Autonomous Vehicle Consultant

Adding environmental and societal costs of coal used in the generation of electricity would create a more level playing field for renewable energy technologies. However, the coal-fired electric power plant industry would summon their considerable lobbying power to decimate any such rational proposal. These same folks would contribute massive sums to political campaigns, and, thus, buy the Congress and the President. Unless the renewable energy industries are willing to outbid their fossil fuel competitors in campaign contributions for tax breaks and regulatory favors, don’t expect otherwise rational ideas on leveling the playing field to be implemented any time soon. For a check on who is giving how much to whom in the political space, try checking www.opensecrets.org.

Dear Secretary Chu,

The United States now imports 60 percent of its crude oil needs according to your Energy Information Administration. In about 11 years, that figure will rise to 100 percent based on known reservoir capacities and withdrawal rates. Given that there are now 137 million passenger vehicles (see Bureau of Transportation Statistics), what will power that many vehicles in 11 years, gasoline from imported crude oil? This constitutes energy security? What is your plan to address this troubling dilemma? You might check my blog for insight into this issue.

Best,

Dr. Jeffrey Everson

The pie chart shows the amount of annual energy consumed in the United States during 2009 from petroleum, natural gas, coal, nuclear and renewable sources.  Petroleum is used for transportation and manufacturing. Furnaces, dryers, transportation, fertilizers, hydrogen production and electric power generation consume natural gas. Coal is used to generate electricity and is utilized by alumina refineries, paper manufacturers, as well as the chemical and pharmaceutical industries. Nuclear energy is primarily employed to generate electricity. Renewable sources, such as wind and solar, contribute only a small fraction of the total energy consumed by the United States.

My blog post of July 11, 2011 reported that the United States now imports 60 percent of its crude oil needs. In 11 years that figure will rise to 100 percent based on known reservoir capacities and current withdrawal rates. Thus, the slice of pie attributed to petroleum consumption (i.e., 37 percent) will be entirely supported by imported crude oil in about 11 years. This “time window” of 11 years means that 137 million passenger vehicles in the United States, now powered on gasoline derived from crude oil, will have to be powered on something else in order to avoid total foreign oil dependency.

The question becomes, “What other slices of the pie could be expanded to accommodate the needs of 137 million passenger vehicles?” How about natural gas? If natural gas from shale (using hydraulic fracturing) can be produced in sufficient quantity without harming the environment or consuming water needed by, say, farmers, then perhaps this fossil fuel source could power millions of vehicles in the form of compressed natural gas.

If electric vehicles (e.g., hybrid, plug-in-hybrids) became a reality in massive numbers within 11 years, then coal fired power plant usage would have to be increased. That would happen at the expense of the environment with more CO2 emissions into the atmosphere. Possibly the amount of coal usage could be held constant by using less of it, say, in the paper and chemical industries, while consuming more coal to produce electricity to power electric vehicles. However, those industries would marshal their vast lobbying resources against this proposal.

It is doubtful that renewable energy technologies, such as wind and solar, could achieve signicant scale up to generate sufficient electricity to meet the needs of tens of millions of vehicles power by electricty. The capital cost of wind and solar systems greatly exceeds their fossil fuel counterparts. That will continue until critical mass funding is devoted to innovative technology development for wind and solar. The need for innovation funding was discussed in my blog post of July 13, 2011.

Conclusion: there is no easy way to replace 37 percent of the U.S. energy consumption with something else, especially in 11 years. It is even more difficult if no one in authority is paying attention. Frankly, in my opinion nothing will happen until after a major disaster occurs, for example, a massive oil cut back from Saudi Arabia.

The graph below shows that 94 percent of the world’s oil reserves are controlled by national oil companies, such as NIOC (Iran), Saudi Aramco (Saudi Arabia), Gazprom (Russia), etc.  ExxonMobil, BP and other international oil companies own the remaining oil assets. See the two arrows located over BP and ExxonMobil on this graph to comprehend the magnitude of these numbers.

My blog post of July 11, 2011 reported that the United States now imports 60 percent of its crude oil needs. In 11 years that figure will rise to 100 percent based on known reservoir capacities and current withdrawal rates.

These facts demonstrate the rising political and economic importance of oil exporters in contrast to the United States and the urgency to find alternative sources of energy other than crude oil to power over 100 million passenger vehicles and manufacture plastics, fertilizers and roadway pavement materials. The Obama administration should openly acknowledge this problem and create a national level program to secure our energy future. Two billion dollars squandered per week in Afghanistan could be a down payment on this project.