Gephardt's energy plan -- please contribute your comments!

[Kolesar]

http://www.amiserablefailure.com/plugin/template/gephardt/93/218
I think Dick Gephardt is on the right track. If I were his energy advisor, I would contribute and edit his energy plan as I have done here. Please add your comments.

Attaining energy independence means America should be looking at major boosts in resources for hybrid and fuel cell vehicles. The Apollo Project will include tax credits for American families and businesses to invest in the production and purchase of fuel saving autos.
California pushed electrically efficient appliances and lamps to deal with the "electricity shortage" in 2001.

Attaining energy independence means America should be significantly boosting solar, wind and hydro energy use. The Apollo Project will support government research programs and partnerships to encourage progress on renewables and tax credits to implement the new technologies.
Just start building wind generators. We don't need to research them further, they are already cost-effective. The big issue now is land use (and seascape use). Remember, wind turbines look more graceful than smokestacks (or burning jetliners).


Attaining energy independence means we should be looking creatively at new approaches for increasing fuel economy for conventional vehicles. The Apollo Project will foster partnerships between government, auto companies, workers and environmentalists to arrive at a formula that increases fuel economy now.
Wiggle room for not implementing CAFE standards? CAFE has been a tough issue.


And attaining energy independence means the Apollo Project must provide new tax incentives to encourage both commercial and residential conservation.
I hope the tax credits here and in paragraph one mean consumer tax credits not corporate welfare

We can no longer remain mired in policies of the past that reward special interest oil, gas and coal industries. Continued reliance on traditional energy sources will make America more dependent on Middle East oil ten years from now than we are today.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. I agree with this

just as I agreed with the concept back in the Carter Administration. The technology for alternative fuel sources is there-what has been lacking is the will to buck Big Oil, Big Gas, and Big Coal.

[mhr]

2. I Agree But

While there are technologies available for generating alternatives to fossil fuels, alternative means for generating electricity, and alternatives for more efficient use of energy, the fact remains that none of these alternatives will generate or save enough energy to replace fossil fuels.

For those interested just do a search on "peak oil" to find much more on this topic.

The sad fact is that any energy plan must include not only conservation, efficiency, and alternatives but also a per capita reduction of energy use. Anything less will not "solve" our energy problem only delay the day that energy becomes a national crisis.

[papau]

3. I agree - and add bio-mass conversion to oil

Seems the demo went well - now to scale up and get the economics to work

so far close but not ready now - but a 10 year program of research seems on point and should be included in the to-do list.

[Kolesar]

4. Conspicuous is no mention of Ethanol, and that is a good thing

Ethanol is corporate welfare, Archer-Daniels-Midland-Corporation-style. I am sure the midwest grain producers benefit, too. However, it has poor energy yield per energy input (1.2::1 ratio).

A biodiesel fuel yields 3.2::1 (this has been discussed on DU before). I still cannot figure how much land would be required to support even a highly fuel efficient fleet of US automobiles, trucks and locomotives. Both biodiesel and ethanol have the problem of topsoil depletion.