So what are we Progressives gonna do about energy?

[info being]

It is easy to oppose US foreign policy on moral grounds, but unfortunately there are real and practical concerns that we Progressives must deal with if our beliefs are to remain grounded in reality. One of these concerns is energy scarcity (peak oil).

As Michael Ruppert points out in “Crossing the Rubicon”, our entire way-of-life is based on the abundance of affordable energy. If our energy supply runs out, the world will plunge into chaos and a good many of us will die of war and starvation. Think, for a moment, of all the energy that goes into producing and transporting our food.

So the Neocons come to power with a plan that at least delays the inevitable. Obviously, the only way these morons are allowed to rule is because enough of the ruling elites think their plans make sense. So, my thinking is...if we Progressives could come up with a more desirable plan, we might be allowed to rule and the elites might rig the next election in our favor. See, the mistake is to believe that we live in a Democracy. You have to achieve your ends by selling to power AND to the people.

The Neocon plan actually makes a lot of sense logistically: you have the resources, but we want them so we'll take them. Oh, and in the process of doing so we'll make the rich elites even richer. Oh, and in the process of making the rich richer we'll build weapons that can be used for population control when the oil runs out. The ruling elites may not want to kill us off in an ideal world, but if push comes to shove they'll do it to save themselves.

I know...the Dems talk about "inventing our way out of this problem" and becoming "self-sufficient", but how many PNAC-like think-tanks have they set up to determine exactly how that would be done...to actively plan and manipulate world events so that it *is* done?

In other words, what are the specifics? What exactly can be done when it *really* comes to balancing severe scarcity with values like equal opportunity and justice for all?

We can't really deliver on our promises unless we have a specific, viable plan to fix energy scarcity and material scarcity in general.

[info being]

1. As I feared, this thread will sink

Let me help. Is this thread ignored because:

1) You don't recognize the fact that Party politics is mostly a sham and that the real decisions get made much higher up?, or

2) You don't understand the importance that hydrocarbon / oil plays...that the issue transcends SUV's?

3) You think we live in a democracy where the people decide what happens?

4) You don't think US foreign policy is primarily about oil?

There are probably some others I can't think of.

My point is, we have to start thinking like rulers and problem-solvers. Endlessly working out our "messaging" to the people does us little good if the elites don't buy off and aren't on board with getting the message out to the masses. We gotta sell up the ladder as well as down. We're smarter, but we just have to apply ourselves the right way.

[Clarkie1]

4. We have to be for increased spending on technology, conservation,

alternative energy, and responsible nuclear power generation.

I think if our party is for responsible, expanded use of alterntive energy sources and conserrvation, increasing fuel economy standards along with responsible, increased use of nuclear power as part of the solution we will be seen as scienntific pragmatists as oppossed to dogmatic idealogues.

[DireStrike]

6. Definitely funding for science

Instead of military.

[kamqute]

37. I agree with that premise but new tech isn't needed to become sustainable

[NuttyFluffers]

2. there's a lot of good ideas already being tried.

but if you are talking about national movements to get on board with these ideas to stave off disaster? heh, that's a long gone option. only other nations will do that; we are shooting for world domination through control of the bottleneck of oil supply.

we won't make decisions on such high levels for a long time. but we can make grassroot movements, kinda like bio-diesel, hybrid cars, and other products. since it's a huge issue, filled with multiple attempts at a solution, you'd have to offer up something that you think might be a good idea for us to take up as a common cause.

throw out some ideas, like home insulation, or low maitenance, low water usage, native species landscapes, etc. we can't build massive powerplants individually, and with this gov't we won't get what is needed (let alone what we want). so what is it you want to discuss with us what we *can* do? there's a lot to talk about, so let's narrow the topic :D

[info being]

7. Thanks for the response

Many of us are already doing what we can "individually"...I'm not talking about personal responsibility. I'm talking about a viable plan that you could walk into a WTO meeting with and gain approval from the powers-that-be to change the world.

One example would be nanotechnology. That term is now being used to represent a lot of things, but the original idea was to be able to make anything out of anything. In other words, you could make fuel out of garbage by manipulating it at the molecular level. I don't know how viable that is, but for our movement to "get the job" of ruling the world, we have to have ideas big enough to rule the world. The practical matter of convincing the sheep can certainly be worked out later. First, we have to get the job.

Nuclear energy was also once seen as just such a breakthrough, paradigm-shifting development...but we rightfully reject that because the risks are too high.

All I'm saying is that perhaps the Neocons are doing a better job "managing" what is seen as an urgent problem by those who do the hiring. Where is our "Statement of principles" equivalent to the PNAC document...where's our pitch?

[DireStrike]

10. Another aspect of nanotech to energy

Carbon nanotubes would be instrumental in creating a cable into space. Such a cable could potentially be extremely useful.

Space elevator - cars can ride the cable with cargo into space for a fraction of current launch costs. This would enable the production of large structures in space. For example, enormous solar panels. Cables running back down could conceivably carry the charge from above.

[info being]

17. I believe nanotech is the only hope we have on the horizon

Unfortunately, I think the concensus is that it may not be passible in the way we're describing it (nanorobot assemblers and such). I think that the funding currently going to nanotech isn't really going to the kind of nanotech you and I are thinking about.

[me b zola]

3. Agreed

Alternative energy sources and utilization should be one of the main issues we should be working on. I remember the energy crisis of the 1970's and have wondered throughout the years why we are not working towards independence from oil. Kerry had this issue on his campaign platform, but didn't think that it is a popular issue and therefore only mentioned it in passing.

[info being]

8. I think we really need to make a distinction

Having a few one-liners in a campaign platform that is designed for the sheep is not the same thing as having a comprehensive plan of action to manage the world. That's the kind of thing the elites are interested in. The practical matter of selling to the sheep can be worked out later.

[DireStrike]

5. Well, what about solar?

Why isn't every roof in the country covered with solar panels?

Hydrogen production: can hydrolysis be fueled with evaporation?

I think the main problem in discussing it here is that there are few energy science specialists chatting on DU.

[Left in IL]

12. oil is dirt cheap

...at least compared to other fuels. Really, you just have to dig it out of the ground.

I calculated the amount of energy needed to replace our oil use and it was truly staggering.

The next "best" option was nuke plants, and it would take something like 600. Then of course you have to use the electricity to make hydrogen to run the cars.

Solar could help, but the metals required are fairly rare, and at this point, just too impractical.

There is however, a great deal we can do to save energy.

If you replace all the standard bulbs with the little spiraly compact florescent(sp) tubes (CFL's) you could easily save $500 a year in electric.

Any furnace, refrigeration unit, air conditioner, or industrial motor made more than 10 years ago, could easily use twice as much energy as current technology. But replacing these things are expensive.

For industrial applications, the cost of new motors, production downtime, and the labor to install them is usually not worth the energy cost savings.

Also, when engineering firms design systems, builders design homes, they typically use the cheapest components possible (which are typically the least efficient), as customers typically shop on price, and avoid technical info.

[info being]

9. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree here

I believe that the "Progressive" approach, minimizing energy usage, funding science, and encouraging peace and stability so we can buy oil instead of stealing it, are in fact better than the PNAC plan.

I don't know why the elites don't seem to agree.

[pantouflard]

11. Bush's Ranch is off the grid, FYI

I'm thinking a big spread on the design of the Crawford Ranch in a major magazine would get people interested.

But it begs the question: if he's so evilly pro-petroleum and pro-pollution, why did he build his ranch with a PV system, etc?

[Left in IL]

13. some quick calculations

I was way off on my other estimate of 600 plants, it was more like 1700.

Here are the STAGGERING numbers I mentioned before!!!

US oil consumption
Barrles per day 20,000,000 which equals
Barrles per year 7,300,000,000 which equals
btu/yr 42,340,000,000,000,000 which equals
KW Hours per year 12,409,144,196,952

Nuke Plants in US 101
KW hrs per yr 7.28E+11

So,
Avg KW/plan/yr 7,207,920,792

Nuke plants to replace oil 1,722

Current Solar Cell Technology generates 10 watts per square foot, when the sun is shining.

Assuming 12 hours of sun per day the
Sqft of solar cells
required to replace oil 720,792,079,208

If the avg home has 1200 sqft of roof space

roofs required would be 1,201,320,132

We only have 300,000,000
people in the US So were not even close on roof space.

[pantouflard]

14. Right, but we've got a TON of huge, commercial rooftops.

And there's wind, and biomass. Don't forget biomass! We could be turning our garbage into energy instead of burying it.

[me b zola]

21. And NEW technologies

I just saw a high school kid on TV the other day that won a science project. He created a gyroscope that creates energy by the motion of ocean waves. Such possibilities!! I believe that we need to utilize many of these alternative sources to ween ourselves off of the teat of petro. NO MORE OIL!! Let the bushies and saudis sit alone together in the desert and reminiss about 'the good 'ol days'.

[Radical Activist]

15. This was the best part of Kerry's platform

We should do exactly what Kerry wanted to do. Sadly I only heard about it in the primary.

[loritooker]

16. Biodiesel--U.S. converts to diesel engines & grows the oil. n/t

[kamqute]

18. Public Works

I know that no one in this market wants to pick up this hot potato, but it's really never been discredited--only by association. A public works system could be part of a system to cushion workers, including higher-level engineers for planning, etc., from an outsourcing boom that would probably be a necessary transitional step to a globally integrated economy WITH GOOD WAGES FOR FOREIGN EMPLOYEES--I know this isn't gonna happen now but that kind of system would be a very good way, at least on a microcosm level, to enact a system that if globally enacted is supremely viable, even with the sustainable-electricity technology that was available five years ago.

[kamqute]

19. Rooftops don't need to be flat

[madfloridian]

20. Apollo Alliance, check it out. Part of Campaign for America's Future.

Remember Robert Borosage on the forum on C-Span the other day? He was debating Al From. He is the chair or head of the latter group.
http://www.ourfuture.org

Ok,I checked, he is co-chair with Roger Hickey.
http://www.ourfuture.org/aboutus/staffbios.cfm

Here is the Apollo Alliance, which links from there.
http://www.apolloalliance.org/about_the_alliance/

More About Apollo

America Must Change Direction

SNIP.."We are on a treadmill, locked into inefficient consumption and increasing pollution without a strategy for change. Continuing our dependence on oil makes our country vulnerable to unstable prices and undemocratic governments.

Failure to control pollution threatens both energy jobs and public health. We need to invest in deploying new technology for pollution control, and increase the diversity of our energy supply.

We must also tackle the waste in the system – building energy efficient homes, offices and factories, manufacturing cars here in America that go farther on a gallon of gas, developing walk-able communities and maintaining our infrastructure like roads, schools, rail, and water mains. Failure to make these investments squanders energy and costs the economy billions of dollars and millions of jobs.

The opportunity costs of refusing to change direction are high: Japanese automakers dominate the hybrid market, the Germans are the largest manufacturers of photo voltaic solar panels, and Denmark and Spain own the market for wind turbines, and poised on the edge of a hydrogen revolution, we are importing fuel cells from Canada. Our reluctance to plan for an energy future that embraces renewable power means we risk losing these markets to foreign competitors and miss the chance to create new manufacturing jobs – a sector that has seen 75% of the 2.7 million private sector jobs lost since the Bush administration took office....."

More at the site.

[Nimrod]

22. There's no money in alternate energy

It won't happen until the oil is actually gone - as in GONE gone, nothing left for somebody to make a buck off of. THEN there will be the possibility of an alternate energy megacorp monopoly designed to rip the money out of desperate people's pockets... and research will take off like you wouldn't believe.

When thinking about the feasibility of such things, always keep in mind that the dollar is GOD. You must worship the dollar. Pray to it. Bring it sacrifices. That is what drives this society, and ALL that drives this society. Money. Period. Nothing else.

[kamqute]

23. We need oil to move to the next phase

How do you expect to INSTALL all this stuff?

Maybe there should be a liberal stockpile :)

[kamqute]

24. So let's make a list

[kamqute]

25. Thermoelectric

[kamqute]

26. Biodiesel

[kamqute]

27. Methane

[kamqute]

28. Solar

[kamqute]

29. Wind

[kamqute]

30. Biomass

[kamqute]

31. Sustainable Hydroelectric

[kamqute]

32. Recirculation

Solar cells opposite your TV, etc.

[kamqute]

33. Vegetable Oil?

[rman]

38. need lots of energy to create vegetable oil

-

[kamqute]

34. Pneumatics

[rman]

40. a means to use energy rather then to create it

[kamqute]

41. Good point, but it still conserves

Unlike fuel cells, which are just carriers

plus pressure buildup can be used, similar to wind but not the same :)

[kamqute]

35. Volcanic Something-or-Other?

And there's always molecular synthesis on the horizon..

[Griffy]

36. the key is use ALL.. some work better n different places...

we need a "apollo project" on energy and solve this.. we have the tech.. just not the will!

[kamqute]

42. Of course different systems work better in different places

and they'll have to be used in conjunction with each other..think of maybe hydro cooling solar panels or something; sorry I'm not very scientifically educated

[Griffy]

43. I am an engineer.. the tech is there. its the wil and goverment to help..

get companies past the costs of retooling and start-ups. The market will take it from there.. if we ever get the media back so facts can be explained to the public.

[kamqute]

46. Thank you for backing me up ! :)

[rman]

39. wave- and tidal energy

[Griffy]

44. This showsgreat promise.. many ppl live on coasts.. build...

tech is now advanced enough to build these structures that can function and withstand the destructive forces of the ocean.. both physical and chemical(salt is corrosive)!

[IndyPriest]

45. Hydrogen fuel cells

The most plentiful energy source in the universe, coupled to fuels cells of many kinds. Huge strides are being made in extracting hydrogen from many sources including biomass and water. And equally huge strides are being made in bringing down the cost of fuels cell stacks.

[Silverhair]

47. Thermal Depolymerization.

We have enough agricultural waste to not need any oil imports.

Completely non polluting

Can be used to process toxic wastes into oil

Oil produced is cleaner.

Landfills, sewage, trash, almost anything can be processed into oil with no pollution. Does not handle radioactives or metals.

Does not introduce new carbon into the atmosphere, thereby reducing global warming.

TDP plants are cheap to build.

Produces pure water, carbon black, and fertilizer as by products while it produces clean oil at $15 per barrel.