Striving for Energy Independence

Comment

Comment by Keith Sanderson President/Co Founder USA Energy Independence dot com on August 28, 2008 at 10:22am

Now Would you believe Stossel wonders why people are angry because he said USA Energy Independence is Idiocy

Mr. Stossel, It's not your argument that angered people.
What angered people is suggesting that USA Energy Independence is idiocy.Most rational people aren't angered over a debate. They are angered over the implication that what they believe is idiotic.

I suggest that you look up the stats of the 70s regarding what happened when the oil flow to the United States was reduced. For starters gasoline prices quadrupled, interest rates rose to as high as 18 percent, and we saw double digit inflation.

Today a similar situation could mean $16.00 a gallon gasoline.

High priced gasoline like that would ruin me and my family and most other families. It would probably even put a crimp in your TV ratings.
.
Back in the 70's we only imported about 30 percent of our oil needs. Today we import about 67 percent. Close to half of what we import comes from parts of the world such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria and Venezuela, places that are one step away from terrorist attacks, war, or have unfriendly government. Let us not forget Russia from whom we import oil.

Your models are based on the way things were. In the late 19th and early 20th century naysayers such as you were criticizing visionaries such as Henry Ford, because they couldn't imagine that there would be a demand for automobiles. Why? Because there was no infrastructure to manufacture and deliver fuel. The point is the Stossels of the world always talk as if things will remain the same and can't visualize the domino affect change has

I don't plan to bet the future of my family on depending on the oil dictators, sheiks and governments of unfriendly oil cartel nations. I would rather move forward through a combination of conservation, new auto technology, increased utilization of developing oil reserves, and the rapid development of alternative energy.

Stop being a naysayer and take a look around you. See what is going on. If you keep the blinders you will continue to show who the idiot is.

Keith Sanderson
President and Co founder
USA Energy Independence dot com

Comment by Ben Claassen on August 15, 2008 at 2:11pm

Something I started on two years ago. Looking for feedback:

Comprehensive Approaches to Reduce Oil Imports to Zero

Ben Claassen
April 15, 2007

The need to reduce consumption of oil is a starting point that everyone can agree on but what lifestyle changes do we each consider as acceptable. This writing is intended to open our minds to the fullest range of ideas to reduce oil burning for personal transportation and maximize the value from the oil that we do burn for transportation.

In recognizing the subjective accounting of lifestyle value, the ideas must bridge policy, cultural expectations and technology. Policy can force people to make changes. Changes in cultural expectations can proceed by public education that leads individuals to embrace the most effective ways to reduce energy, use while getting equal value. For maintaining lifestyle values, technology must provide new ways to get high transportation value from less oil consumption.

Hypothesis

The United States MUST become self sufficient in domestic oil production that matches oil consumption. (zero imports).
The United States MUST include this reduction of oil consumption in an overall energy plan that addresses all issues.
The United States MUST aim for solutions that avoid maximizing domestic oil production in the short term

Add your MUST and WANT criteria?

THE POLICY HAMMER

We can picture the present US oil consumption as a stake sticking up from the ground. The part of the stake in the ground is present domestic production and the part of the stake sticking out of the ground (60%) represents present oil imports. A brute force “policy-only” solution is to heavily tax gasoline or crude oil at whatever level it takes, to drive the stake in the ground. At some price each consumer will make lifestyle changes given no other choice! The poorest will make most of the change; the richest will do little to change; nothing near to an optimum efficient oil use will result.

In this approach of “a policy-only solution”, the consumer is pulled out of his car and no substitute transportation is developed and tested for replacing the lost lifestyle value form the oil consumption.

THE CULTURAL HAMMER

A large part of the oil use “stake in the ground” results from “habitual oil consumption” as in “oil addiction”. A voluntary cultural change can be driven through the public education route. The media can creatively deliver factual information to accurately define and quantify simple “new habits” to reduce energy use, like turning off lights in empty rooms or setting up a miles driven budget and scheduling car trips to meet your budget.

To date the sirens of change have not sounded a well thought out coherent message. As a nation we do not know what energy saving measures actually can yield a high reduction in oil burning (to meet zero imports) or reduce electricity use by one coal-fired power plant. The Time Magazine April 9, 2007 issue had “selected whoever authors” write 51 ways to reduce global warming that were subjective, not quantified and some were just plain dumb. A coalition of multi discipline professionals (possibly as envisioned by Appollo’s Fire) could produce such educational video messages that would be factual.

THE TECHNOLOGY HAMMER

We can again picture the same stake in the ground. The US, in this representation, can cut off the part of the stake by developing new energy sources to power the existing fleet of transportation vehicles. More efforts on efficient vehicles and mass transit options as well as “soft options” are part of the solution. Soft options include developing computer models for fleet vehicles, such as the recently publicized UPS “turn right to save gas” model.

Current mass transit substitutes for one-passenger cars have not met the value goal of equal commuting time. Busses that move very slowly on grid-locked streets (or on ineffective stop-start HOV routes) will obviously have few riders who value their time. Imagine that the commute over the existing multilane roads is really a “packing problem”. If each person were conveyed at 60MPH within a 2foot by 2foot box, the throughput would be 250 times more than the current auto commute in which one person effectively requires an 8foot by 40foot space (their car) moving at 20MPH.
This imagined scenario would greatly reduce the commute time and the energy use.

The 2foot by 2 foot box could be a seat on a rapid commuter bus that “owned” most of the inner city interstates, was filled with subscribers and had effective start and end point people conveying to final destination to keep transit time low. Another compromise solution to improve “packing” would be one to two person micro cars with exclusive access to many roads possibly within a Zip Car –short term rent and park model.

In summary, I believe that the oil addiction stake can be cut off or driven to a zero oil imports goal in as few as 5 years! The resulting individual value can be maintained by a connected application of policy, cultural and technological approaches. The only light we need to have turned on is the one in the room we are in and the one in our head.

PS I have many technical articles on energy policy and I am working on models for the back out of energy used for transportation . I see tax on oil imports or gasoline as a way to possibly keep net gasoline prices lower than where they have been.

Comment by JD Polk on August 14, 2008 at 8:16am

DESPERATLY SEEKING ANGEL INVESTOR…..

I have been touting Solar, Wind and Tidal-Flow generation on one platform offshore for over 20yrs now......My wind is different from every one else's it is a type of Vertical Axis that has not been seen much if any in 20 yrs either.....it looks like a Power line pole
With holes drilled in it in such a manor that no matter which direction the wind blows it only turns one way.
I have been doing R&D and developing my new Patent Pending Recirculation Generator
That will run off 2 200w PV’s and will put out 1.7KW per hr…..
Takes the cost of 10 PV’s@ $1000.00 =$10,000.00 down to $3700.00 for my Hybrid System 2@ $1000.00 and $1700.00 for recirculator.
And puts out basically the same watts per hr….with a 60% reduction in COST!!!!!

JD Polk, founder & ceo
Advanced Technology Industries inc.
(Formerly )Alternative Resource Electric Corp inc.
(solar, wind & hydrokinetic generation one platform offshore)

Building Sustainable Renewable Communities
of Tomorrow...
"We will be the Standard for all building Structures of the Future"
Building Integrated Photovoltaics

Po box 747
Walthourville, Ga. 31333
solarmanjd@dcemail.com
888.448.9188
912.996.2771
904.525. Polk

Comment by Steve Richard on August 11, 2008 at 8:37pm

Less Waste Oil In The Environment

A few months back I started my own independent distributor company promoting the benefits of using premium synthetic oils instead of petroleum based lubricating oils. Approximately 1% of a barrel of oil is used to make lubrication products. That may not seem like much until you consider that this country uses 20,730,000 barrels of oil per day. That’s 207,300 bbl/day that’s being used to make motor oils, greases and other lubricating products alone. At $125.00 a barrel, that’s almost $9.5 billion a year going overseas for foreign oil just for lubrication products. Almost $26,000,000 a day could be stopped from going overseas today and every day starting tomorrow, not in ten years, if we just switched from petroleum lubricants to premium synthetic lubricants.

The California Environmental Protection Agency and its Integrated Waste Management Board has embarked on a statewide “3,000 Mile Myth” public information campaign to educate drivers on reducing motor oil consumption.
See what others are saying about using an extended drain program.
There are many other benefits from using premium synthetic lubricants. Such benefits as lower cost through extended drain intervals which produces less waste oil; better wear protection for longer engine life and better fuel economy (up to 8.3%) with less carbon emissions.
For those of you who have a fleet of vehicles, here is an actual case study of how an owner has saved thousands of dollars for his company.
Aside from the economic benefits it’s just The Right Choice for the Environment.

Feel free to give me a call to discuss anything about the Pickens Plan or how to reduce your oil consumption through the use of premium synthetic oils. The best time to catch me in the office is around the noon hours CST. My toll free number can be located on my website at http://www.InnovativeSynthetics.com

Comment by bill on July 23, 2008 at 4:45am

i was wondering if there is a way to use the signs that are over the turnpikes and interstate hi-ways to explain that lower speeds save gas? it seems like a good place to spread the word.

Comment by Dee RN on July 22, 2008 at 11:42am

Look to the future but start now!
http://push.pickensplan.com/xn/detail/2187034:BlogPost:378844

Comment by Daryl Oster on July 17, 2008 at 5:09pm

Transportation is the foundation of the economy because it is the master key to survival, transportation presently it depends on oil.

ETT offers the potential to eliminate reliance on fossil fuels for transportation – using wind energy generated by your wind farms, hydro-electric, and photovoltaic. Evacuated Tube Transport (ETT)™ is patented transportation technology requiring 1/50th of the energy of trains, cars or planes; it is cleaner, lower cost, safer, faster, and electric.

ETT Technology
Earth orbits at 67,000 mph without friction. ETT works like “Space Travel on Earth” ™. With ETT, air is permanently removed from 2 tubes (one for each direction) along a travel route. Since there is no air in ETT tubes, the passenger capsules are pressurized (like a 6 person biz jet cabin), and travel in the tubes on nearly frictionless maglev; so travel takes place without air friction or rolling resistance.
Airlocks allow access without letting air in the tube. Linear electric motors accelerate the capsules (preferably with renewable energy). During most of the trip, the capsules coast through the vacuum using no power. When the capsules brake, linear generators recover most of the acceleration electricity.
Depending on distance, ETT speed can be up to 350 mph for in state trips, to 4,000 mph for international travel that will take you from D.C. across the Bering Strait to Beijing in 2 hours at 1/10th the cost of airfare.
ETT is networked as are freeways. ETT capsules (hauling people or a pallet of cargo) are automatically routed non-stop between “off-line” network terminals that are disbursed according to demand (like freeway off-ramps are).
ETT capsules weigh only 400 lbs yet haul 800lbs of people or cargo as the typical SUV; so a twentieth as much guideway material is required to support ETT capsules than to support 200ton trains. This reduction in materials, and use of present automated pipeline production equipment drops cost to less than a tenth the cost of High Speed Rail, and less than 1/4th the cost of a freeway. Because of automated passive switching, a single ETT tube can exceed 80 lanes of capacity, further reducing cost.

Private Model
The ETT Patent is assigned to et3.com Inc. (et3 stands for Evacuated Tube Transport Technologies), an open consortium. An inclusive license agreement offers any entity incentives to participate in the plan to implement ETT using their “off-the-shelf” assets (materials, parts, technologies, skills, labor, and production capacities). Collectively companies have already spent billions developing ETT; although most are not aware of it yet; for instance, hundreds of companies worldwide make and install pipelines (tubes), vacuum pumps, and the electronics to operate them. Everything exists to start building ETT now. ETT is being implemented in China, and Korea.

We believe ETT will help achieve the goals and ideals of the Pickens Plan.

Best regards,

Daryl Oster
(c) 2008 all rights reserved. ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth"
e-tube, e-tubes, and the logos thereof are trademarks and service marks
of et3.com Inc. For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal
River FL 34423-1423 Verizon cell(352)257-1310 et3@et3.com www.et3.com

Comment by Mike McCarthy on July 17, 2008 at 12:19pm

Join us at Carbon Neutral as we move forward with our plans to Flip a City.

Vacant Buildings - Holyoke

Download the pdf (4 MB) and get a sense of where we have to start.

Then watch us grow and implement a plan to install grid tied solar pv systems on all rooftops, and most importantly, bring an entire City back to life as Carbon Free as possible.

Comment by Mary on July 16, 2008 at 1:28pm

I have tried twice to put up a wind turbine on my property. One in Oregon and here in South dakota. Both time the local power company refused to let me hook up to their gride to sell back what I don't use. Oregon wanted a $10,000 study that I had to pay for to see if their lines could handle the power I might send them. Here is South Dakota the flat out refuse to let me do it. My only option is to cut them off compleatly and go it alone.
when I have the money I just might do that. Have solar as a back up for when there is no wind and lot of batteries. But a extra cost I can't afford. They don't want anyone to be energy independant and if they say they do then they are liers. Just try and put up a small residental wind trubine on you property while living in city limits and see how many hoops they make you jump through.
Mary

Comment by Douglas Schiller on July 15, 2008 at 6:54pm

Visit http://tinyurl.com/aecelebvideo for a funny video "What celebrity could produce the most natural gas?"

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last