RE: Energy Policy / Junk Science Environmentalism

Hi Al, my responses below in blue.

>>> "Al Koop" <koopa@gvsu.edu> 1/5/2006 10:08 AM >>>
Charles Carrigan wrote:
CC: There are many energy sources available to use besides fossil fuels.
AK: Agreed. The central question is what the final cost will be to extract the energy from these sources. As an extremely simple case: If one unit of oil costs $1 per unit and alternative energy X costs $2 per unit, of which $1 is due to the cost of oil, then alternative energy X will never be economically viable. So the discussion among the alternative energy people is what part of the cost of alternative energy is due to cheap oil. There are endless arguments and I know of no definitive source to sort this out, but it is by no means as straightforward as the optimists claim.
 
CC: Agreed. The cost of energy will go up, but it is a question of which energy sources will become economically viable. While some may never, others will. As the cost of energy in our current economic climate continues to rise, the possibility of innovation also rises. Many alternative energy sources may not be economically viable simply because no one has yet found any incentive to invest in them. As the price of oil rises, those incentives will become more and more prominent. In fact, I would argue that the process is already beginning. Here in Illinois, for example, wind farms that generate electricity are growing and I heard of a new one being started just a few months ago. Obviously not all areas of the world can take advantage of wind energy like IL, but IL can't take advantage of solar power the same way the desert SW US can, and neither of those can take advantage of geothermal energy in the same way as areas along the pacific rim. Alternative energy sources will likely be much less portable than fossil fuels, and this will likely require different regions to focus on the sources that are available to them.
 

CC: Nuclear power generates ~20% of US electricity (although here in Illinois the percentage is much higher than that), and is the only non-fossil fuel that is used in any considerable abundance worldwide. France for example generates ~80% of its electricity from nuclear power. The US was at one point scheduled to have many more nuclear reactors than it has now, but many of these plans were cancelled in the 1970s-80s due to growing public concern over anything nuclear (nuclear holocaust, 3 mile island, cold war, cuban missle crisis, etc.etc.). Our low use of nuclear power comes not from a lack of U fuel, poor technology, or high cost, but rather from political pressures that make nuclear power rather difficult to push forward. In my opinion this is mostly due to public ignorance, but there are of course significant concerns with the disposal of radioactive waste. AK: The initial costs of getting a nuclear plant on line are enormous, and there is unlikely to be any private money willing to go this route even if the political climate should change.
 
CC: Agreed that the initial costs of bringing a nuclear plant on line are large, but the initial costs of setting up deep offshore drilling platforms such as Jolliet are also very high. The question is not one of start up cost alone, but of the potential for economic profit. Part of the change in political climate must involve creating opportunities for investors to take reasonable risks for the possibility of reaping the rewards. In our current sociopolitical climate, we want rich investors to take risks, but we don't want them to get the payoff. For example, as soon as "big oil" starts making a lot of money, we start talking about bringing back the windfall profits tax (apparently we've forgotten what a failure that scheme was the first time). We forget the fact that profit in big risk businesses is cyclical and the high peaks must be there to balance off the deep troughs, otherwise investors put their money somewhere else and we are all worse off for it.
 
 
AK: Nuclear power may be in our future, but the costs of decommissioning plants and disposing of the wastes have not been factored into the cost even now. Of course, our children are extremely smart and will easily find a solution to these problems :)
CC: I've no doubt that my own daughter (15 months) is the brightest person I've ever met and that solutions such as these will be right up her alley. :-)
 
Best,
Charles
<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><
Charles W. Carrigan, Ph.D.
Olivet Nazarene University
Dept. of Geology
One University Ave.
Bourbonnais, IL 60914
PH: (815) 939-5346
FX: (815) 939-5071
Received on Thu Jan 5 12:34:17 2006