[Graeme]

I just saw an interview on BBC Hardtalk with Amory Lovins, who explained in a half hour slot that USA (and other countries) do not need nuclear power to solve their energy problems. He knows from his analysis that renewables plus micro-generation and increased efficiency can do the job, ie make America oil free by 2050 by simply using market forces (the cheaper energy option, nuclear is too expensive). He advocates carbon fibre or composite materials to make cars, trucks and planes lighter and stronger and hence more efficient (use less fuel). He also talked about alternative fuels: ethanol made from switch grass, and liquid hydrogen to fuel aircraft.

If anyone else saw this interview, or if anyone wants to make a comment, please respond.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', 'H')e knows from his analysis that renewables plus micro-generation and increased efficiency can do the job, ie make America oil free by 2050 by simply using market forces (the cheaper energy option, nuclear is too expensive).

[peaker_2005]

The market will make us relatively oil-free by 2050 - because between then and now the floor will fall from beneath the industrial economy.

Unfortunately, it won't be fun on the ride down...

[Ludi]

"The market" is somewhat irrelevant when it comes to nuclear, which is heavily subsidized and now is being given extra government help/insurance to cover cost overruns and expenses incurred by delays in starting operation (presumeably such things as lawsuits from nearby citizens, etc). How can "the market" combat an industry which has the support of the government, essentially using the tax money of citizens to pay for nuke plants they may not want? (and yes, I know our tax money is always used for things some of us don't want, so don't bother to point that out to me )

I should add that Amory Lovins bugs the hell out of me.

[Revi]

The market would be a perfect "invisible hand" to get us to where we need to be if it weren't for the government propping up petroleum. Would gas cost $3 if we weren't subsidizing it through war and paying people to produce it? If gas cost $10 a gallon instead of $3 we would all be figuring out a way to get around with much lighter, alternatively fueled vehicles now. We'd move closer to our jobs and rearrange our lives to use a lot less fuel. Lovins is right about everything. Unfortunately there is a vast and entrenched fossil fuel economy that won't go away without taking us all down with it. (Well maybe not all of us.) Those "hypercars" may be gemcars. The average person may not show as much brand loyalty when the Tahoe turns into a millstone.

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', 'T')he average person may not show as much brand loyalty when the Tahoe turns into a millstone.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', ' ')He knows from his analysis that renewables plus micro-generation and increased efficiency can do the job, ie make America oil free by 2050 by simply using market forces (the cheaper energy option, nuclear is too expensive). He advocates carbon fibre or composite materials to make cars, trucks and planes lighter and stronger and hence more efficient (use less fuel). He also talked about alternative fuels: ethanol made from switch grass, and liquid hydrogen to fuel aircraft.

[AlCzervik]

I always read this garbage that Lovins pays no more than like five bucks a month for energy or something, but what I want to know is, how much it cost to pimp out his house to get these savings. Unless it's something the average American can afford, forget it. And that isn't even taking into account the fossil fuel platform needed to produced all the solar, etc., etc.

Anyway, I love it when Kunstler rips Lovins for thinking we are all going to be rolling around in 200 mile/gallon supercars from here to eternity...

[lorenzo]

The interview will be posted on the BBC Hardtalk webpage soon:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/programmes/hardtalk/

The man is of course entirely correct, and, unlike the vast bulk of PeakOilistas, he knows what he's talking about.

Just look at the simple facts:

1. car fuel efficiency can increase spectacularly and easily. The most basic projections about efficiency increases in future cars (carried out by the MIT) show 200 to 300% increases in under 10 years time. A marketeable 80mpg car is feasible today, a 120mpg car is feasible within 10 years.
http://lfee.mit.edu/publications/PDF/LF ... 001_RP.pdf

:: fact one: we can cut our current fuel consumption for cars in two, or we can even cut two-thirds or even three-quarters of it, in a pretty short time.

:: fact two: this car will be a bioflex plug-in hybrid, which means it gets 50% or more of its power from the grid. Can be an entirely green grid (wind, solar, geothermal, bioenergy).

2. provided the car in question will be a bioflex plug-in hybrid, we'll still need some liquids, but only a quarter of what we consume today, so that's less than 2.5 mio barrels per day. Now all major studies show that the US can produce 50% of this, easily (with capacity to spare for other sectors, such as electricity from biomass).

Read the ORNL's by now famous report:
"Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply"


http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cppr/y2001/rpt/123021.pdf
http://feedstockreview.ornl.gov/pdf/bil ... vision.pdf
http://www.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs ... eport2.pdf


3. Globally, the projected potential of bioenergy in 2050 is 3 to 4 times the total amount of primary energy the world consumes today! Just imagine it: the world today consumes 420EJ of energy, from coal, natural gas, petroleum, nuclear, etc.... Bioenergy *alone* can provide 3 to 4 times that amount (of course consumption grows, but it will never quadruple before 2050. It will have doubled by 2030, at most, after which it declines, since populations start to decline in 2030).

The IEA's Bioenergy Taskforce 40 (studying global bioenergy potential) made interesting projections, here:
www.iea.org/textbase/work/2005/Biofuels ... tation.pdf
PPT presentation, here:
www.termo.hut.fi/Ene-39/006/part%20I.ppt [7.5mb]

In short, most experts agree that bioenergy and increases in efficiency will make the world independent from petroleum within a few decades.


4. Since we are becoming ever more energy efficient, and since the developing countries have the capacity to make quantum leaps (since they're not burdened by an old infrastructure), the world can become oil independent within a few decades.

It's pretty feasible.

Also check Nobel laureate Steven Chu's remarks on cellulosic ethanol: 'Termite Guts Can Save The Planet,' Says Nobel Laureate
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 111110.htm

So let's not panic, we now know and we have established that the future is a bright green bioenergy future.

Let's do it! The Beginning is Near!

[seldom_seen]

All we need is super light cars and airplanes made out of balsa wood and we're there!

Amory! Amory! Amory! Amory in 08!

[lorenzo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('seldom_seen', 'a')irplanes made out of balsa wood and we're there!

[seldom_seen]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', 'W')e must use other materials for scramjets. I'm sure we will find them (in fact, we already have.) Balsa wood is not good.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AlCzervik', 'I') always read this garbage that Lovins pays no more than like five bucks a month for energy or something, but what I want to know is, how much it cost to pimp out his house to get these savings. Unless it's something the average American can afford, forget it.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', '
')Just look at the simple facts:

In short, most experts agree that bioenergy and increases in efficiency will make the world independent from petroleum within a few decades.

[Tyler_JC]

I agree with Lorenzo on one thing.

The average fuel efficiency of a car in the United States will increase dramatically over the next few decades.

Unfortunately, this will occur only because millions of SUV-drivers will be priced out of the market.

The economy will take a nose dive when the big spending Tahoe drivers are forced to cut back.

All efficiencies in a market economy come at the cost of JOBS.

As Monte loves to point out in TeamSpeak, think about the tire industry. Hundreds of thousands of people producing a product that we will need less and less of in the future. How are those layed off workers going to buy these 200mpg magic cars?

And if we stop driving out to Wal*Mart and Costco, how will those workers buy new hybrid cars?

All changes towards a low consumption world also mean, almost by definition, a lower GDP.

[lorenzo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', '
')All efficiencies in a market economy come at the cost of JOBS.

[smiley]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')ts not the Tahoe that the problem, its the people using the Tahoe for a job that the Yaris is better suited for. Think of it as a comparison between a 6 mule team pulling a flatbed wagon vs an arabian with just a pair of small saddlebags. The arabian can't be expected to pull 3 tons of bricks; and its stupid to drive 6 mules and a wagon downtown to get a 5lb bag of flour. Yet because fuel is so incredibly cheap, thats exactly what people do.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', '
')All efficiencies in a market economy come at the cost of JOBS.

[lorenzo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', '
')All efficiencies in a market economy come at the cost of JOBS.

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smiley', '
')The problem is that people don't want them. You shouldn't underestimate the psychological aspects involved in buying a car. If you ask people about the two most important things in their lives it will probably their house and their car. They view their car as a status symbol and as an extension of their personality. And they are willing to dig deep in their pockets for that. So people will always buy the biggest, fasted, shiniest car they can afford.