Newt Gingrich says, “I have a plan to set gasoline prices at $2.50 per gallon.  We have 1.4 trillion barrels of potentially recoverable oil in the United States. Join us to make it happen.” on YouTube, here.

At a rally in Dalton, Georgia, reported here on CNN, he said, “Just tell all your friends we’re setting it up so you can go online at newt.org and you can give one Newt-gallon which is $2.50, or you can give 10 Newt gallons which is $25, or 100 Newt gallons which is $250 or a thousand Newt gallons which is $2500.”

I wonder who’s picture he wants on those “Newt Dollars.”

The Jane Dough blog describes “Today in Improbable Campaign Promises: Gingrich Bus Advertises $2.50/Gallon Gas,” here.

Talking Points Memo, here, says “Newt Gingrich Running On Bitterness and $2.50 Gas.”

Newt doesn’t offer the details, which brings to mind the so-called “investment strategies” of Bernard Madoff and R. Allen Stanford, recently convicted of the largest Ponzi schemes in history. Both consistently refused to explain how they made money; “It’s complicated,” they said, “You wouldn’t understand. But I guarantee that I will make you money. And look at these pictures of me with important people”

In “How to Smell A Rat,” Ken Fisher, of Ken Fisher Investments, with co-author Lara Hoffmans, says, “If a so-called ‘Investment Strategy’ is ‘too complicated to explain’ it’s probably a scam.”

The Chairman of the Communist Party in China can set the value of the currency and price of any commodities in China – because China has a command economy not free markets. The President of the United States, who’s authority, responsibilities, and limits are described in the Constitution, has a lot of power. As Commander In Chief, the President can wage war. But the President can not set the price of commodities traded on free markets.

I don’t believe that Mr. Gingrich has a realistic plan to set the price of gas to $2.50 per gallon.  However, I can think of several ways to appear to cut the price of gasoline from $3.73 to $2.50 per gallon:

1. Devalue the dollar by about 1/3, so that $2.50 “new dollars,” or “Newt Dollars,” as Mr. Gingrich calls them, buys $3.73 worth of gasoline, or other stuff.
2. Use tax subsidies to pay people the difference between $2.50 and the price at the pump. Then, of course, you would have to raise taxes by $1.23 per gallon.
3. Drill Baby Drill.
4. Ration gasoline to artificially cut the demand.

The first two are smoke and mirrors. The third requires massive amounts of clean water and would create massive amounts of toxic by-products. The fourth would work in time of war or disaster. All require what might be termed “Big Government.” All would pour tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to mile winters such as the winter of 2012, climate change, storms like Hurricanes Katrina and Irene, and acidification of the oceans.

There’s one other thing we could try:

Develop fuels derived from sustainably grown plants to legitimately cut demand on fossil fuels.

While this would require “Big Government” to fund research this seems to me to make sense. It is also the mid-term to long term plan of Continental / United, Virgin, Alaska Air, Horizon Air, other carriers, and Boeing (click here for Gizmag or here for Bio-JetFuel Blog). Solazyme (SZYM) and General Electric (GE) are working on the technology.  The US Navy is also working with Solazyme for fuels derived from algae (Business Wire). However, based on Mr. Gingrich’s statement that “We have 1.4 trillion barrels of potentially recoverable oil in the United States,” I suspect that he is playing fast and loose with facts and ginning up support for “Drill, Baby, Drill.”

Another example of the risk of petroleum supply interruption: the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz. While it’s hard to imagine that United States military forces wouldn’t prevail in a conflict with Iran, that confrontation might easily escalate.

Excerpted from Oil Price Would Skyrocket if Iran Closed the Strait of Hormuz by Clifford Krauss  at NYTimes.com:

HOUSTON — If Iran were to follow through with its threat to blockade the Strait of Hormuz, a vital transit route for almost one-fifth of the oil traded globally, the impact would be immediate: Energy analysts say the price of oil would start to soar and could rise 50 percent or more within days.

An Iranian blockade by means of mining, airstrikes or sabotage is logistically well within Tehran’s military capabilities. But despite rising tensions with the West, including a tentative ban on European imports of Iranian oil announced Wednesday, Iran is unlikely to take such hostile action, according tomost Middle East political experts.

United States officials say the Navy’s Fifth Fleet, based in nearby Bahrain, stands ready to defend the shipping route and, if necessary, retaliate militarily against Iran.

Iran’s own shaky economy relies on exporting at least two million barrels of oil a day through the strait, which is the only sea route from the Persian Gulf and “the world’s most important oil choke point,” according to Energy Department analyst

What does this mean? We think it’s most important in understanding how fragile our dependence on oil is – particularly because protecting requires us to ask our military personnel to put themselves in harm’s way. Petroleum dependence – energy policy – shouldn’t be a casus belli. We have other choices – conservation and renewable energy sources. If we reduce our dependence on oil, we win in many ways: reducing risk to our armed forces; cheaper energy, and better environmental and health outcomes.

Reducing the power of the current Iranian ruling elite is a bonus.

Here are my top 10 predictions for 2012. These are less readings of the tea leaves or the entrails of goats and chickens and more simple extrapolations of patterns in progress. Altho that may be the way effective oracles. They just masked their observations with hocus pocus, mumbo-jumbo, and guts.

This list runs a gamut from business and technology to energy, instability in the Middle East, micro-economics in the United States, politics, and not-yet-pop culture.

1.  Apple and IBM will continue to thrive. Microsoft will grow, slightly. Dell and HP will thrash. A share of Apple, which sold for $11 in December, 2001, and $380 in Dec. 2011, will sell for $480 in Dec. 2012.
2. The Price of oil will be at $150 to $170 per barrel in Dec., 2012. The price of gasoline will hit $6.00 per gallon in NYC and California.
3. There will be another two or three tragic accidents in China. 20,000 people will die.
4. There will be a disaster at a nuclear power plant in India, Pakistan, Russia, China, or North Korea.
5. Wal-Mart will stop growing. Credit Unions, insurance coops and Food coops, however, will grow 10% to 25%.
6. The amount of wind and solar energy deployed in the United States will continue to dramatically increase.
7. The government of Bashar Al Assad will fall.
8. Foreclosures will continue in the United States.
9. Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio will resign. Calls for Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from matters involving his wife’s clients will become louder, but Justice Thomas will ignore them. A prominent politician who says “Marriage is between a man and a woman,” or her husband, will be “outed” as gay. President Obama will be re-elected.
10. The authors of Vapor Trails will not win a Nobel Prize for literature. They will not win a “MacArthur Genius Award.” Nor will I despite my work on this blog or “Sunbathing in Siberia” and the XBColdFingers project.

Here are the details … Apple, IBM, Microsoft, Dell, & HP

Apple will continue to reinvent itself, bringing out “the best iPhone, iPad, iPod, iMac and MacBook – ever.” It won’t get Apple TV right, but no one will care. The Mac Mini will very quietly enter the server space, in workgroups, small companies and science and engineering labs. Software “apps” will be developed on iMacs and Minis for use in the field. It will continue grow by creating then exploiting new markets. It may even get Apple TV right one day. IBM will continue to thrive in computer hardware and software engineering and professional services.

As illustrated, their market capitalizations and stock prices will grow 25%. The valuation of Microsoft may grow 20%. Dell, and HP, however, will not grow more than 10% and will remain well below their historical peaks.

Financial analysts will come to regard Microsoft, MSFT, as analogous to an investor owned utility. They will note that it has completed it’s growth cycle and has leveled off, and will expect dividends, and continue to receive them. One way that it could grow dramatically would be to split into a three companies: a server software company, a business desktop software company, and a home software company, but that idea is 10 years old. They didn’t do it then; they won’t do it now.

HP will continue to gyrate without focus. They designed an inferior tablet, compared to the iPad, and an overpriced tablet compared to the Nook, Kindle and Kindle Fire, and face competition in the printer space from Canon, Sharp, and Xerox. HP will, in 2012, cede the laptop and workstation markets to Dell and Lenovo, and lose market share in the server market to Dell and IBM. They won’t care about the laptop and workstation markets because the margins are so thin, except for Apple, but the loss of the server market will be painful because there are margins and services there. HP needs a Lou Gerstener to make the elephant dance, and return to the “HP Way.” Fiorina didn’t do it. She tried to remake HP in her image rather than return to what Hewlett and Packard did that made HP great. I don’t know if Whitman will do it. She won’t do it in a year, and may wind up fired by a Board that is impatient and bored.

Dell will continue to take it’s customers for granted and treat them badly. While this may not rise to the level of the 2008 settlement between the Attorney General of New York and Dell Computer and Dell Financial, (NY AG Dell site here / NY Times coverage here) bad customer service will not get better. Dell is growing by acquisition, which is an expensive way  to gain customers, typically requiring tremendous leverage putting a heavy burden on staff. It will sacrifice morale for statistics.

This will reflected in the stock prices. Apple, and IBM will increase 25% to 480 (AAPL) and $225 (IBM). Microsoft may grow 20%. Dell, and HP will gyrate but end the year where they started. The Dow Jones Industrial Average will increase about 10% to 1320.

The price of oil will end 2012 at $150 to $170 per barrel. The price of gasoline will hit 6.00 per gallon in California and New York City. People will drive less, and when they buy cars, they will buy more efficient new cars.  Increased CAFE standards, click here for overview, 27.5 mpg, since 1990, which Obama will again try to increase, will continue to annoy Republicans and Tea Party faithful, who will buy more efficient vehicles anyway.  Meanwhile fleet efficiencies will climb faster than the CAFE standards mandate as businesses and municipalities factor in fuel and maintenance costs in the life cycle analyses they perform. Parking lot solar energy systems will spread from California, Texas, and New Jersey to other parts of the country. These will feed the grid and charge electric cars driven by commuters, and generate revenue for the owners.

Nuclear Power & Disasters.

There will be a disaster at a nuclear power plant in India, Pakistan, Russia, China, or North Korea. If Russia, we will not learn of it for days. If China or North Korea we will not learn of it for weeks. If India, the government will blame Pakistan. If Pakistan, the government will blame India, the United States, and Israel. This will have the unintended consequence of driving stronger ties between Israel and India. We will see battery powered Tata Motors cars in Israel, as well as Europe. These will be commuter vehicles. They will not displace trains. We will continue to see high speed rail displace inter-city and regional airplane traffic. And trains will continue to grow, particularly in Europe and Asia.  We will look for evidence of leaked tritium at various nuclear power plants, and find it wherever we look.

There will be another two or three tragic accidents in China in which 20,000 people will die. This will take place in a coal mine, an elementary school, a railroad, a housing project or an airport, another example of unregulated totalitarianistic state capitalism.

Wal-Mart v Credit Unions and Food Co-ops.

Wal-Mart will stop growing. Part of this will be due to gas prices, and higher priced poor quality goods from China. People will stop buying cheap crap they need to replace quickly, and start demanding – and paying for – good, durable, locally sourced goods – goods that are good.

Credit Unions, Mutual Insurance Companies and Food Co-Ops will grow 10% to 25%. Credit Unions and Insurance co-ops will grow, in part, as a result of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement. We will also see a slight increase in organic and sustainable farming.  The margins will increase because people will pay more for healthier and better tasting food, and manure will cost less than gas based fertilizers. Ranchers will also begin deploying manure to methane cookers, and will run farm equipment on manure. They – we – will also plant gardens, eat less meat, and get healthier.

Energy  Pundits (funded by coal, methane, and oil industry interests) will continue to call for fracking and carbon sequestration. Politicians will listen oblivious to the facts on water use or pollution costs that will be externalized to future generations. At the same time, conservative politicians will begin to re-assess energy subsidies for coal, oil, methane, and nuclear.

Solar energy capacity in New Jersey and California will increase by about a third, from 400 MW to 600 MW, in Jersey, and from 700 MW to 1 Gigawatt in California. Solar will spread to Florida, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, This will be accompanied by a price drop to below $5.00 per watt, and additional technology breakthroughs in manufacturing and design efficiencies. These phenomena will feed each other in another positive, or reinforcing feedback loop.  Small solar will spread to aboriginal communities in Africa, Australia, South and Central America, and remote parts of Asia.

Iowa gets 20% of it’s electric power from the wind today. This will increase to 25% over 2012.

Wind, hydro, solar hot water, and geothermal will increase by 25% in the Pacific Northwest.

1.0 gigawatts of nameplate capacity in one or two old coal or nuclear plants will be decommissioned, replaced with wind, solar, geothermal, and insulation. This will be done for reasons, having as much to do with economics as the environment.

1.0 million homes in the US will be retrofitted with R25 or better insulation in the walls and attic.

Ground – or water – will be broken as the first offshore wind farms in US waters will be started, either Cape Wind, in the Horseshoe Shoals off Nantucket, or the New Jersey wind farms.

There will also be design breakthroughs in offshore hydro-electric, or marine current generation, and deep geothermal.

The government of Syria will fall, but, as is happening in Egypt, the military will take or hold power. Bashar Al Assad will be killed, like Muammar Gadaffi, by the people at whos heads he has pointed his guns, or he will find refuge in Tehran, Iran, Baghdad, Iraq, or, like Idi Amin, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Iran and Turkey will compete to fill the power vacuum. Since the government of Iran is unstable – the people are hungry for democracy as well as food- this round will go to Turkey. Hamas will continue embrace the Palestinian Authority. It will also continue to call for the destruction of Israel. Without support from Syria, Iran, Iraq, and the Saudis, these cries will grow louder, harsher, more shrill, yet less effective. The Israelis, however, will grow more frightened and will respond with harsher methods. It’s a reinforcing feedback cycle. Hamas will continue to execute people who call for peace with Israel. Calls for divestiture of Israel by the left in the US and Europe will be ignored.

Back in the US, foreclosures will continue, driving property values down. Many will remain unsold as credit will be expensive and speculators will be cautious.  However, as energy prices climb, and as effective insulation can be made from recycled cellulose (newspaper) treated with boric acid, people who have some equity will invest in negawatts, and nega-fuel-watts. And they will plant gardens.

The Republican Party will be divided over calls by Newt Gingrich and business owners for amnesty for undocumented workers (here), calls by Mitt Romney and Wall Street to allow “the foreclosure process to take its course” (here), and by citizens opposed to the appearance of a biases in favor of illegal aliens and Wall Street “Banksters.” People will turn away from the GOP as they will see adherance to Grover Norquist’s pledge as destructive and unpatriotic, and the focus by John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, on cutting taxes for the 1% while raising taxes on the 99%, which people will perceive as a transfer of wealth to the very wealthy. Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who is said to have cost Maricopa County $43 million in lawsuits, will resign over his alleged bias against Latinos. The calls for the impeachment of Clarence Thomas, over conflict of interest for not recusing himself over business dealings of Ginny Thomas – Mrs. Justice Thomas – will get louder. Another two or three married members of the House or Senate will be involved in a ‘sexting’ scandal. There will be a scandal involving a prominent Republican politician or her husband involved in ilicit sexual liasons with a professional sex worker of the same gender. This will be immortalized with “Marriage is between a man and a woman. But with sin; anything goes!” The unemployment rate will drop below 8.2%. Elizabeth Warren will be elected Senator from Massachusetts, the Democrats will regain control of the House. Barak Obama will win re-election to the Presidency.

“Vapor Trails,” by Bob Siegel and Roger Saillant will not win a Nobel Prize for literature. Nor will I despite my work on this blog or “Sunbathing in Siberia” and the XBColdFingers project. “It’s Rainin’ Outside the Cave” featuring “Sunbathing in Siberia” and other songs of peace, love, and global warming will not become a hit record. Neither Emenim nor Kanye West will do a ‘rap’ version. Rianna will not do a duet with me . Lady Gaga will not moan a version of it. Brittney Spears will not ask about covering any of my songs as part of her “Comeback Tour.” Neither will Justin Timberlake, Justin Beiber, Arlo Guthrie or Tom Paxton. Nor do Siegel, Sallant, or myself seem likely to win MacArthur “Genius Grants.” However, we will develop a screenplay of Vapor Trails which will feature some of my songs, and we ink a film deal.

Tweet I will be presenting Beyond Fuel: From Consuming Natural Resources to Harnessing Natural Processes at the Space Coast Green Living Festival, Cocoa Beach, Florida, Sept 17, 2011.  The festival  is sponsored by the Cocoa Beach Surfrider Foundation and the Sierra Club Turtle Coast Group. It will be at the Cocoa Beach Courtyard by Marriott. Haley Sales, (Website / Facebook / Youtube),a local singer / songwriter, will perform.

Our current energy paradigm today is to fuel based. We burn oceans of oil and methane mountains of coal. And there are consequences.  We suffer oil spills, polluted water, mercury, coal mine disasters, nuclear power plant melt-downs, we fight wars …

According to the DoE, in 2010 we burned 1,085,281 thousand short tons of coal and 15,022 thousand short tons of coke (here).

Wind and solar don’t burn fuel. The winds blow, the sun shines, you put a widget in the path of those moving particles in the air or those photons of light and you get electricity – without greenhouse gases, radioactive wastes, toxic wastes, and it costs less. So the question is not ‘Can we meet our energy needs with clean, sustainable renewable energy technologies?” The real question are How? How Much? And How quickly?

And we could do it within 25 Years if we wanted to.

Amory Lovins, of the Rocky Mountain Institute, coined the term “Negawatt” to mean energy you don’t need to buy, as in “The cheapest unit of energy is the one you don’t have to buy.” The next cheapest, the “nega-fuel-watt” is the unit of energy that doesn’t require fuel.

Green Living Festival

Tweet I am presenting “Beyond Fuel: From Consuming Natural Resources to Harnessing Natural Processes,” a discussion of the hidden costs, or “economic externalities,” of nuclear power, coal, and oil, and the non-obvious benefits of wind, solar, marine hydro and efficiency at the Space Coast Green Living Festival, Cocoa Beach, Florida, Sept 17, 2011.

The festival  is sponsored by the Cocoa Beach Surfrider Foundation and the Sierra Club Turtle Coast Group. It will be at the Cocoa Beach Courtyard by Marriott.

Cocoa Beach is about 60 miles east of Orlando and 120 miles north of West Palm Beach. It is easily accessible by air, land, sea and space.

This will be similar to the presentation I recently gave to the NYC Business Sustainability Minded Action Round Table (Click here or here).

It is during hurricane season. Hopefully life will not be imitating art as portrayed in Vapor Trails, by Roger Saillant and Bob Siegel, and the conference will not be cut short by a hurricane of Katrina-like proportions.

courtesy NASA (our tax dollars at work)

  Tweet  It sounds too good to be true:

*   100 gigawatts of offshore wind, $300 Billion,
*   100 gw of landbased wind, $200 Billion,
*   75 gw of solar, $300 Billion,
*   75 gw of geothermal, $200 Billion.
*   200 gigawatt equivalents of efficiency – $200 Billion.
*   100 & Clean, Renewable, Sustaianble Energy: 1.2 Trillion.
*   2.7 Million New Jobs and a Healthy Economy: Priceless!

This is happening, slowly, inexorably, by the “invisible hand of the market.” But it will happen faster if the “invisible mind of the community” acts. This means the government!

In his “General Theory on Employment, Interest, and Money ” John Maynard Keynes argued that the only employer with the resources to create large numbers of jobs and dramatically unemployment is the government. It can take risks entrepreneurs cannot because it can’t go out of business. The Keynsians are not arging that government spending – when done correctly – will create jobs and stimulate the economy. They know it does. The only question is “How many jobs will be created?”

To raise revenues the government can either borrow money or raise taxes. It made sense to cut taxes to eliminate the surplus that Bill Clinton’s Presidency facilitated. And it makes sense to raise taxes to deal with the deficits today. Tax rates are such, particularly for wealthy people, that they can help finance investment in infrastructure projects that will create jobs and position the United States for the future.

Investment in shifting our energy infrastructure from coal, oil, methane and nuclear power to a sustainable framework built around wind, solar, geothermal, bio-fuels, and efficiency – clean, renewable, sustainable energy will, according to Bruce Katz at the Brookings Institution, create 2.7 million jobs. By itself this will lower the unemployment rate from 9.2% to 7.4% and cut unemployment from about 13.5 million people to about 10.8 million people. In addition, it will spur growth in other sectors – cars, housing, entertainment.

But will it work? Even if we can power our economy by a paradigm shift to sustainable energy, can we power our lifestyles with wind, solar, geothermal, renewable fuels and efficiency? Between 2000 and 2010, before Fukushima, Germany cut nuclear from 29% to 20%. Renewables make up the difference. After Fukishima, Angela Merkel announced that Germany will accelerate its transition from nuclear and coal to wind, solar and efficiency technologies. Germany will be at 40% renewable by 2025. They will be at 100% renewables by mid-century.

We can do this here – 100% renewable for about $1.2 Trillion – about the cost of the war in Iraq:

*   100 gigawatts of offshore wind, $300 Billion,
*   100 gw of landbase wind, $200 Billion,
*   75 gw of solar, $300 Billion,
*   75 gw of geothermal, $200 Billion,
*   200 gigawatt equivalents of efficiency – $200 Billion,
*   100 & Clean, Renewable, Sustaianble Energy: 1.2 Trillion,
*   2.7 Million New Jobs and a Healthy Economy, Priceless!

There are environmental impacts – wind turbines make noise, solar energy require various heavy metals in the manufacturing processes. However, these are negligible compared to the arsenic, lead, mercury, uranium, zinc and other heavy metals released when coal is mined, processed, transported and burn, or the tritium and the other radioactive wastes produced by “business as usual” operation of nuclear power.

New renewable energy systems are also cheaper to build than new coal, oil, methane, and nuclear.  New nuclear is probably on the order of $6 to $10 billion per gw, new coal w carbon sequestration is $18 b / gw. The costs of new oil and methane w sequestration are probably on the order of coal.

But … it means the government must act!

Tweet On Ayn Rand, Objectivism, and Climate Change

Ayn  Rand would not “believe” in climate change.  She would try to objectively determine whether the theory correctly modeled the data. While it is legitimate to question both the conclusions of scientists and the methodologies by which data are gathered, denying objective validity of the data, which people who call themselves “Objectivists” are doing with respect to climate science, is well, in a word, anti-Objectivist, at least as described  by Ayn Rand in 1962.

“The essence of my philosophy” she said, is:

1. Metaphysics Objective Reality
2. Epistemology Reason
3. Ethics Self-interest
4. Politics Capitalism

“Translated into simple language, ” she continued, “it would read:

1. “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed” or “Wishing won’t make it so.”
2. “You can’t eat your cake and have it, too.”
3. “Man is an end in himself.”
4. “Give me liberty or give me death.”

Then she elaborated

“Objectivism, holds that

1. Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.
2. Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.
3. Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.
4. The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.”

Statements 1 and 2,  “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed…. Wishing won’t make it so…. Facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears…. Reason is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival” suggest that the objectivists should be taking note of several observable facts:

As shown in the graph at left, from Vincent Gray, Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide, here, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased from 280 parts per million to 390 ppm since 1800. The mass of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased from about 2.63 trillion tons to about 3.67 trillion tons, an increase of about 1.034 trillion tons.  This also corresponds to a decrease of about 282 billion tons in the mass of the earth below the surface, since the carbon in the carbon dioxide was taken from carbon sequestered below the surface in coal mines, oil wells, and gas wells.

While 211 years is one year longer than three times the Biblically defined human lifespan of three score and ten, it is a small fraction of the 5,600 years of recorded history, and the 4.5 billion years the U. S. Geological Survey tells us the earth has been in existence (here).

The non-magic number is 350 ppm carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Above that we will see dramatic changes in climate; below that, the climate in which humans and other contemporaneous species evolved (click here).

The objectivists ought look at this increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and shift from solid, liquid, and gaseous carbon below the surface into atmospheric carbon dioxide in the 211 years, and ask what it means for the earth and the ecologic systems. Will earth become warmer or cooler, or neither? Will there be more storms or fewer? Will the carbon dioxide hold more heat and allow the atmosphere to hold more water vapor?  Will this result in more storms?  Will any storms be stronger or weaker?  Will rivers like the Missouri and the Mississippi flood? Will there be heavier snowfalls? What are the effects of shifting 282 billion tons of mass from below the surface into the atmosphere? And what are the effects of combining 753 billion tons of atmospheric oxygen with 282 billion tons of subsurface carbon in order to create this 941 billion tons of carbon dioxide?

Dramatically increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide, as we have done, from 280 ppm to 390 ppm, may have no effect. But believing they have zero effects, and scientifically proving they have zero effects are two different things. Rand would say “We Must KNOW! We may not simply believe!”

Tweet On May 25, 1961 President John 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.” (Kennedy library and NASA)

Ten years ago, before Sept. 11, Jim Gordon and his team set out to build a small wind farm on the waters on which the young President, his wife, brothers, sisters, nieces and nephews sailed. Size is relative. It’s small compared to a large coal or nuclear power complex. The wind farm will be composed of 130 turbines and produce up to 430 megawatts of power (here).

In 2010 Jim Gordon and Cape Wind, LLC, finally, got their permits to build the wind farm. For a variety of reasons it took longer for Cape Wind, LLC to get the permits to build the wind farm than it took this nation to land a man on the moon and bring him home safely.  Had the wind farm been built by the winter of 2004, Cape Wind would have provided power during the bitter January of ’04, the heat wave of ’05, and every day, especially the coldest days of winter and the hottest days of summer – when the winds are strongest and New Englander’s electricity needs are highest.

It’s also clear, from reading Cape Wind, by Wendy Williams and Robert Whitcomb, that the alliance to “Save Our Sound,” created an anti-wind rogue’s gallery, a bipartisan coalition of moneyed special interests which led Senator Edward M. Kennedy, D-MA, Governor Willard Mitt Romney, R-MA, Senator Ted Stevens, R-AK, Representative Dan Young, R-AK, Sen. Trent Lott, R-MS, Sen. John Warner, R-VA, and very wealthy residents of Cape Cod, including Bill Koch, the late Richard Egan, Rachel “Bunny” Lambert Mellon (Sen. Warner’s ex-mother-in-law), professional environmentalist Robert F Kennedy, Jr. to obstruct the regulatory and the legislative processes and which slowed the development of Cape Wind and offshore wind farms off of the mid-Atlantic and elsewhere.

For them to oppose this project or say “I favor wind power, as long as it’s somewhere else,” was and remains cynical. Given that we have combat troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, that Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006 described the mission in Iraq as a war for oil, was unpatriotic, perhaps traitorous.

Yet another bipartisan coalition rose up to challenge them and support Cape Wind: Ted Roosevelt, IV, who lives on the Cape, Rep. Jim Bass, R-NH, Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-ME, Sen. John McCain, R-AZ, Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-NM, Sen. Pete Domenici, R-NM, Matt Patrick, Massachusetts, Gov. Deval Patrick,  Greenpeace, unions, Fox News’ Sean Hannity. What these politicians have in common is an understanding of the values of energy independence and renewable energy.

Popular Logistics is a policy blog, not a politics blog. However, it’s worth noting that several political campaigns were won in Massachusetts by Democrats who supported Cape Wind, including Matt Patrick, the 5-term Democratic Representative of the 3rd District of Barnstable, Cape Cod, and Deval Patrick who started his 2006 Gubenatorial campaign in front of the Hull, MA, wind turbine.

Mitt Romney, who signed Ted Kennedy’s health care plan into law in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, (also known as Obamacare 1.0) appears to be running for President in 2012. He lost in the 2008 Primary to John McCain. Mr. Romney signed on to the Kennedy-Koch-Egan-Mellon anti-Cape Wind jihad. Americans favor wind power. Will they support Romney in 2012?

Scott “Mitt-Lite” Brown, said (here) “While I support the concept of wind power as an alternative source of energy, Nantucket Sound is a national treasure.”  Massachusetts voters favor Cape Wind 70 to 30. Will they support Brown in his re-election campaign in 2012?  The Statue of Liberty is a “National Treasure,” as is the Constitution.  I last visited Cape Cod when I was 7. Nantucket Sound is not a “National Treasure.” Getting America off coal, oil, natural gas, and nuclear power, moving to clean, renewable, sustainable energy means our children and grandchildren will enjoy our national treasures.

In their book Williams and Whitcomb suggest that Senator Kennedy may have realized that he had made a bad decision in opposing Cape Wind, but that for a variety of reasons he refused to back down. They may be right. While I think Kennedy was wrong, I can’t speak to whether he came to that understanding. As I noted on this blog, back in August, 2009, (here) President Obama said of Ted Kennedy,”His ideas and ideals are stamped on scores of laws and reflected in millions of lives: in seniors who know new dignity; in families who know new opportunity; in children who know education’s promise; and in all who can pursue their dream in an America that is more equal and more just, including myself.”

Obama said “More equal and more just,” but he didn’t say “perfect.” America is not perfect. It is nation of men and women governed by the rule of law. The laws are not perfect, and neither are the men and women who make, enforce and interpret the laws.

Our energy policy is electricity flows when people flip a switch. Most of that electricity comes from burning fossil fuels and harnessing nuclear fission. We can pretend that the carbon we are pumping into the oceans and the atmosphere will have no effect, that we have unlimited supplies of fossil fuels, and uranium, that all the waste from coal mining, processing, transporting, and burning, and all the radiation leaks from nuclear plants (and radioactive waste from coal) are trivial or routine. Or we can get real. The choice is between coal, oil, methane, and nuclear, or wind, solar, tidal, and geothermal. I choose wind, solar, tidal and geothermal; for myself, for my backyard, not just for people who are my equal in the eyes of the law, whether they have more or less money than me.

–

Index to the series that explores Offshore Wind and Politics:

1. Cape Wind, Leadership and Vision, here.
2. Why Cape Wind Still Matters, here.
3. Ted Roosevelt, IV, on Cape Wind (coming soon).

Regular readers know that when Matthew L.  Wald‘s byline appears in The New York Times, we pay attention.  In “Obama Considers Tapping Oil Reserve, ” we suspect that space considerations forced the omission of certain important background details. First, excerpts from Mr. Wald’s piece:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is considering tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in response to rapidly rising gasoline prices brought on by turmoil in the Middle East, the White House chief of staff, William M. Daley, said on Sunday.

“It’s something that only has been done on very rare occasions,” Mr. Daley said on “Meet the Press” on

Image by Infrogmation via Wikimedia Commons.

NBC, adding, “It’s something we’re considering.”

Administration officials have sent mixed signals about the possibility of opening the reserve, which would add supply to the domestic oil market and tend to push down prices.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu said on Friday that the administration was monitoring prices, but he has been reluctant to endorse more aggressive steps.

“We don’t want to be totally reactive so that when the price goes up, everybody panics, and when it goes back down, everybody goes back to sleep,” he said.

A few days earlier, Mr. Chu said the administration was watching the situation closely, but it expected oil production that had been lost in Libya would be made up by production elsewhere.

Administration officials continue to emphasize the critical need for long-term steps to reduce oil use, like improving the fuel economy of cars and promoting battery-powered vehicles.

But recently, five Senate Democrats have called for opening the reserve, which is stored in four salt domes in Texas and Louisiana. And on Feb. 24, three House Democrats from New England, where oil is used to heat homes, wrote to Mr. Obama saying that while exporters could increase production, “they also profit from oil price spikes and therefore have little incentive to quickly respond with the increased supply needed to calm markets.”

“We don’t want to be totally reactive so that when the price goes up, everybody panics, and when it goes back down, everybody goes back to sleep,” he said.

A few days earlier, Mr. Chu said the administration was watching the situation closely, but it expected oil production that had been lost in Libya would be made up by production elsewhere.

Administration officials continue to emphasize the critical need for long-term steps to reduce oil use, like improving the fuel economy of cars and promoting battery-powered vehicles.

But recently, five Senate Democrats have called for opening the reserve, which is stored in four salt domes in Texas and Louisiana. And on Feb. 24, three House Democrats from New England, where oil is used to heat homes, wrote to Mr. Obama saying that while exporters could increase production, “they also profit from oil price spikes and therefore have little incentive to quickly respond with the increased supply needed to calm markets.”

In recent days, prices for the American benchmark crude, West Texas Intermediate, have exceeded $100 a barrel. Oil for April delivery settled at $104.42 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange on Friday.

The average price for a gallon of unleaded gasoline was $3.50 on Sunday, AAA reported, up from $3.12 a month earlier. Gasoline prices routinely rise as the weather turns warmer and people drive more, leading some experts to predict gasoline at $4 a gallon this summer.

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve was established in response to the Arab oil embargo of 1973-4. It was tapped most recently in September 2008 in response to Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. At that time, the Energy Department arranged “exchanges” with oil companies whose normal supplies had been interrupted; the oil companies later made restitution in oil. The last time the government sold oil from the reserve to address supply interruptions was in 2005, after Hurricane Katrina.

Sales were also made in January 1991 to calm global markets as the United States invaded Kuwait, which had been occupied the previous year by Iraq.

The government suspended oil purchases when prices were approaching a peak in 2008, before the recession began. In that case, members of Congress argued that acquisitions for the reserve were contributing to higher prices, harming consumers.
A version of this article appeared in print on March 7, 2011, on page B6 of the New York edition.

What’s missing? Here are a few things that should, we think, be in a sidebar, or otherwise at hand so the reader can make sense of this:

1. How many barrels (and of what grades) are in the reserve?
2. What’s our average daily consumption?
3. For the arithmetic-challenged, how many days’ supply are in the strategic reserve?

Here’s another set of questions:

1. What are the easiest ways to reduce consumption? Fedex, for instance, is using hybrids. The New York City Police Department has purchased about 400 hybrids; so far as we know, the United States Postal Service is not yet using hybrid vehicles. About 2/3 of NYC’s yellow cab fleet are hybrids – and many of those without government intervention, but merely because they’re cheaper to operate.But organizations which use many vehicles, use them many hours a day and therefore are always retiring and replacing them, are well-situated to take advantage of the switch to hybrids.
2. Heating. We’re far away from exploiting all the potential in aggressively insulating residential and commercia  l buildings.
3. Solar and Wind. We’ve still got lots of opportunities here.
4. Green Roofs and Solar Roofs. These prevent buildings from heating up in the summer, reducing air conditioning power needs.Those are just a few of the obvious examples.

Let’s suppose that we’ve got a thirty-day supply at current consumption levels. If – to make the math simpler – we reduce consumption by 50% – our strategic reserve would last for 60 days. And the less oil we need to import, the more we can replace petroleum with domestic renewable energy and reduce consumption, the less vulnerable we’ll be to  energy extortion, or sudden price spikes.

However, the more readily we use and replenish the strategic reserve, we anesthetize ourselves from the economic pain. There’s a moral problem here: it’s one thing to let market forces push big fleet operators towards more efficient vehicles. They can stand the pain, even if they’re only replacing vehicles on normal fleet replacement schedules. But small business owners and families – replacing vehicles is a big economic move.

However, if it’s the big groups of vehicles that make the change first (police departments, taxis, rental car fleets), by the time they replace the first group of hybrids, that will mean that the market in second-hand cars will contain a large proportion of higher-efficiency cars.

Perhaps the best strategy is Robert Reich’s – reduce income taxes for families exactly as much as the excise taxes on petroleum-based fuels are raised. If a family is not in a position to make the switch immediately, the income tax reduction should cover the increase in net fuel price (pump price plus taxes). In Reich’s scheme, households not ready to make the switch come out even. But families which own petroleum-fuel-based businesses (a taxi, delivery vehicles) will have additional incentives to make the switch.

The risk of using the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is it serves as an analgesic for the pain of elevated oil prices – particularly sudden ones.  So – let’s increase it in two ways: (1) by simply adding to the number of barrels in the reserve at a moment when prices are low; (2) by reducing consumption, we can increase the effective supply in the reserve.

We note that this piece has a number of unsourced statements; please check back later; we hope to have remedied the situation by the end of the day

The Deepwater Horizon spill. Sunday, June 13, 2010, AP Photo/Dave Martin

Part 6 in a Series that began after Earth Day (1 Fossil Fuels and a Walk on the Moon, 2 Drill Baby Drill or Drill Baby Oops, 3 The Magnitude, 4 One Month After, 5 Like Chernobyl?)

Last month I wrote on Popoular Logistics “BP and the government say … 5,000 barrels per day is reaching the surface and most of the oil – 80%  to 90% – is below the surface. So I think it’s on the order of 25,000 to 50,000 barrels per day.” (click here)

This was a “back of the envelope” reflection of NPR’s analysis, reported May 14 (click here) that the spill was 70,000 barrels per day, with a margin of error of 14,000 barrels – so maybe as low as 56,000 Barrels per Day and maybe as much as 84,000 Barrels per Day.

In their article “Deepwater Horizon round up: it’s worse than you think (again) – June 11, 2010,” Nature.com noted “At the end of May the official estimate was raised again to between 12,000 and 19,000 barrels day. Now the Flow Rate Technical Group has produced a bevy of new estimates ranging from 25,000 to 40,000. Crucially, legal liability established for a spill can be linked to its size.” (click here) and here for the Flow Rate Technical Group.

It looks like I’m in good company. But I’d prefer to be wrong.

I also note that this is “business as usual” for BP and other fossil fuel companies, and compared it to the accident at the Kingston Steam Plant, 12/22/08, the Upper Big Branch Mine, 4/5/10, the Exxon Valdez, and Chevron-Texaco’s alleged dumping of 18 BILLION Gallons

of oil process waste in Ecuador between 1964 and 1990  (click here).

It is obvious to me that we MUST move to a post-carbon economy.

• 100 gigawatts – offshore wind, $300 Billion
• 100 gigawatts – land based wind $200 Billion
• 50 gigawatts – solar $200 Billion (price is going down)
• 50 gigawatts – marine current – $200 Billion.
• Clean Energy Infrastructure: $900 Billion.
• Save the World: Priceless.

Emergency phone numbers.

* Report oiled shoreline or request volunteer information: (866) 448-5816
* Submit alternative response technology, services or products: (281) 366-5511
* Submit your vessel for the Vessel of Opportunity Program: (281) 366-5511
* Submit a claim for damages: (800) 440-0858
* Report oiled wildlife: (866) 557-1401
* Medical support hotline:  (888) 623-0287

The Series, following “Earth Day for the Future”

(Here)

1. Fossil Fuels and a Walk on the Moon (Here)
2. Drill Baby, Drill – or Drill Baby, Oops (Here)
3. The Magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon Spill (Here)
4. One Month After The Spill BP Siphoning 3,000 Barrels Per Day (Here)
5. Deepwater Horizon – the Chernobyl of Deep Water Drilling? (Here)
6. Deepwater Horizon: 40,000 Barrels Per Day or 70,000? (Here)