Ethanol from Wood Chips and Switch Grass...God Help Us
I see the wisdom in a "don't sweat the small stuff" attitude. Being able to understand what is at the core of an issue and to marshall your energies on real priorities is a hallmark of a good leader. Maybe that is how the White House approached the SOTU address - stand firm on the critical issues of Iraq, fighting terrorism, taxes; and, for the rest, just throw out any old nice-sounding political garbage. After all, you can't be a bulldog on everything. That has to explain the rubbish that Bush spouted about America's addiction to oil and the need for ethanol from wood chips and switch grass.
We need energy diversity and Bush might have thought that was what he was promoting, but that is not what he actually achieved. He fed the large amorphous, unknowledgable, anti-hydrocarbon blob. He may have thought he said that we are too reliant on foreign oil and have not made adequate progress on alternatives to oil, but what the world heard, his adversaries especially, was "oil is bad, very bad." Now, I understand the political impossibility of getting up before the Congress and the nation and saying "Oil rocks. It's cheap, abundant, can propel thousands of pounds of metal and humans long distances, and saves us from having to kill whales or farm millions of acres just to feed horses." But the American people inherently understand this despite the pervasive harping and bad-mouthing of our hydrocarbon-driven society. Thus, you can stand before it and say "like it or not, we use alot of oil, and until the day comes when we have alternatives, we'll be buying alot of it from murderous, socialist jerks like Hugo Chavez when we could be supplying ourselves and employing more of our own folks. Seems pretty obvious, so let's get cracking up in ANWR while we are doing the other smart things, like mandating ultra-low-sulphur diesel or encouraging hybrid technology, that take time to have an impact. It doesn't have to be black or white, we can have a shades of gray energy policy." But no, what does he do, but throw out "Americans are addicited to oil" which is straight out of an enviromental absolutist's playbook. And the one policy proposal to go with this indictment...more ethanol. No nuance no reasoned approach. Most shockingly, no attempt to sensibly frame a complex issue, of which he clearly has extensive knowledge. Bam! Oil bad, more ethanol.
He didn't just punt, he gave upper hand to the legions of radical people and ideas that are at odds with a sensible, free-market driven energy policy. Our energy market is under assault from all sides and the repercussions on the economy and on society are enormous. By legitimizing the demonization of oil he failed to stop the dangerous momentum that anti-free market forces have gained and hastened bad things.
We need energy diversity and Bush might have thought that was what he was promoting, but that is not what he actually achieved. He fed the large amorphous, unknowledgable, anti-hydrocarbon blob. He may have thought he said that we are too reliant on foreign oil and have not made adequate progress on alternatives to oil, but what the world heard, his adversaries especially, was "oil is bad, very bad." Now, I understand the political impossibility of getting up before the Congress and the nation and saying "Oil rocks. It's cheap, abundant, can propel thousands of pounds of metal and humans long distances, and saves us from having to kill whales or farm millions of acres just to feed horses." But the American people inherently understand this despite the pervasive harping and bad-mouthing of our hydrocarbon-driven society. Thus, you can stand before it and say "like it or not, we use alot of oil, and until the day comes when we have alternatives, we'll be buying alot of it from murderous, socialist jerks like Hugo Chavez when we could be supplying ourselves and employing more of our own folks. Seems pretty obvious, so let's get cracking up in ANWR while we are doing the other smart things, like mandating ultra-low-sulphur diesel or encouraging hybrid technology, that take time to have an impact. It doesn't have to be black or white, we can have a shades of gray energy policy." But no, what does he do, but throw out "Americans are addicited to oil" which is straight out of an enviromental absolutist's playbook. And the one policy proposal to go with this indictment...more ethanol. No nuance no reasoned approach. Most shockingly, no attempt to sensibly frame a complex issue, of which he clearly has extensive knowledge. Bam! Oil bad, more ethanol.
He didn't just punt, he gave upper hand to the legions of radical people and ideas that are at odds with a sensible, free-market driven energy policy. Our energy market is under assault from all sides and the repercussions on the economy and on society are enormous. By legitimizing the demonization of oil he failed to stop the dangerous momentum that anti-free market forces have gained and hastened bad things.
posted by Donny Baseball at 2:20 PM
4 Comments:
Great points indeed. Plus hydrogen puts us back on the bottom of the learning curve. We are better off making incremental improvements in our use of hydrocarbons. Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel and the new, highly efficient diesel engines that will be hitting the US in 2006 and beyond are great starts. More diesel engines on the roads will spur the development of biodiesel too. We can pull off similar improvements in traditional mogas. That's where the research dollars should be spent.
I don't know the exact switchover, I want to say June, but the EPA is targeting ULSD (<15 ppm) to be 95% of the transport diesel fuel sold here by the end of 2006. I think that engines modifications for ULSD must be incorporated by 2007. Mercedes and BMW have annouced diesel models for the 2007 model year. I believe that a few other manufacturers are doing likewise. The third pillar of diesel technology (after refining and engines) is filtration. I don't know of any mandates on the filter producers, but the technology there is improving too and there appears to be a future in it as witnessed by BASF's huge overpay offer for Englehard.
I don't know the exact switchover, I want to say June, but the EPA is targeting ULSD (<15 ppm) to be 95% of the transport diesel fuel sold here by the end of 2006. I think that engines modifications for ULSD must be incorporated by 2007. Mercedes and BMW have annouced diesel models for the 2007 model year. I believe that a few other manufacturers are doing likewise. The third pillar of diesel technology (after refining and engines) is filtration. I don't know of any mandates on the filter producers, but the technology there is improving too and there appears to be a future in it as witnessed by BASF's huge overpay offer for Englehard.
Zoltan-
N.B. Peter Huber writing in today's WSJ Op-Ed page, makes your point about the false promise of hydrogen.
Post a Comment
<< Home