 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
REPP-CREST
1612 K Street, NW
Suite 202
Washington, DC 20006
contact us
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| Green-power Archive for February 2002 |
|
| 7 messages, last added Tue Nov 26 17:19:03 2002 |
[Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GP: Re: [GBlist] USA imports 55% of its oil was Should we be subsidizing nuclear and fossil fuels?
Let me give you a non-American, non-CNN view on the
matter:
Yes, I believe a lot of the wars the US has been involved in after the
break-down of the Soviet Union are related to securing access to
inexpensive fossil fuels. Even the Afghanistan war is - to my point of
view - indirectly connected to this. The Taliban regime has been a
terrorist regime ever, way before Sept 11, and it didn't only dawn on Mr.
Blair then that they are flooding the streets of London with heroin. The
West knew that and accepted this for reasons of securing future access to
natural gas and oil. There have been plans of building a pipeline from
Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan and the Indian Ocean, as all
other routes did not materialize. As a matter of fact the State
Department has supported the Taliban for the longest time, calling them a
stabilizing force in the region. CNN and the western media have
sucessfully market this as a war on terrorism, while operation 'Infinite
Justice' and 'Desert Storm' are, at least partly, necessary to obtain
respectively maintain access to fossil fuels. The costs of these
operations have thus to be allocated to the costs of oil, an externality
of around 0.5% of the US' GDP, according to some recent figures. I
predict that these fights for resources will become more frequent as the
resource gets scarcer. Get this across to the American taxpayer and it
should not be that hard to turn the tables in favor of renewables and
energy efficiency.
The scenario that you are predicting, Ron, is, however, not very
realistic. The Middle East will not close off its oil export over night.
They, as much as the consuming West, depend on selling their crude. All
they can do - if OPECs goes along with this - is reducing the production
and thus increasing the price. That will not come overnight. Moreover,
the horror of having to pay 5US$ per gallon of gasoline can't be that bad
- most of Europe pays around 1$ per liter (4.4$/gallon), and still the
economy is somewhat operative and competitive. Except for some primary
industries the share that energy expenditure has on the overall
production costs are marginal, in most cases below 5% of the total annual
expenditure. Raising the price even by 50% will not but them all out and
you on the streets.
Subsidizes always distort the economic reality. Nuclear power has been
subsidized for the longest time, both in terms of R&D, as well as in
operation cost (Paul mentioned the costs of nuclear waste storage). Yet,
this has not managed to bring nuclear anywhere close to an economic
operation. And it never will if you take the half-mean time of e.g.
Plutonium (25'000 years, I
believe) into consideration. When Britain
privatized its national power stations in the 80/90ies they got rid of
all plants - except the nuclear ones. No profit-oriented company wants to
deal with them.
Subsidies, nevertheless, do make sense to help a technology take off. The
computer industry would have never got anywhere close to where it is now,
without the massive support from the US Government, notably from the
military budget. Put a share of the money given for the development of
nuclear power stations into research for renewables and the next
generation might see some cost competitive technologies.
Likewise a market introduction of RES will not happen without a changed
regulatory framework and some sort of financial incentives. Denmark,
Germany, and Spain are prime examples of how to boost renewables. The
feed-in regulations has made Germany N°1 in terms of installed wind
capacity, despite the rather poor wind condition the country offers
(at least compared to other countries
like the US). In Germany now critics are
forming, which indicates a next step in a transition towards an altered
energy supply system. According to Schopenhauer there are always three
stages in a sociological development: Firstly, the majority laughs about
your ideas. In a next phase the critics start fighting you with
increasing vehemence, while finally they completely agree with you,
considering it the most normal thing on the face of the earth. The
question arising from this: Is Mr. Bush's announcement to support
renewables to be classified as the last phase, or only a fig leaf to
cover his bare support for the old oil industry?
Cornelius Suchy
Almaty, Kazakhstan
At 08:18 05.02.2002 -0800, Ron Byrd wrote:
I think Paul has missed my point. I
am in favor of a cleaner environment
and peace on Earth. I happen to believe that most things are
accomplished
though some kind of economic means.
I believe that our dependence on foreign oil is actually holding us
bake
from making progress in other renewable energy sectors. The sooner we
make
the change from a fossil fuel society to one that relies more on
renewable
resources the sooner we can stop protecting our future interest in
the
Middle East.
Oil is only a start. We need to focus on all types of energy
consumption
including our own needs for our homes and businesses. The more
energy
efficient we become the more green our lifestyles will be.
Technology
though economics is the best engine for change. Make a way for someone
to
earn money and it will happen.
By the way I read a news report today about the Presidents spending
budget
and it seems he is suggesting we reduce spending on fossil fuels
while
increasing spending on renewables. He is also recommending tax
incentives
for renewable technologies. A statement like that coming from a real
"oil
man" makes me wonder what our energy situation is really like. Can
anyone
remember what the energy situation was like when Jimmy Carter was
in
office?
Speireag Alden wrote:
> Sgrìobh Paul:
>
> >So you will take what you want because might makes right,
and
> >anybody who gets in the way will get butchered by your military.
And
> >that little jewel, Mr. Oil Man, puts you squarely in the
category of
> >robber baron, terrorist, "more blood for oil".
> >You are a miserable excuse for a human being.
> >
> >--paul, webmaster
http://globalcircle.net
> >peace and liberty, sustainability and justice
>
> Hello, Paul.
>
> Several points occur to me.
>
> You advocate peace in your .sig, but
this is not a peaceful
> response. Your intentions may be otherwise, but it smacks
of
> hypocrisy.
>
> In any polite forum (like this one),
this sort of personal attack
> is specifically prohibited.
>
> Regardless of whether it's prohibited,
such a personal attack
> ends up accomplishing nothing good.
>
> You are therefore discrediting
yourself on a forum where,
> presumably, you're hoping to advocate for the issues which are
> important to you. I, for one, now will not waste my time
bothering
> to look at the website in your sig.
>
> The person you have chosen to attack
as an "oil man" makes his
> living selling solar systems and advocating for solar energy.
>
> The fact that you didn't figure that
out, despite the fact that
> it's at the end of all of his posts, makes you look like an idiot
or
> a fool, even if you are neither.
>
> If you intend to continue to advocate
for environmentalist
> issues, kindly get a grip on your behavior so that you don't
> discredit other environmentalists.
>
> Thank you.
>
> -Speireag.
> --
> I feel most emphatically that we should not turn into shingles a
tree
> which was old when the first Egyptian conqueror penetrated to
the
> valley of the Euphrates. -- Theodore Roosevelt
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
> This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by REPP/CREST, creator
of
> Solstice
http://www.crest.org,
and BuildingGreen, Inc., publisher of
> Environmental Building News and GreenSpec
http://www.BuildingGreen.com
>
______________________________________________________________________
--
Ron Byrd
Vice President
Sunstar Precision Energy Corporation
http://www.specbyrd.com
" We turn sunlight into SPEC energy "
____________________________________________________________________________
This discussion group is sponsored in part by:
* Center for Renewable Energy and Sustainable Technology,
http://www.crest.org
* Global Environmental Options,
http://www.geonetwork.org
Archives and related documents can be found at at:
http://www.green-power.com
________________________________________________________
MVV Consultants & Engineers
GmbH
Almaty Branch
c/o Kaznipienergoprom Inst.
Abylay Khan Ave. 58-a, room 206
480004, Almaty, Kazakhstan
Tel.& fax: ++7-3272-506 257
Tel: ++7-3272-338 332 (+5 hours to
Central Europe)
________________________________________________________
|
|
|
