The White House: AEI in All Its Glory (SOTU Open Thread 3)
Posted by Prof. Goose on February 1, 2006 - 1:53am
Topic: Policy/Politics
Tags: advanced energy initiative, energy, george w. bush, oil, oil prices, peak oil, state of the union [list all tags]
The White House position paper on the Advanced Energy Initiative (expanded from the SOTU) can be viewed here. Discuss. (Anyone remember the Apollo Legislation proposed by Inslee et al a while back?)
And, if you haven't already, go check out this piece over at EB on the Iranian Oil Bourse.
I wonder how these measly sums thrown at research compare to the value of oil industry tax concessions in last year's energy bill?
Throw some chump change at the problem and talk it up. Same 'ol same'ol.
In regard to research for wind power, the Danes have essentially solved the intractable problems; all the rest of the world has to do is go to Denmark and listen to their engineers.
In regard to solar energy, Germany (which does not get a great deal of sunshine) leads the way, for reasons I do not understand. Anybody who does know the path dependence story here, please let me know, because I cannot figure it out. For obvious reasons, Israel also is at the cutting edge of solar-energy research.
For turning coal into liquids, the best proven technology is found in South Africa's SASOL corporation--which they borrowed and improved upon from what was done in Germany during World War II.
Some of the most effective large-scale production of ethanol from biomass is being done in Russia--and has been going on for several decades.
Contrary to what seems to be implied by some commentators, there is no need to re-invent the wheel. And I have astonishing news for some Americans: Most of the really smart people in the world do not live in the U.S.
Violence is low, maybe due to all the ganja, but also each Jamaican male seems to be born with a machete clutched to his fist. Were you to, for example, dishonor a Jamaican man's sister, your life expectancy would be about ninety seconds; everybody knows this, and hence manners are good.
And for food . . . their diet based on rice and beans is way way healthier than what most Americans eat. Because of extended family support, undernutrition and malnutrition is almost unknown in Jamaica; women there live longer than men do in the U.S. Now, if only the price of sugar would rise and help with their horrendous unemployment problem . . . .
Reports say that Jamaica is bleeding to death with more than 1,100 murders recorded last year and 100 tonnes of cocaine trans-shipped to western markets.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1859948.stm
Jamaica, birth place for many in Toronto's black community and, according to police, birth place for the gang culture now taking hold of the city, is an exceedingly violent country. With a population roughly the same as Metro Toronto's, it has about 1200 murders a year, and likely this is an undercount. Jamaica also is home to some hateful social attitudes. A recent popular song there has words about burning alive a 'chi chi man,' the Jamaican expression for a homosexual. So, too, a favored local swear word refers to a woman's menses.
http://www.canadiandemocraticmovement.ca/displayarticle800.html
It is the Jamaica where there have already been some 531 murders for the year by the end of last month, largely related to the frightening "drug culture", spawned by the drug lords operating out of depressed inner-city communities and elsewhere. Among those killed were 10 policemen.
Worried over the record number of murders in any one year -- some 1,131 in 2001 -- and conscious of the influence-peddling of drug barons and gun-runners, the major political parties, the incumbent People's National Party (PNP) of Prime Minister P J Patterson, and the Jamaica Labour Party of Edward Seaga, have signed a historic document for a shared commitment to combat crime at all levels of the society.
http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/html/20020805T200000-0500_29984_OBS_FACES_OF_JAMAICA_ON___TH_ BIRTHDAY.asp
The in-feed law, which was enacted 5 years ago supports not only the wind power energy (the german manufacturers account for half of the world market), but as well photovoltaics, biomass and now more and more geothermal energy. The economics of scale is very important. Germany is a technology exporting country. Thre is no other choice.
There is not only a peak oil problem. How do you think it is possible to supply the more than one billion people, who do not have access to electricity? Should we build coal-fired power plants in Africa or maybe atomic plants in rural areas of south America, or maybe in North Africa? In the long term, the only solution is renewable energy. So it is better to start now!
"Clean coal" is just a waste of money, which only maintains the current energy structures.
matthias, berlin
This is the reverse of the approach in Britain and Ontario, for instance, where renewables are encouraged through a formal bidding process for a set amount of capacity. The quantity is politically (and arbitrarily) determined and the price emerges through competitive bidding. Cheaper technologies would dominate and others may not be exploited at all.
The problems with the latter approach are significant. A cumbersome and bureaucratic bidding process restricts participation to the larger players with deep pockets. Those players can only participate if they have access to the highest quality renewable resources as these are the only projects which will be able to compete on price. The mindset behind this approach is one which attempts to force renewable energy into a form compatible with a traditional power system - large-scale generation at a distance from demand.
Unfortunately, this is model is not a good fit with the potential contribution of renewable energy, which is naturally small-scale and distributed. A competitive bidding process tends to set a ceiling on the penetration of renewable energy technology rather than a floor beneath it. The emphasis on low price is counterproductive - the problem is that power prices are too low for alternatives to be viable. Even winning bids often do not lead to construction of new projects as commercial financing can be difficult to find when spot-market prices are very volatile, there is no long-term visibility and a history of political interference makes potential backers nervous. Ontario has begun to recognize this and is planning to introduce feed laws as Standard Offer Contracts shortly.
Feed laws give investors the long-term visibility they are looking for. They are simple enough that the cost of entry is not prohibitive. They encourage small-scale distributed projects by paying enough to make it cost effective to build renewable capacity, even where the renewable resource available to be exploited is not ideal (Bavarian sunshine for instance).
Germany, and others, have made a political decision to use what renewable potential they possess to best effect, even if it is nowhere near competitive on cost grounds with traditional alternatives. This is a recognition of the fact that the traditional model is faltering, partly as a result of looming fossil fuel shortages. Continental Europe is taking the long-term view and planning for the future in advance of a crisis, unlike most of the anglo-saxon world where a short-term market-based view is thoroughly entrenched. Unfortunately, by the time market prices adjust sufficiently for price signals to drive renewable energy, we will probably be pitched into a state of short-term crisis managment which is incompatible with a rational programme of infrastructure replacement. We need to take action while we still have the luxury of taking the long-term view if we choose.
Applied to electricity, pursuing comparative advantage would mean one should generate in the cheapest possible way, or perhaps rely substantially on imports. If one must encourage more expensive renewables for political reasons, then one should limit their penetration and should exploit only the best resources. This approach focuses on short-term cost comparisons, even when pertinent information about the long-term is available, and leaves its practitioners potentially vulnerable to supply disruptions.
A web of interdependency works for as long as the system is stable, or at least does not change too drastically or too abruptly for the specialists to adapt. However, when it is possible to predict very significant change with some degree of confidence, then I would argue that it is advisable to develop and make best use of all one's own resources rather than rely on others, even if it is not cost-effective in the short-term. This is what Germany, and others, have done in building distributed renewable energy capacity through feed laws. During periods of upheaval, specialists often suffer disproportionately while generalists may thrive.
Austin (city level)
http://www.austinenergy.com/About%20Us/Environmental%20Initiatives/Plug-in%20Hybrid%20Vehicles/
http://www.austinenergy.com/Energy%20Efficiency/Programs/Rebates/Solar%20Rebates/index.htm
(Texas) (state level)
http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us/zzz_altfuels/alt.html
At the local level there is not so much research funding, but there is selective purchasing, direct or via subsidy, of state-of-the-art products that can help get manufacturers/suppliers/distributors/installers past the start-up and break-even stages.
Meanwhile the industry of renewable energy became a major investment, not only in the EU. Bankers are heavily interested in this topic. The flow of capital and a very good profit lures them. So in the end, more the big money is benefiting from this. It became a multi billion Euro industry in a few years with good local jobs.
The installed wind power in Germany accounts for roughly 5 to 6 % of the domestic electricty. Ten years ago, there was almost nothing existent. Sometimes things can happen pretty swiftly.
matthias, berlin
http://www.powergeneration.siemens.com/en/windpower/casestudies/king/index.cfm
This law is now wideley accepted within the EU and is now in places like Spain, France, Italy.....and even in China.
matthias, berlin (where is no sund now, it's dark and cold...;-)
Also, Germany has had a very strong Green movement since the 80s.
So it would make sense that Germany has a high uptake of solar power.
here is a link to newer data
http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/2004/indicator12.htm
Siemens isn't longer in the top five. The new manufacturer Q-Cells (Germany) is now (2005) number two, there is as well a chinese one, suntech which invests heavily in new factories.
matthias, berlin
Via a rather good government grant.
(If the US let panels be a 179 dedustion, I know I'd be all over 30K worth of panels)
Methadone programs take heroin addicts, and change them into methadone addicts. Methadone is cheaper and usually allows people to function better.
So we're going to take an America that is addicted to oil, and [in theory] get it addicted instead to ethanol and hydrogen. But it won't be cheaper, and it won't help us function better. Shouldn't we try to reduce our dependency instead?
Great stuff, without conspiracy teories or imperialism.
http://www.energybulletin.net/12463.html
I found this it be a very-well reasoned article as well. For those who would like more background on how the big money works in international finance, I would highly recommend Smithy's "Wizards of Money" series of radio programs, archived here, for instance:
http://www.zerra.net/WizardsOfMoney/
In particular, I believe that it is in episode 5, "Monetary Terrorism," that Smithy explains the anatomy of a currency attack.
(hopefully this zerra.net site will remain functional for a while - Wizards of Money archives tend to come and go)
Once the price of oil rises enough, middle
America and the poor will be forced to buy less
fuel because they simply will not be able to
afford it. Demand destruction will solve much
of the US dependency on foreign oil, particularly
if the dollar plummets.
The Bush initiative are only concerned with the
welfare of the top 2% of American society.
http://www.cnn.com/video/player/player.html?url=/video/world/2006/01/31/sot.galloway.iraq.affl
I'm not anti-Bush or anti-whatever, but this is really humurous!
Listened to POTUS on the radio in Oz today.
The US Govt is going to lead the way?
Excuse me.
US renewable energy consumption 1984 6430.7 Trillion BTU.
US renewable energy consumption 2004 6123.4 Trillion BTU.
Seems like renewable use peaked under Clinton 1996/1997.
Renewable use fell in first year of Bush by 830.3 Trillion BTU.
Get yourselves a new President and a new way of life -please!
While there were very few SUV's and only few minivans in Australia, MOST vehicles on the road still had at least 6 cylinders. There were at least as many flat bed and box bed light trucks as in the deep south of the US (90%+ empty of any cargo).
Both my brother-in-laws vehicles were nearly new Holden V8's.
Despite hefty overheads on new vehicles and even greater tariffs on imports, Australians seemed only to willing to shell out $50K+ AUD for new V8 'interceptors' (a Mad Max side joke), and gleefully drove like speed-obsessed maniacs most of the time, while cheerfully chugging a V.B. and $4+ USD/gallon petrol. Insane!
As a side note, Australian road accident rates, per person, are 1.5x what they are in Great Britain (which has 3x the populaton in an area 1/30th the size).
So they bought up a lot of silicon to subsidize the electronics companies and claimed it was research and development for solar. Total scam.
And back then the government wasn't as corrupt as it is now. My bet is that they will find a way to extend the K street project to silicon or thin film. Find a company that has made donations to the Republican party, write them a check, give them a very vague deliverables responsiility and forget about it.
Think of those half empty cruise ships docked in New Orleans on your dime. About that level.
I'm happy to see you are willing to apply rigor to government policy and energy. Willing to have a 'call out' WRT government tax dollars proping up a method.
Now, why is it you have YET to apply that same rigor to Nuclear power? Do you have a reason you do not consider the Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act a government handout? A handout that without, nuclear power would be unaffordable?
"It is us."
From Paul Roberts, Reagan's undersecretary of the Treasury:
"Two recent polls, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll and a New York Times/CBS News poll, indicate why Bush is getting away with impeachable offenses. Half of the US population is incapable of acquiring, processing and understanding information.
Much of the problem is the media itself, which serves as a disinformation agency for the Bush administration. Fox "News" and right-wing talk radio are the worst, but with propagandistic outlets setting the standard for truth and patriotism, all of the media is affected to some degree.
Despite the media's failure, about half the population has managed to discern that the US invasion of Iraq has not made them safer and that the Bush administration's assault on civil liberties is not a necessary component of the war on terror. The problem, thus, lies with the absence of due diligence on the part of the other half of the population . . .
It is extraordinary that anyone would think Americans are safer as a result of Bush invading two Muslim countries and constantly threatening two more with military attack. The invasions and threats have caused a dramatic swing in Muslim sentiment away from the US.
Prior to Bush's invasion of Iraq, a large majority of Muslims had a favorable opinion of America. Now only about 5 percent do.
A number of US commanders in Iraq and many Middle East experts have told the American public that the three year-old war in Iraq is serving both to recruit and to train terrorists for al Qaeda, which has grown many times its former size. Moreover, the US military has concluded that al Qaeda has succeeded in having its members elected to the new Iraqi government . . .
And now with the triumph of Hamas in the Palestinian election, we see the total failure of Bush's Middle Eastern policy. Bush has succeeded in displacing secular moderates from Middle Eastern governments and replacing them with Islamic extremists. It boggles the mind that this disastrous result makes Americans feel safer!
What does it say for democracy that half of the American population is unable to draw a rational conclusion from unambiguous facts?"
Excerpted from
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts01292006.html
From the nice gents over at P!:
"'Malice in Blunderland: Further Adventures of the Idiocracy'
Referring to Hamas' unexpected victory in the elections, which caught both Israel and the U.S. by surprise, Rice admitted the U.S. has failed to comprehend the depth of Palestinian hostility toward their leadership.
"I've asked why nobody saw it coming," [US Secretary of State Condoleeza] Rice said, speaking of her own staff. "It does say something about us not having a good enough pulse," the New York Times quoted Rice as saying Sunday.
"I don't know anyone who wasn't caught off guard by Hamas' strong showing," Rice added. "Some say that Hamas itself was caught off guard by its strong showing."
That's from Ynetnews, "Rice: We underestimated Hamas".OK, so hold on a minute, 'cuz there's this, too, from MRC News, "U.S. officials, Iraqi insurgents meeting":
BAGHDAD, Iraq (UPI) -- American officials in Iraq are engaging face-to-face talks with high-level Iraqi Sunni insurgents, Newsweek reported Sunday.
Americans are meeting with 'senior members of the leadership' of the Iraqi insurgency, Americans and Iraqis with knowledge of the talks told the magazine. The talks are taking place at U.S. military bases in Anbar province, as well as in Jordan and Syria.
'Now we have won over the Sunni political leadership,' said U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad. 'The next step is to win over the insurgents.'
The groups include Baathist cells and religious Islamic factions, as well as former Special Republican Guards and intelligence agents, said a U.S. official with knowledge of the talks.
Leaving aside the hilarity of Khalilzad's comment, doesn't all this sound a little strange? I thought The Doubleduh-Cheney Gang had identified these insurgents as "terrists" and, of course, we don't negotiate with "terrists". Wassup wi'dat?
So we're not gonna talk to Hamas, either, 'cuz they're "terrists", too. And now folks wanna bring back the PLO, 'cuz Fatah couldn't handle it. But how are we making all these decisions if the NSA, CIA, DIA, and the rest of those folks don't know what's happening in real life on the ground?? Maybe the folks at Fort Meade are so busy listening to domestic phone calls they just lost track of how fucking mad these middle eastern types are. Letterman and Leno must feel like these idiots live just to write their monologues for them.
You may have noticed that I've been on a specific crusade (I was gonna say jihad, but the Ft Meadies are already overwhelmed) of my own of late: trying to convince y'all that The Doubleduh-Cheney Gang is NOT incompetent - that they've done quite nicely, in fact, of furthering their goals of creating chaos, diabling and dismantling our government, destroying democracy, and getting rich.
That's not to say, however, that there aren't any idiots or incompetents around. The State Department seems to be full of them. Mike "Heckuva Job" Brown is certainly a poster child. Delay, Frist, and Santorum seem to have a collective IQ of 6. And anyone with at least one brain cell coulda seen the Abramoff thingy comin'. Oh, yeah . . . and I will concede that Doubleduh is one of the stupidest people to walk the pollution-ravaged face of the earth - that's why they hired him. But I'm convinced that these are a few exceptions that prove the rule. Absolute power may corrupt absolutely, but that's corruption, not incompetence.
Lemme tell you who's really incompetent: we are. We are the Idiocracy. If we weren't, The Doubleduh-Cheney Gang woulda been on their way outta town a week after Enron broke, or at least on September 12, 2001. But they're still there, supported by hundreds of politicians that we elected to represent us. We are the Idiocracy because we haven't convinced but a few of the brighter dimwits in congress to impeach The Gang's sorry asses.
We are the Idiocracy because we don't wanna take responsibility for the fact that we not only let it all happen, but made it happen. Seen the commercial with the CEO type saying his cell phone plan was "his way of sticking it to 'the man' "? "But you're the man - so you're sticking it to yourself." "Maybe". NO NOT MAYBE. You can blame The D-C Gang all you want, but we did them to ourselves. At its heart, western democracy was supposed to be participatory self-government. That takes personal responsibility and a whole lot of work. Those two things don't resonate in the 21st century marketplace. Why are we so angry and surprised that we left democracy like a set of keys on the bar, and a bunch of smart thieves drove off with goods. Same old story - we have come to value all the wrong things, and we can't work for nor do we want to pay for the right things. The old Joanie Mitchell riff - "Don't know what you got 'til it's gone". Losers.
We are the Idiocracy because in the last month a whole bunch of scientists have raised the cry that we've reached an environmental point of no return, environmental calamity will happen in the next 20-30 years, not in a few hundred or thousand, and nobody's panicking!!! Because Al Gore finally grew a set of cojones last week, everything's gonna be OK?? That pig won't flah, son! Kee-rist you are slow! Panic awreddy!"
Excerpted from
http://newpropop.blogspot.com/
From OpEdNews, "Standing At The Brink":
"How, then, do we find ourselves in the condition of a rat inescapably suffocating within the coils of a Boa Constrictor, gasping its final breath?
The end is coming and it is coming soon, if we do not awaken from our collective stupor. The life is being strangled out of us and we do not even struggle to free ourselves. We think we are a free people with inalienable rights, as the reptile prepares to swallow its prey. Naiveté, as well as ignorance, can get us killed.
The probability that another self inflicted terrorist attack will occur on American soil has already been planted in the public conscience; even as the Bush cabal, with the aide of its chief ally in empire--Israel, is preparing to instigate war with Iran. As was the case with Iraq, Iran's threat will be grossly exaggerated and its leadership demonized in the Western media. This war, connived amid the same gross lies and distortions that resulted in the invasion and occupation of Iraq--the modern Viet Nam--may well be waged with nuclear munitions far worse than the depleted uranium used against Iraq. Iran's defense infrastructure lies beneath many feet of concrete and only nuclear weapons are capable of penetrating them.
A US-Israel attack on Iran is eminent, probably no later than March or April; or it might come as late as June. When this occurs the Middle East will become a vortex of fire and brimstone that is beyond control. It will assume a life, a momentum of its own, with global consequences. The Boa Constrictor is tightening its grip on power, as it acts to defend the imperialist dollar against the more equitable Iranian Bourse.
If and when another self inflicted terrorist attack is launched on American soil, the constitution will likely be suspended, martial law declared, and a full blown dictatorship will be unleashed upon us. A significant segment of the citizenry, bred on ignorance and nourished by fear, will welcome the event with open arms, just as did the citizens of Germany in 1933.
In truth, however, it is not turban-wearing terrorists of Middle Eastern decent that threaten our lives and our freedoms; it is the domestic terrorists that hold public offices who will destroy us. The real enemy stealthily moves unencumbered in our midst, posing as our protectors, as guardians of democracy. The dangers now facing us as a people are truly beyond exaggeration."
Exerpted from
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_charles__060128_standing_at_the_brin.htm
German renewable energy production has been growing at rates in excess of 30%/year for well over a decade (PV and wind), and at a somewhat lower rate for solar thermal. More than 30%/year! And the total contribution to their primary energy use comes out to 0.03%, 1.6% and 0.06%, respectively, for PV, wind and solar thermal. Those numbers say a lot about the challenges ahead for renewables.
Read the rest here : Fossil-Fueled Worries
This is the most imminent crisis we face and it is not mentioned.