New Look, Same Great Website.
Be on the lookout for our re-design for 2010 launching Friday, March 12!

Close
 
Photo Credit: Photo by Richard Krauze, ACORE
article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (41) View image gallery Image Gallery (1) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
December 14, 2004

National Security to Lead Renewable Energy Deployment

U.S. Energy Independence Goals Propel Renewable Energy to Next Phase
by Jesse Broehl, Editor, RenewableEnergyAccess.com
Washington D.C. [RenewableEnergyAccess.com]

If one actionable priority could be distilled from the chorus of support expressed for renewables at last week's conference of the American Council On Renewable Energy (ACORE), it's that the time has come to shift the nation's priorities from an era of research and development to one of major deployment. And the one mantra rising above the conference chatter that might create enough political muscle to kick-off that shift can be summed up in two words: National Security.

"We find ourselves dependent on imports from people who, by and large, are hostile to us. It makes (energy independence) a national security imperative."

- Frank Gaffney, former national security advisor to President Reagan

At the packed conference, 24 national leaders spoke to over 500 experts from industry and finance in the Cannon Caucus Room of the U.S. House of Representatives, sharing their experience, expertise, and hopes for the various renewable energy technologies that scatter the broad energy landscape. The conference was convened primarily to acknowledge that the past three decades of research and development in the U.S. have yielded positive results and that it's time to move into a new phase -- a broad and deliberate deployment phase.

"Back in the '70s, we did not have the technologies," said Michael Eckhart, President of ACORE. "Now it's time to say we've done well, we have the technologies, some are commercialized and some are near, but we have succeeded and now it's time to move into Phase II where we put those options to use."

The real question for today's renewable energy visionaries is how to get there. It was fitting then that the conference took place in the nation's capitol where, decades ago, renewable energy technology was seen first and foremost as a means to address national security through energy independence.

It's within the marbled halls of the nation's capitol that many experts see the real potential for growth of renewable energy -- growth they say has been largely untapped.

A Decades-Old Answer

The first comprehensive message on renewable energy was delivered by President Richard Nixon during a June 1971 speech, according to Jay Hakes, Director of the Carter Library, who spoke at the conference. Nixon's speech stressed the need for national security through increased energy independence, and he specifically cited the development of a nuclear "breeder" reactor and renewable energy technologies as part of that solution. A 51-page report called "Project Independence" would eventually come out three years later acknowledging global warming for the first time and delving into the potential for the renewable energy technologies of solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, hydrogen fuel cells, biofuels and others.

The energy independence report was progressive for its time, but Jonathan Lash, president of the World Resources Institute, questioned the country's progress since then.

"Renewable energy is critical to national security," Lash said. "Ever since Nixon pledged we would be free of oil, our national average has increased. Now it's a regular drumbeat of information telling us that we are changing the world we live in."

While much of the conference focused on pushing the federal government for more than its typically lackluster and inconsistent support for renewables, Lash highlighted the many legislative successes at the state level. Renewable energy benefit funds, renewable portfolio standards (now effective in 18 states), government purchases of green tags, and rebate programs have all served to foster regional and state-based renewable energy markets.

Many speakers acknowledged these successes at the state level, but stressed that energy security is a national imperative and only through the guidance of the federal government can renewable energy truly play its part for energy independence.

Policy, Military and Intelligence Leaders Speak Up

Some of the most poignant dialogue stressing the national security angle at the conference came from a panel with considerable experience in that realm. These speakers included R. James Woolsey, former Director of Central Intelligence, Frank Gaffney and Bud McFarlane, former national security advisors to President Reagan, C. Boyden Gray, former White House Counsel to President G.H.W. Bush, and Adm. Dennis McGinn, USN (Ret.), former Deputy Chief of Naval Operations.

All were keen to focus in on Middle East regimes that assure our petroleum needs but, at most, only tacitly assure our national interests.

"We find ourselves dependent on imports from people who, by and large, are hostile to us," Frank Gaffney said. "It makes (energy independence) a national security imperative."

Gaffney cited the growing scarcity of resources in a world with burgeoning economies and populations, such as China as having the potential to create a "perfect storm." Faced with a scenario of increasingly insatiable and expensive demands for energy, countries like the U.S. and China could find themselves at the brink of war.

"Situations like this have given rise to wars in the past, that is not to be precluded here," Gaffney said.

Retired Admiral Dennis McGinn, former deputy chief of Naval Operations, knows a thing or two about war. Not only does McGinn see renewable energy technologies as a means to increase U.S. energy independence but also as a way to directly improve the effectiveness of the military itself.

"We need investment in new technologies for increasing the efficiency of the military," McGinn said. "Speed and agility are the key successes so anything you do to make the military lighter, faster and less reliant on a huge liquid fuel infrastructure makes you more effective."

McGinn came to this realization while orchestrating remote naval training exercises on small Pacific islands where fold-out, flexible, thin-film photovoltaic sheets and a hydrogen-powered fuel cell proved themselves indispensable for powering their electronic and communications systems.

R. James Woolsey, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency during the Clinton Administration said the U.S. is waging a war against three totalitarian movements: the Shiite and Sunni Islamists, and the ranks of Al Qaeda.

"I fear we're going to be at war for decades, not years," Woolsey said. "It will last a long time and it will have a major ideological component. Ultimately we will win it but one major component of that war is oil."

Woolsey, who drives a hybrid-electric Toyota Prius and has his own solar PV system on his home, offered some suggestions to curbing U.S. oil dependence. They didn't involve the much hyped hydrogen, either.

Two of the most promising renewable energy technologies, in Woolsey's opinion, are cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel. Both could help provide a substantial amount of the energy requirements for transportation but they rely on existing technology available today. Furthermore, Woolsey pictured a future with these domestic fuels powering fuel efficient, hybrid electric vehicles. And if the cars were plug-in, hybrid-electrics, every MW of solar and wind added to the national grid could help charge up the nation's cars.

"This all can help with rural development, it can help with the trade deficit, deny funds to Islamists and decrease our dependence on foreign oil," Woolsey said.

Ultimately, any number of technologies and scenarios may be part of the solution and the framework of Phase II. This ACORE conference kicked off the shift to Phase II, from development to deployment, and the next conference in September 2005 will try to answer how to get there.

"We're talking solutions, that's Phase II," said Michael Eckhart, President of ACORE. "What are the policies? We don't know, which is why we need to get everyone thinking alike. No one person can think of it all. Everyone must come forward with their own philosophies."
Image Gallery (1)
 
For Further Information
Please Note: RenewableEnergyWorld.com does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window.
Reader Comments (41)
 
No image available
Anonymous
December 14, 2004
I agree with Kathleen Rolinson. We need to re-emphasize energy efficiency and energy conservation, also referred to by other terms in the 90s such as demand-side management, as the first step in Phase II. We need renewables, but we should not rely solely upon increasing our alternative sources/supplies of energy without making energy effficiency a key component of a new energy policy.
Comment 1 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 14, 2004
I was very interested in the development of Solar PV these last 2 years because I was having Psychic visions of great huge solar towers which like no other tower were more circular and retractable with drainage and weather resistant except for when sometimes they might have a part that might overheat and need someone to replace it. Good Jobs Beautiful to look at, like performing art. So I'm glad to see it happening!!! When can I get my house Solar Panelled?
Comment 2 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 14, 2004
I think that it is time to quit asking "them" to step up to the plate and promote renewables. I work at a very small rural Public Utility in the Pacific Northwest. We offer solar PV as an option to our remote-site customers, are involved in a program to create methanol from wood waste , we've recently announced a community-funded PV installation to be added to a new Assisted Living Facility, and we are currently talking with a firm intent on building a wood-waste to lumber manufacturing plant that would provide green electricity as a by-product.

None of this was done at the behest of any Federal or State agency. Quit reading and writing articles and go to your local power company and local elected officials. Tell them to lead for a change instead of spending their lives studying how to follow others. Trust me, it's much more effective.
Comment 3 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 14, 2004
Bush's original energy plan offered 6 billion in subsidies for gas, oil and nuclear power. It only offered 5 million for renewable energy. Change that subsidy focus around an we have a new paradyme to rapid energy independence, a clean environment and we would lead the world in the new technologies it must move too. We create tremendous job growth with these investments in solar, wind, hydrogen, geothermal, biomass and who knows what else will develop.
Comment 4 of 41
No image available
December 14, 2004
Yeah - I am glad to hear a variety of factions supporting renewables. We need our current administration to change focus as well - and that is the most difficult hurdle. In the 70's the goverment preached conservation, today we preach consumption. That message alone needs to be changed to get the renewable energy consciousness to expand.
Comment 5 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 15, 2004
It is good to see the growing interest but it is still miniscule compared to the overall consumption base of SUV lov'in American citizens.
I believe there will not be a meaningful switch to RE until the full effect of Peak Oil is upon us, and at that point there will be plenty of pain to go around, due in large part to politicians bought off for the past 25 years by the Energy industry.
Comment 6 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 15, 2004
Having spent a great deal of time and effort in the '70's & 80's religiously promoting passive solar and solar voltaics, I have come to the realization that none of these sources is dense enough to sustainin our current lifestyle. If we are to survive, we need a breakthough in a New Energy Technology such as LENTR (Cold Fusion). It is getting late, very late. We must get our heads out of the sand and go to work.
Comment 7 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 15, 2004
Considering that our Nation's Military Industrial Complex has had benefit of truly unbelievable technologies for a considerable span of time.........I am certainly in favor of those (rare though they may be) more familial efforts which might actually buy the human race a little more time.

I mean, what's the alternative at this point? Let the Chinese, or perhaps another nation take the kudos that could otherwise garner for our government some much needed 'good will' from it's citizens?

At the present pace......I guess we should feel lucky that we have become a thriving reincarnation of ancient Rome.....rather than share the technologies that, quite possibly, could render us a dead 'Atlantis'.


Hopefully,


Mitch Robinson
Comment 8 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 15, 2004
So much of our economy has become petroleum-dependent. We cannot just snap our fingers and make decades of business process development and related infrastructure change overnight to accommodate renewable resources. The aspect of national security is very important. Development of smaller scale, widely distributed power source generation capability is vital. More of this can rely on multiple, integrated wind, solar, and low-head hydro sources. Heavy industry will not be able to make the change away from petroleum and gas feedstocks as quickly as the small business and the residential sector, but they need to be encouraged to innovate (and be given tax incentives to do so). We must move quickly to to all this, but we also cannot risk trashing our economy, or placing the country at strategic risk while we're doing so...
Comment 9 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 15, 2004
Woolsey's view of ethanol,hybrids and wind
energy could be implimented right away as
these technolgies are now well proven.Future hybrids will become more electric and less relient on gas.Running them on ethenol and Charging them at night while windmills produce ample electricity is very efficient.My Prius is a 50mpg,super ultra low emissions vehical.
We can reduce air pollution,global warming
and our dependance on foriegn oil.Let's
stop subsidizing oil and nuclear power and put those moneys into making this happen.
Comment 10 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 15, 2004
If the US expects the military to be efficient , I agree with Retired Admiral Dennis McGinn on the military becoming less reliant on a less reliant on a huge liquid fuel infrastructure, especially when much of that fuel is coming from OPEC. We should also remember that a good percent of our driving depends upon oil from other countries. I hope President Bush will allocate funding for developing alternate energy to remedy this situatiion.
Comment 11 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 16, 2004
To Jim Clarck,Sun Wize has just come out with a solar panel that puts out 210watts.
It measures 32" x 52".Is that still not dense
enough?Just 10 panels on a roof is 2kw.That seems like a big help,many panels
now sell at below 4$ a watt,expensive but
cheaper than a SUV.GE's wind turbines generate 3.6mw each with4-5mw designs on the table,that's a lot of power.Thank you for supporting solar energy and I hope you will continue into the
future.
Comment 12 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 17, 2004
New Wind Turbine Multiplies Output by several times,
Could solve all energy needs.
http://www.superturbine.info
Comment 13 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 17, 2004
It seems that those of us in renewable energy businesses have to present a clear unified direction to establishing energy independance. To quote a bumper sticker that a friend sent me; "Energy Independance IS homeland security". Most of us have stopped preaching to the choir, but we have to be cautious not to confuse those in Washington by bickering about the relative merits of solar vs wind vs biomass etc. They are all great. Lets just start deploying the first one that is available. This can change from location to location and over time. We have all the technology and the products to make solar and wind work today. Lets get this simple clear message to the decision makers in Washington.
Merry Christmas
Comment 14 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
December 17, 2004
Lets get QUANTITATIVE. Bioethanol and biodiesel are a waste of biomass: you can replace 2-5 times more oil imports by replacing oil-burning heaters with biomass burners, even if you have to farm the biomass. This also works out at least 6 times cheaper per barrel of oil saved.

For a given amount of oil saved, solar panels work out maybe ten times more expensive even than biofuels!

Energy saving is by far the cheapest way to save oil imports.

Let's start right away with some unspectacular low-cost policies which can have an immediate impact:-
- more incentives for insulation and energy saving
- Announce a program of future tax raises to encourage fuel-efficient vehicles
- Announce future tax increases on heating oil, to encourage conversion to wood/biomass burners.
- Announce future ban on innefficient wood-stoves and incentives for buying efficient ones. (Frees up wood to replace heating oil)
-encourage heat-and-power schemes
Comment 15 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 4, 2005
There is oil in the far North in our own hemisphere, where the main problem is working in the extremely cold conditions there, and the current cost of extracting the oil from the rock that it's in. I'm wondering if plasma technology could alter that dilemna. Plasma is already being considered as a way to eliminate the majority of the nuclear waste generated so far. ( What waste cannot be eliminated will be encapsulated in glass.) What ELSE can plasma do?
Comment 16 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 4, 2005
Biodiesel: an ultimate dead end unless you are talking about growing hay for horses and ox teams. It takes too much energy to create energy if you have to produce it by farming then processing it artificially.

Energy: there is no genie in a bottle that will save our present lifestyle. None. Impossible. We could force America to live a saner lifestyle if we double the price of gasoline thus cutting down on the massive vehicles driving aimlessly all over the place, redesigning our cities and suburbs.

But this will not happen. We await the War to Get Oil, aka, WWIII. Nuclear war.
Comment 17 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 4, 2005
The recent Private Space Race and Multi-million dollar prize is the best example of what to do.

$10 Million Dollar prize for the first person/company to produce a home energy device that works with existing housing and returns on cost within 10 years, using renewable energy.

$10 Million Dollar prize for the first person/company to produce a vehicle energy device that works with existing vehicles and returns on cost within 10 years, using renewable energy.

Then stand back and watch the flood of ideas and working solutions come to fruition.

The Bill Gates Energy Prize??

Dare ya Bill!
Comment 18 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 4, 2005
Nuclear fission is still the stupidest way humans have ever invented to boil water. It is not cheap at all and no technology can contain anything for billions of years. Repeal the Price Anderson Act which limits utilities with multiple nukes to a mere $500 million in liability and watch every single nuclear plant close.
Comment 19 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 4, 2005
Renewable sources are mostly not dense enough although some of the more recent solar devices including some still in the lab will greatly help. What is dense enough and is orders of magnitude safer than oil or goal is nuclear. Nuclear got an irrationally bad rap that has led us straight to the mess we are in now. This must change.
Comment 20 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 4, 2005
A century late and a trillion dollars short. Nikola Tesla had patents on an electric car that got up to 90 miles an hour back in 1924. It was powered by repulsion against the Earth's magnetic field. The U.S. government seized his work and never released it after his death. You people are chasing your tails; big petrochemicals will never allow the government to switch to alternative energy until the oil reserves start drying up, because then they can hold the public over a barrel. Either get to work on rediscovering technologies stolen by business and government bureacracies or die like they want you to.
Comment 21 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 5, 2005
The Bush II Administration has never been effectively challenged on its secretive energy policies or its commitments, including military, to the traditional energy industries. The Afghanistan-Iraq wars are indicative of the outdated views on energy held by the current Administration.
Passive and PV Solar on all new homes, European standards of auto efficiency, and public recapture of privately owned utility networks are needed to operate a multiple source energy distribution network that crosses time (daily) ands climatic (seasonal) zones.
Comment 22 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 5, 2005
I agree with earlier comments, that scientists with a far better grasp than I have most likely solved this problem many years ago. Such as Tesla, and numerous others, but have been supressed by goverments and Petrochemicals, if we don't rely on their product, they have no power over us. A great idea I read about a few years ago was one by K Eric Drexler, the "father" of Nanotechnology. If the materials used to create solar panels could be influenced at a nano scale, then they could be added to the materials used to surface/build roads and motorways. Imagine, every inch of every road on the surface of the planet becoming a solar panel, plugged into a global, not national, grid. Once the infrastructure is in place, free electricity for all. The sun is always shining somewhere.......
Comment 23 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 5, 2005
Solar panels on ALL roofs tied to the grid -(worldwide). The problem would probably
be too much power generated. D.
Comment 24 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 6, 2005
I agree with George Anderson. If the upcoming crisis in oil hits at midnight we're probably at 11:50 PM now. One problem: How do we change human behavior (incessant consumption not only of fuel but of anything from $1,000,000 homes to The Sharper Edge catalog) without bringing out the worst in it (scapegoats to explain why we can't have everything---whether or not it's the Islamic world, immigrants, homosexuals, Jews, etc. to blame)? This is the best opportunity for the globe to come together as one community. Screw the military.
Comment 25 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 6, 2005
I commend ACORE for bringing Peak Oil problems into the open. Now that we know the obvious, which road due we take?? Can we change the mindset of hundreds of millions into conserving energy?? Many questions, and little time to act.
Comment 26 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 6, 2005
HEMP for FUEL!!! It is the cheapest source of biomass for alcohol. And cheapest biodiesel oil. Very nutritious too!
http://sheRemembers.org
Comment 27 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 8, 2005
Hey people wake up. Congress should instituted improvements in our energy grid starting 30 years with the "Oil Crisis of 1973" Instead, they promoted a war in which people with the most shares in a munitions factory make the most money while our brave soldiers continue to die, because we didn't push our Congress to develop alternative energies 30 years ago. Why do the half asleep Americans continue to follow these self seeking politicians in congress ( if you serve two years or less in Congress, you get a guaranteed pension of $150,000 a year for life.) Their pension is in a guaranteed plan unlike Social Security! Wake up people!
We are losing jobs, due to the fact during the period from 1970-1990 the industrialists and Congress decided to donate huge amounts of money to the backward countries of the far east. Rather than building the newest factories in America.
Comment 28 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 9, 2005
Why not a national tax deduction to new and existing homes and buildings based on amount of renewable energy produced,and NOT on cost of construction and placement.This would be well played in the sun belt states with photo voltaic cells.
Comment 29 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 9, 2005
I live in Japan. This is the only country which is anywhere close to being on track to reduce its population to natural carrying capacity. If the U.S. could cut its energy consumption by over half, it might also come close to reducing its population to natural carrying capacity. Failing this energy cut, the U.S. cannot continue to import cheap illegal foreign workers. These workers will become very expensive indeed, on the soon-to-come day of reckoning.
Comment 30 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 10, 2005
Nuclear power is not sufficient since there is not enough nuclear fuel to produce the amount of electricity needed. Only a combination of ALL renewables will help to bridge the time till new recources have been found, for instance from other planets. It's a question of demand and supply, and sofar the demand is too big and still growing. It's mankind's biggest challenge since it's existence.
Comment 31 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 11, 2005
<
Enter you comment here>
Comment 32 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 12, 2005
1. trust the oral histories.
2. it's all done with smoke and mirrors.
3. recent experiments with photon splitting show an information transfer speed of c squared between quantum particles .
4. take a laser / split the beam into virtual and real / eliminate one / harness C squared .
Comment 33 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 12, 2005
i think it's obvious that it is far too late for a smooth, relatively painless transition...from the oil we're so addicted to...to any (or even all) of these 'alternative' sources/technologies....i don't mean to detract from their importance, but they are incapable of postponing the now inevitable crash that is literally around the corner. Millions, probably billions will die in the coming years...those who are left will need all the energy options they can get. To get a clearer picture of what's coming i can recommend a fantastic book...impressively researched and carefully documented..."CROSSING THE RUBICON, the decline of the American Empire at the end of the Age of Oil" by Michael Ruppert, 2004. Even now our leaders continue to deny the obvious...trust them at your peril.
Comment 34 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 18, 2005
There is sufficient nuclear fuel. Anything else is a lie. Uraniun-235, at present consmuption, will last 75-250 years. Then there is 3 times as much thorium. And then you can utilise uranium-238 in breeder reactors, which means you get almost 60 times as much energy. And then there is 15 times as much uranium in the sea as there is in the ground. Even without the deposits in the sea nuclear power will last for thousands, if not tens of thousands of years.

Nuclear power only has one major drawbacj, proliferation of nuclear weapons. This is a big threat to great power hegemony.
Comment 35 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
January 19, 2005
I too have read "CROSSING THE RUBICON, the decline of the American Empire at the end of the Age of Oil" by Michael Ruppert, 2004, and recommend it to all as a wake up call to those in doubt of the pending global crash. This book should be taught in schools, never mind having it's reviews constantly removed from amazon.com. As others have stated, it is "It's mankind's biggest challenge since it's existence", and yet most people continue to either not know, or not care. Yesteryear indifference used to mean it was someone else's problem. Tommorow it could mean you and your family starving to death in the cold winter. Still want to "do" indifference? Or does next years Xmas list really seem that important any more. If you are on this site, you are most likely already well informed, but we need to spread the word to more.
Comment 36 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
February 6, 2005
I am retired from lifetime transport employment, saw USA go from Lending to Borrowing Nation; go from oil exporter to oil importer. Switch started in earnest with freeway free-for-all of the late fifties-sixties.
It is an illusion to think we can cruise-control our way thru the Oil Interregnum, car for all at puberty- business as usual. Picking one priority: Vast expansion of railway network, capacity & reach, renewable linked to priority transport COHESION, not futile busywork. Tough choices to break free from the Oil Tarbaby.
Policy platform peakoil.net, Letter42 art.374.
See regional model in 11-04 MASS TRANSIT p.70. Extrapolate concept your region. Info sharing my pleasure.
Comment 37 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
February 25, 2005
Samantha's comment is dead on. Stanley Meyer should be a national hero with his statue on the mall. Repressed energy inventions should be celebrated in the media for what they are: the product of our awesome human mind at work to solve a problem that we are up to the task to solve, in spite of the help of big business and government!
Comment 38 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
April 4, 2005
Northern California listen up: Home of PostCarbon .org, many enviro-activists. So, why is the North Coast Rail grid still out of service? Why not Sacramento rail connect to Vallejo/Waterborne & service to Santa Rosa/Willits & North? CalTrans 1995 US50 Corridor Rail Study is hidden... Sacramento- Placervillle- Tahoe- Carson Valley electric railway will run on American River HYDROPOWER enroute. USA too poor to build railways?? Oyez- poormouth our way to the energy collapse poorhouse! OK, ENERGY INDEPENDENCE BONDS will be part of Social Security "Private Investment Options", seed mony for renewable electricity linked to electric rail expansion. 1838 Mandate of US Congress, naming USA Railways "Post Roads" is blueprint for re-emphasis of local railway network, renewable driven.
Comment 39 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
April 4, 2005
Actually, I am terrified at the prospect of a surge toward biofuels. First, there simply is NO WAY biofuels are going to be able to replace the current level of consumption of non-renewables, but consumers' expectations are being programmed to think so, and, second, if biofuels become the Next Big Thing, kiss goodbye to every available rural open space, every standing woodland, every patch of temperate forest, every scrap of obtainable boreal forest, any remaining biodiversity... and still we will find ourselves in deep energy crisis and at the brink of energy war of the kind to make the current "war" on "terror" (whatever that means) look like a country picnic.

Biofuels boomers like the Rocky Mountain Institute should be keelhauled. They ought to know better.
Comment 40 of 41
No image available
Anonymous
April 5, 2005
We can no longer look to US government to do the right thing by the US people. Woosley, Cheney, Bush and minions are at war with all the people of the world, including US citizens. They are driven to blow up people, buildings and countries because that is how they amass their wealth. They should be ignored and delegitimized at every opportunity. We should boo them into silence every time they cry war.

And if they or their assets launch another attack against US people, we must keep our heads, and not react with more war, because this is what they expect.
Comment 41 of 41
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
AEE Solar SolarTech Consortium PVPowered Inc. FRONIUS USA LLC  Solar Electronics Division Solar Technologies Intertek
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo