Skip to main content

by Marcel F. Williams

In the President's speech last night about the BP Gulf Coast environmental crisis and the petroleum industry, he said the following:

"I am happy to look at other ideas and approaches from either party –- as long they seriously tackle our addiction to fossil fuels. Some have suggested raising efficiency standards in our buildings like we did in our cars and trucks. Some believe we should set standards to ensure that more of our electricity comes from wind and solar power. Others wonder why the energy industry only spends a fraction of what the high-tech industry does on research and development -– and want to rapidly boost our investments in such research and development.
All of these approaches have merit, and deserve a fair hearing in the months ahead. But the one approach I will not accept is inaction."

We've already known how to convert urban and rural biowaste (garbage) into gasoline, diesel fuel, and jet fuel for decades. Such local resources could replace nearly 20% of our petroleum needs and provide jobs practically everywhere where garbage is produced (that's every city, town, and farm in America).

Obama

But biowaste conversion to liquid fuels waste 80% of its total carbon content. If you added hydrogen to the mix produced from clean electricity from nuclear and hydroelectric power plants, nearly 100% of our transportation and industrial hydrocarbon chemical needs could be met. Once we starting using fuel efficient plug-in-hybrid vehicles and fuel cells, the US could actually become a major exporter of clean carbon neutral fuels.

Obviously, we're not going to replace petroleum overnight, but we can start the transition if the President and the Congress would simply-- mandate-- that at least 10% of all gasoline, diesel fuel, and jet fuel sold in the US be derived from carbon neutral resources by 2020, 50% by 2030, and 90% by 2040. And any of these fuels sold in the US that does not reach these percentages should be slapped with a heavy carbon tax.

To me, its that simple!

Nuclear Synfuel Economy
http://newpapyrusmagazine.blogspot.c...

Synfuels and the Price of Oil
http://newpapyrusmagazine.blogspot.c...

Gasoline from Air and Water
http://newpapyrusmagazine.blogspot.c...

Obama Seeking New Ideas on Energy and Climate
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/...

Navy Looks to Biofuel to Power Fleets
http://newpapyrusmagazine.blogspot.c...

Originally posted to newpapyrus on Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 08:17 PM PDT.

Poll

Is it time for the Federal govenrnment to mandate that a growing percentage of transportation fuel in the US be derived from non-petroleum carbon neutral sources?

55%20 votes
36%13 votes
8%3 votes

| 36 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Good Lord, Rational Thought In An Intellectual (0+ / 0-)

      vacuum.

      Biomass is second only to hydro as a renewable energy resource.

      Solar, despite the massive expenditure of funds, remains a cipher with the usual deficit of intermittent energy.

      Certainly certain biomass energy has deficits and is perhaps even counterproductive, e.g. feed grains for fuel, cutting down rainforest to grow sugarcane for ethanol.

      But that is hardly all there is.

      I like this guy myself who needs no conversion of biomass to a liquid fuel:

       title=

      See here.

      Best,  Terry

  •  Oh cool! We can just eliminate all oil use now! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DrFrankLives, william shipley

    WOOT! Happy days are here again!

    Gosh - I can't imagine why no-one ever realized this. What a bunch of fucking idiots.

    I'm gonna go eat a steak. And fuck my wife. And pray to GOD - hatemailapalooza, 052210

    by punditician on Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 08:44:55 PM PDT

  •  The Military (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DaleA

    Right now, only the US military appears to be headed in that direction. But hopefully the rest of the country will follow.

  •  Your problem is.. (0+ / 0-)

    .. you live in a fantasy land where you think government is supposed to follow mandates.  Take the debt ceiling for instance... Congress just raises it as they see fit, nobody takes it seriously.

    All we need to do is simply invest worthwhile dollars into research.  Setting a mandate isn't going to get the job done, because even a village idiot can tell you the government does whatever the hell it wants to.  Rules be damned

    Also, I guess you agree with President Bush who wanted 80% of our energy to come from ourselves by 2025 or something to that degree.

    I don't drink the cool-ade.. liberal or conservative.

    by Raviohli on Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 09:45:54 PM PDT

    •  Mandates (0+ / 0-)

      Again, we already know how to convert biomass into gasoline, diesel fuel, and jet fuel. The US military is already beginning to make the transition.

      And   Federal and State governments already mandate various clean  fuel additives  all of the time. Now its time to mandate that transportation fuels come from carbon neutral resources.

      A mandate requires a penalty if that mandate is not achieved. And that's why a carbon tax should be that penalty for any company that sells transportation fuels in the US and do not meet the Federal mandates.

  •  It's part of the solution. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NoMoreLies

    There's a lot of different ways energy can be produced efficiently, tailored to local conditions and reduce the need make new power plants.

    That should be the first step: stop building new power plants.

    Then, stop work on any 'grid based' system.

    Bring in locally produced carbon neutral or carbon zero sources to supplant existing requirements, and fine tune the technology as needed to adapt to the demand cycles. All of this technology is off the shelf. PV, thermal solar, wind, geo-thermal .. use the local bio-fuels as needed.

    Bio-fuels and synfuels are transition devices: they both add to the GHG load, but at least they can be brought in so that they replace out the dirtier and riskier petrol based carbon fuels.

    They will buy us the time we need to transition to fusion, or some other energy generation technology that is being worked on today.

  •  plastics (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Judgment at Nuremberg

    What are you going to make plastics from if you do not make them from oil?

    •  Plastics (0+ / 0-)

      Sounds like the Graduate:-)

      Some major plastic ingredients like formaldehyde can come from carbon neutral methanol.

      Also by adding renewable CO2, you can cut petroleum in half in manufacturing plastics.

      But bioplastics will probably be the principal source for replacing petroleum produced plastics, IMO.  

    •  There is even a magazine devoted to bioplastics (0+ / 0-)

      See here.

      I suppose (without the slightest knowledge) there are problems with bioplastics just as there are with petroleum-based plastic but we have rid ourselves of the dependence on petroleum at least.

      I have diaried plans of a start-up to substitute a solid powder for natural gas.  Of particular interest is the patent claim that plastics, and even metals, may be used as fuel.

      There are always obstacles to introduction of new technology and much will turn out to unfeasible for economic and/or technical reasons but the usual inertia of humans is the primary problem IMO.

      Best,  Terry

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site