical skewing of
statistics. (The accompanying table shows growth rates for other energy
conversion systems as well). What is missing is the installed capacity! Of
course, with very few wind generators installed, any addition represents a
proportionally large growth. To state that wind power is less expensive
than gas- and coal-fired electricity without providing data is questionable,
especially when, earlier on, the statement is made that "The cost of nuclear
generated electricity is roughly double that of other energy sources now in
the power market." So, is electricity form nuclear twice as expensive as
that from coal and gas and more than twice that of wind? If so, why are
most nuclear power plants running flat out and why are nuclear power plant
owners now submitting applications for licence renewal?
I don't think I have taken the comments of the WWI out of context. My
impression of an, admittedly limited, inspection of their publication, that
WWI is an advocacy group and presents a mixture of facts, opinions, and
questionable statistics to make a point. If I'm wrong, I'm sure that
somebody will haul me up short. ;-)
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Uko Zylstra [mailto:zylu@calvin.edu]
Sent: Thursday May 31, 2001 8:49 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu; Kamilla ludwig
Subject: Re: Organizations
Kamilla,
I am more familiar with WorldWatch Institute than the other two you
mentioned.
I consider the WorldWatch State of the World books and WorldWatch magazine a
good source of information on environmental trends. I use their materials as
a
basis for many of my lectures. If they have an axe to grind, I think it is
one
which all Christians should be concerned with as well.
Uko Zylstra, Ph.D.
Biology Department
Calvin College
tel: (616)957-6499
email: zylu@calvin.edu
>>> "Kamilla ludwig" <kamillal@worldnet.att.net> 05/30/01 05:46PM >>>
I am wondering which organizations and advocacy groups are the most reliable
sources of good information.
What can any of the listmembers tell me about, for instance:
Union of Concerned Scientists
Center for Science in the Public Interest
WorldWatch Institute
I am particularly interested in those organizations that are active in
public
health. Are there any other organizations that might be better sources for
information and for possible involvement?
Also, before I forget again, I have looked around a bit for some of the
answers
about our earlier discussion in GM foods, particularly the claim about
Monarch
butterfly toxicity. It seems that those claims were wildly exaggerated.
Just
goes to show you can't trust someone just because they have a tenured
position
and a PhD after their name!
Thanks,
Kamilla
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 31 2001 - 10:31:32 EDT