Join | Log in

Advanced Search

What is Helium

Is solar energy a viable solution to reducing oil dependence?

Title endorsed in part by:

Helium Election 2008

Results so far:

Yes		81%	182 votes	Total: 225 votes
No		19%	43 votes	Total: 225 votes

Yes

1 of 18

As much energy from the sun falls on the Earth in one hour as the world consumes in a year. The limits to application of solar power to human energy solutions are limited only by the I.Q. and political will of the people. If they prefer to be subject to corporate oil manipulation with gas prices varying according needs of market control, outsourcing of the nation's capital to Muslim oil producing nations and a retarded transportation infrastructure they can well afford to pay trillion dollar bad bank debt bail-outs and burn gasoline in SUVs indefinitely

The nation's highways could be transformed in to solar photon-electron conversion surfaces with the application of an innovated recoating technology. The energy then could be soaked up by passing electric cars or channeled in to super-conductors under the highways bathed in liquid hydrogen. Homes can be built with exterior surface entirely covered in solar photon-electron capturing materials and used to power electric car recharging. Instant recharge electric car batteries can be brought on-line and the Congress could follow John McCain's proposal to create a Manhattan project for alternate energy development and application.
Solar energy is a first rate substitute for clouds of polluting, choking poisonous fossil fuels produced in radically anti-western nations for deep pocketed corrupting corporatist oligarchic attackers of civil society and democracy through implicit subversion of alternate energy progress to say nothing of the brain damage caused to say many urban children around the world from persistent leaded fuels, benzene and other carcinogenic bi-products of the oil patch. How many have experienced the toluene melt-down of biological integrity and the byproduct of crude crud oil? Yet only when the sun shines presently is the derrick and the domino effect of redistributing the worlds wealth via oil from the first world to Muslim terrorist supporting nations disrupted, and that is the weak link in complete reliance on solar power presently...the worlds mass extinctions have historically been associated with volcanism and great rifts of outpouring magma that darken the skies to such a level of the sun resembling the most dim crescent moon through the clouds on a dark and stormy night. What will the U.S.A. do if a conservative correlation between the present creeping mass extinction on the globe because of wanton environmental destruction and aloof degradation and annihilation of the wilderness develops and volcanism returns spewing out millions of tons of sulphur dioxide into the atmosphere out gassing even those ridiculous automobile exhaust emissions to accelerate global warming driving the world into the corner of the blood red full moon 1/3rd its size?

The answer may be blowing in the wind of course-wind electrical generators and solar electron harnessing technologies. What the federal government should do is immediately cut all taxes on purchases of solar and wind technology and develops a preference for independent home power production for automobile electric power. The federal government should support national development of infrastructure transformation renewal projects that would end trade deficits and reliance on foreign technologies. Competition through invention and innovation would much better than silly rival projects such as producing synthetic gasoline from coal since the U.S. oil reserve is largely depleted. Highway resurfacing technologies to make all the nation's southern highways solar collecting roadways from which electric cars might get a charge and even electric trucks would be useful. Scientific published an article on using hydrogen in a liquid form as a coolant for super-conducting and electric storage perhaps better synergized as a loop for storage of day time electricity.

In many areas of the nation saltwater is available for electrolysis conversion of hydrogen from solar and wind generated electrons, there should be serious and accelerated coordination of national efforts to make individual citizens independent fuel producers for their battery powered and hybrid plug in electric engine cars for themselves. Corporatism is as antipathetic to democracy as is autocratic socialism and must be defended against through liberation of U.S. individuals from purchases of automotive fuel from the corporate world as soon as possible. It is a mistake to underestimate the serious negative consequences of the inertial power of historical fossil fueled internal combustion engine on U.S. political well beingness as well as environmentally.

The sun actually is said to send as much power to the earth in 2 or 3 minutes each day than the whole human population consumes in a month. Individuals just generally lack the ability to go out front themselves and purchases the entire speculative mixed bag of electric car, fuel cells, hydrogen storage, solar panels, wind generators and so forth. Perhaps most cities in America with wind don't even have a local wind and solar power sales and installation contractor that can put a thousand watt wind generator on a pole on a roof or 500 watts of solar panels for an attractive cost. Solar powered paint, solar power plastic and a variety of solar materials and wind materials should reach even into wall-mart. The non appearance of 600 watt marine hardened wind generators in Wal-Mart for fewer than 300 dollars must be a corporatist block to prevent the consumers from moving toward liberation from international corporate control of the power supply. They keep Gillette's 'The Hot One' shave cream out of stores too and hidden away in a few remote Hudson's Bay Stores running silent and running deep toward the Frankenstinian fracas of expensive power.

Learn more about this author, Gary C. Gibson.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

No

1 of 5

by Allan Taylor

No, solar energy is not the solution to reducing US oil dependency.

Considerable progress has been made in the development and use of solar energy world wide over the last decade. This is a good thing and no doubt will continue. But where does solar energy fit into the overall energy crisis problem?

The production of oil in the US has been declining since about 1975 due to apparent depletion of oil fields and to unfavorable Federal Government intervention and regulation, such as banning offshore drilling and closing down of oil wells. After all, why produce oil yourself when it can be imported more cheaply?

The recent sudden oil price hike to the unheard of $148 a barrel was a wake up call to the US, illustrating its precarious economic and strategic position in the world. The source of much imported oil is from Venezuela and some Middle East Arab countries which are not exactly friendly to the US. They seem to take a delight in taking a swipe at the world's super power!

Today (December 2008), on settling in of the global financial crisis, the price of oil has plummeted to ca $45 a barrel! Why has this happened? Demand for and the use of oil couldn't possibly have dropped over 50% within a month. Maybe credit to buy it has dried up?

The oil exporting countries are none too happy about the situation. For many this is their sole source of foreign currency and their economies are geared to having an oil price much higher, like $70 a barrel or more (Government expenditure always rises to meet income). OPEC has now decided to reduce supply by ca. 5%, in hope of improving the price and income for them. What a shambles the world economy is in!

Americans are rightly concerned about their over dependence on oil imports. What to do about it has produced a wide range of ideas and created businesses which need careful analysis as to their sensibility and viability. The time factor is important as these projects may be short, medium or long term solutions, or non-solutions to the problem (i.e., years to decades for results).

The popular response to the energy crisis today is to move away from the use of fossil fuels and towards "renewable energy", such as solar and wind power and biofuels. This idea is promoted by Obama and the Democrats, and of course the Green Movement.

This is emphasized by Obama's recent appointment for Secretary of Energy, namely Professor Steven Chu, of the University of California, Berkeley, an expert on renewable energy and Nobel Prize co-winner (Physics 1997). Chu is also the Director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory which is a center for research into biofuels and solar energy technologies, which employs 4000 people and has a budget of $650 million (Wikipedia).

If the future development of solar energy is going to make an impact on the energy crisis then it would seem that the choice of Steven Chu as Secretary of Energy is an excellent one. Well done Obama!

However, on reading the fine print of Chu's biography I have my doubts that anything positive will come of it all. A major research objective of the National Laboratory is to develop technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. He is an advocate of alternative energy and believes that it is essential to move away from fossil fuels to combat global warming. In other words, he is a believer of Al Gore's propaganda and the Green's "Theory of Cataclysmic Global Warming". He has to accept this to maintain his research grants. Chu, in my opinion, is "out on a limb and can't get back", and also, he is "barking up the wrong tree".

This does not harbor confidence in many people for the future economy and prosperity of the USA!

So what is the solution to the energy crisis?

Firstly it is necessary to realize that all this demonization of carbon and atmospheric CO2 is unwarranted. It arises from it being an essential part of the Green religious propaganda but has no support from scientific observation. It is simply religious dogma. Like in the Middle Ages it was generally believed that the sun and moon revolved around the earth. The skeptics were imprisoned or burnt at the stake!

In fact, atmospheric CO2 produced by power stations, other industrial plants and automobiles acts as a free fertilizer for the biosphere. We need, of course to remove pollution from sulfur, particulates, and other minor toxic components of combustion, but CO2, like water vapor, is harmless and essential to life on earth. Atmospheric CO2 is NOT a pollutant. The gradual increase observed in atmospheric CO2 over the last 100 years, to 380 ppm, has been very beneficial to mankind by increasing crop yields and rates of growth. At atmospheres below 200 ppm CO2, plants wither, but at 1000 ppm they are quite happy and grow prolifically, such as when used in commercial controlled hothouse environments.

Also, the idea that increasing atmospheric CO2 causes global warming is bunkum, (nor can it make the oceans acidic), as shown by the huge amount of scientific evidence that has accumulated over the last decade. The United Nation's IPCC which promotes this fraudulent scare mongering should be ignored (preferably sued) otherwise the world will descend further into economic chaos. This has already started due to the dodgy financial systems promoted by US bankers and financial "experts" of Wall Street. As President Putin of Russia is reported as saying " You Americans started it all and caused this chaos". However, maybe we can also lay blame on the Europeans (EU) for promoting all the bunkum about global warming and promoting a useless and harmful "Emission Trading Scheme" to remedy this non-problem.

Let's forget about who is to blame and consider what to do about it all.

Once you accept the true state of affairs, that is that CO2 gas is an essential component of the atmosphere for life to exist and that more of it is a good thing then the best path ahead is obvious.

The world economy is totally dependent on oil for transport fuels and petrochemicals which maintain our present high standard of living. I predict that this will be so FOR EVER because the properties of element carbon and its derivatives are so unique that there are no adequate substitutes. Viva Carbon!

Also, I predict that in the year 2100, your descendants will be happily driving a GM? product (or Toyota) automobile fueled by gasoline, diesel or LPG.

Obviously, Professor Chu, the Director of the National Laboratory in Berkeley has got it wrong.

It would be more sensible if the objectives of this high powered laboratory were rotated 180 degrees and they concentrated on how to get "more bangs for the buck" out of fossil fuels.

Forget about Al Gore and his religious mania and get back to science!

For starters, immediately the US should get rid of Government restrictions on drilling for oil both on and off shore, so as to boost domestic production. Ditto impediments on construction of thermal and nuclear power stations. Requirements for utility companies to produce 10 or 20% of power from renewable resources should be abolished, this just being part of the Green's eco-religious nonsense.

Research and development should concentrate on finding better, and more efficient ways of getting hydrocarbon fuels from coal and oil, and of generating electricity, without undue pollution, bearing in mind that atmospheric CO2 is NOT a pollutant.

Let us squeeze the last drop of oil out of the fields we know about. Let's find new oil fields that we suspect exist. Let's query the traditional theory of oil formation. What about the igneous origin of oil? What about the role of meteorite impact on the origin of oil? Let's apply de Bono's invention of lateral thinking to the problem , or are you a Greenie and content to accept the religious bunkum promoted by Al Gore? God help America!

Much needs to be done on defining the enormous reserves of oil shales and sands that exist and which in the latter part of this century I predict will be the main source of our petroleum. How best to mine it? Open cut methods no doubt, but how to process it?

We have coal reserves sufficient to last a couple of hundred years, maybe 1000 years. Natural gas reserves too are extensive. R & D needs to concentrate on how better to extract and produce transport fuels, both natural and synthetic, such as gasoline, kerosene, diesel and propane (LPG) so that in future we can fuel our cars, buses, trucks and airplanes.

I feel sure that this is the sensible way ahead out of the energy crisis.

Concurrently, it is very important to conserve (not waste) the hydrocarbon fuels so produced.

Longer term is the need to address the transport infrastructure of major cities. Ideally, people shouldn't have to drive their cars to work. It is important to have efficient rail, light rail, tram and bus services get people moving around, also having inner city free transport is a good thing. Working at home with a computer link to the office should be encouraged.

I am optimistic for the future because I believe that this bizarre global warming bandwagon will fizzle out within a couple of years. Let's hope so!

Ends

Learn more about this author, Allan Taylor.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.