Re: Energy strategy

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Greg Wood" <ghwood () gmail com>
Date: December 14, 2008 5:42:16 PM EST
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Energy strategy

Dave,
Mr. Potter's suggestions are all reasonable (though of differing
degrees of technical and political challenge) if we assume we're
starting with the best possible land use plans (housing,
manufacturing, agriculture) and transportation infrastructure. But we
are not. So, IMO, these kinds of suggestions are akin to suggesting we
grow/climb taller trees to reach the moon.

That is, they miss the fundamental (and much more difficult/important)
challenge we face, which is to rethink how we plan and build our
cities and towns, and how and where we manufacture/grow and distribute
our food and products to be less energy intensive in the first place.
The truth is, most of the policies and planning that shapes our
current physical infrastructure assumes cheap energy and works best
with relatively low population densities. A quick look at the 16-lane
freeways of Los Angeles (or any sprawling city around the world) shows
our current model of cars as large portion of our transportation mix
does not scale.

And, we'll likely gain a lot of side benefits by considering more
fundamental changes to how we transport. For example, recent studies
show a correlation between average car commuting and obesity.
Designing cities and towns (and other policies) that promote (or even
permit!) walking as a viable part of the transportation mix is
critical, but not (yet) common, in suburbia.

I do agree this is a unique opportunity for new leadership and to
establish a new model and I detect indications that the Obama team is
considering the challenge we face at this level.

I'd be extremely interested in the views of others on IP because in
many ways, I think, this issue is analogous to the discussions now
underway about rethinking the Internet architecture.

Best,
-Greg

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Farber" <dave () farber net>
To: "ip" <ip () v2 listbox com>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 5:12:57 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [IP] Energy strategy



Begin forwarded message:

From: "Robert J. Potter" <rjpotter () rjpotter com>
Date: December 14, 2008 3:17:19 PM EST
To: <dave () farber net>
Cc: "File" <rjpotter () rjpotter com>
Subject: Energy strategy
Reply-To: <RJPotter () rjpotter com>

Dave,
Here is a paper I've written to address the energy crisis.
Perhaps it might be of interest to your IPs.


BARACK OBAMA
CAN SOLVE THE ENERGY CRISIS
by
Robert J. Potter

There is a way to solve our energy crisis with strong leadership.
Either candidate could have done it, and Barack Obama should do it.
If our rich and prosperous country's President defines the strategy,
implements the tactics and requires results, he could free the USA of
dependence on foreign oil, clean the atmosphere, lower the cost of
mobile fuel and enrich our national technology all simultaneously.
Barack Obama must recognize that this problem is a national priority……
equivalent to the space race with the USSR and the development of the
atomic bomb to win World War II.

The critical steps are:

1.         Evolve autos from gasoline/diesel to hybrid to plug-in
hybrid.
2.         Develop a battery that can run 200 miles on a 10-minute
recharge.
3.         Strengthen America's electrical distribution system.
4.         Recharge cars in garages, public places and service stations.
5.         Build nuclear power plants to enlarge the supply of
electricity.
6.         Use all alternate sources of energy, i.e., wind, natural
gas, solar.

America is a representative democracy, and there are many forces on
our President-elect.  However, this is a time when we need the firm
hand of a strong leader like Barack Obama, who can take command and is
not dependence on consensus to mobilize our nation to generate
abundant energy.  The key is to define a new fuel and vehicle system
to serve affluent civilizations during the 21st century without being
dependent on exhaustible or foreign resources.

The fundamental strategy is to evolve to an electric transportation
system and an electricity-based refueling infrastructure.

The internal combustion engine that powers our cars and trucks is 100
years old.  Our organization of gasoline stations is effective and
well established with over 160,000 service stations throughout the USA
on interstate highways and in our cities, which should be made
obsolete in the twenty-first century. A swift transition to electric
cars and the ability to conveniently recharge them is the best energy
policy for the future.

The first step is to require or convince auto manufacturers to swiftly
evolve from gasoline and diesel engines to hybrid electric and then to
fully electric vehicles within ten years.

The second step is to enable our vehicles to be recharged in our
homes, parking lots, parking garages and service stations.  The
electrical distribution system in the USA can be expanded to provide
capacity to gasoline stations, evolving them into recharging
stations.  Parking spaces in the public and private environment can
also have a plug-in charging system.

The major challenge is to develop a battery system that is small,
light and rechargeable in 10 minutes for a 200-mile capacity, even
though most drivers refuel often and do not require that much range.
This technology is not available today, but American ingenuity,
entrepreneurship and invention can make it possible.  We are
accustomed to recharging devices and equipment from cell phones to
electric drills.  The problem is that the battery technologies used in
our laptops, iPods and cameras are not adequate for automobiles.  The
technical challenge is clear and can be solved.

Here are two historic examples to suggest that this task can be done.
Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the Manhattan Project, to build an
atomic bomb based on the theories of a dozen or so scientists.  In
just a few years, creative determined people defined a complex new
technology and built an entire industry to isolate the materials for
the first few atomic bombs.  The 'atomic bomb industry' was as a large
as the domestic automobile industry at that time.  They did it
secretly.  It was a life or death race with the Nazis to build the
atomic bomb.

Secondly, John F. Kennedy said, "I believe that this nation should
commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of
landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth."  The
complex technology development was successful because of determined
leadership and an unambiguous target: win the race with Russia to land
a man on the moon.

Americans respond to competition.  Now, Barack Obama must realize the
threat to our economy and lifestyle to give him the motivation and
authority to launch an all out effort to win energy superiority.

In the 21st century, the President of the USA can authorize and
prioritize the development of a suitable battery and recharging
system, an easier task than the two examples above.  It will require a
well-organized and adequately funded development program.

The electricity will come from the current electrical generation
system of waterfalls, coal plants, wind farms, solar panels, gas
turbines, and supplemented by an extended network of nuclear power
plants.  The increased requirement for electricity will be satisfied
without polluting the environment, will not contribute to global
warming, and will not generate complex carbon waste.

If the consumer charges his battery at night in his home, using off-
peak electricity, his cost would be about $2.00 for a full charge.  If
he recharges during the day in a parking lot or garage over a multi-
hour period, he would pay about $4.00.  If he wants a high-speed
charge from an on-the-road recharging station, he would pay about
$15.00 for 200 miles.  The high-speed charge of 40-kilowatt-hours will
require 1,000 to 2,000 amperes at 110 to 220 volts, a significant
upgrade to our electrical system.

We need safety regulations, patents and all of the checks and balances
of our federal system.  Nevertheless, Barack Obama will have the power
to fund and keep the transition on track, not to satisfy his own
needs, but rather to benefit the citizens of the USA.

As President, Barack Obama cannot be reckless.  He must require the
highest standards of safety.  Today's scientists and engineers
understand how to expand Thomas Edison's electrical distribution
system and can do it.  Our leader would make the grid safe and less
vulnerable to blackouts.  An appropriate amount of analysis would be
encouraged but political bickering and bureaucratic delays should not
be allowed to stand in the way of the development of a process to free
the USA of foreign oil, high prices and irrational energy tactics.

Barack Obama can change our driving patterns more dramatically than
the Interstate Highway System did.  In 1956, President Eisenhower and
the Congress had the wisdom to launch the Interstate Highway System,
which replaced the hodge-podge of state highways.


Over these last 52 years, we have invested the equivalent of $425
billion in 2006 dollars developing the infrastructure of our highways
so we can travel by automobile or ship freight by truck throughout the
USA on a sophisticated well planned, nicely managed, organized network
of high capacity highways. Virtually 100 percent of the construction
and maintenance costs were funded through fuel taxes collected by
states and the federal government, and tolls collected on toll roads
and bridges.

Now the time has come to expand the electrical distribution system to
power our vehicles and provide an equally elegant organized electrical
distribution system to service stations, parking lots, homes and
shopping centers.  The electrical distribution system also has to
connect the various sources of electricity such as coal burning
plants, hydroelectric power stations, nuclear power plants, wind
farms, solar thermal arrays and semiconductor solar cells.  All of
these power sources are different in cost, structure and capacity.
However, the beauty of electricity is that when we plug in our
television sets, kitchen appliances or light bulbs, we do not care,
nor does it matter, where or how the electricity was generated.  A
kilowatt-hour from a wind farm and a kilowatt-hour from Niagara Falls
are indistinguishable.

It is not necessary to build the entire supply grid in one step, nor
is it necessary to build the distribution system to recharge stations,
parking lots and homes simultaneously.  Just as the Interstate Highway
System evolved over five decades and just as fiber optics long
distance communications lines expanded over two decades, the same is
true of an elegant powerful electrical distribution system.  It can
grow to meet the needs along with safeguards to make it safe,
reliable, useful, cost effective and efficiently managed.

If we are going to do things that have never been done before, we must
use methods which have never been used before.  Powerful leaders have
done this before.  Now is the time for President Barack Obama to
define and drive a superior mobile energy system into place for all
Americans.



TEL  (972) 869-8270
FAX  (972) 869-6593
CELL (972) 489-5400
E-MAIL RJPotter () RJPotter com
www.RJPotter.com

Robert J. Potter
R. J. Potter Company
Williams Square, Suite 360
5215 N. O'Connor Boulevard
Irving, Texas 75039



Copyright (c)2008 Robert J. Potter







-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com