Energy Future of Earth - Essay Example

My 3 November 2007 Our Energy Future Government investment in hydrogen technology is the most promising way to provide a secure energy future for the United States, and in turn, for the world. By developing a hydrogen economy, we will have abundant energy to fuel all of the scientific advances and universe explorations to come as our civilization moves from the space and information ages into an even more energy-intensive age. With hydrogen power, we will once and for all completely sever our deadly dependence on foreign oil. Cars with hydrogen fuel cells and plants with hydrogen generators will enable us to finally reverse climate change and environment destruction, as well as rediscover clean air. Without developing renewable energy sources such as hydrogen, we face a probable future of global war over the last remaining oil. We also will aggravate global warming and the environmental pollution, possibly to irreversible levels. There is also potential for the global economy to collapse, sending our civilization into virtual decline. Most of these events are already beginning to occur, and will worsen if no new path of action is taken. In order to avoid this crisis our world is heading towards, the National Issues Forums (NIF) booklet “The Energy Problem: Choices for an Uncertain Future” suggests three possible solutions to our present energy situation. The first approach is to utilize our national untapped reserves of oil, natural gas and coal. This approach seems to merely prolong our problem of needing to find long-term alternative energy, at best buying a few more years until the world’s supply of oil is too low to avoid major global crises. This approach also continues to pollute the environment, and will destroy the some of our country’s last fragile pristine environments, such as the Alaskan wilderness. The second approach is to use more wind, solar and nuclear power. Wind and solar power may not be able to meet our high demand for energy. Nuclear power is dangerous and dirty, requiring the disposal of radioactive waste that destroys environments. Wind and solar power have the advantage that people can install this form of energy production locally in order to become more energy independent. The great part of this approach is that we can finally work to reverse climate change. When hydrogen power is also included, these renewable energy sources make the greatest choice (minus nuclear power, unless a way is found to safely clean it up). The third approach is to use less energy and use energy more efficiently. This solution is wise to a point, but soon begins to counter the American way of life, when our activities begin to be scaled back in order to conserve energy. It is hard to see how we can continue to try to advance as a civilization, in particular, to develop new technologies and explore the universe, if energy use continues to be seen as too expensive and if an increasing array of activities are viewed as indulgent expenditures. It is also oppressive to force people to cut back on consumption, and many people may simply not accept it. Even if people were somehow forced to cut back, the gains may be offset by a rapidly developing global population explosion. Development and population growth are projected to double global energy demand by 2050 (Crabtree "The Hydrogen Economy"). In the long run, relying solely on cutting back energy seems to lead us backwards to the dark age instead of forward to the great unknown future. The investment in a hydrogen economy would bring the greatest payoff for our nation. Hydrogen fuel cells utilize water and have clean water as a waste product; "the only thing coming out of their tailpipe is pure water vapor" (Pogue "The Future"). As such, hydrogen has the potential to become a cheap, clean and reliable energy source. Hydrogen fuel cells and the development of hydrogen infrastructure should be supported by government funding. Initial investment into these technologies will pay off when hydrogen, wind and solar power technology become more efficient. One of the main impediments to developing a hydrogen economy is the problem of the need to develop both fueling stations and vehicles at the same time in order for either to financially survive, known as the chick-and-egg problem (Lavelle "Biodiesel"). This impediment to the hydrogen development can only be broken by finding ways to make the hydrogen infrastructure cost-effective, possibly by federal intervention. Other impediments to hydrogen development include how the process of extracting hydrogen from water also usually requires electricity, which in many instances comes from polluting coal-fired plants. Hydrogen can also be extracted from water through a chemical process, which may not be as efficient as using electricity to strip the hydrogen atoms off the oxygen atoms. The flammability of hydrogen is also sometimes discussed, and safety procedures would need to be developed. All of these problems could be conceivably surmounted within the near future, especially with government support and funding. The main technology needed to utilize hydrogen fuel cells is in place. The process of extracting hydrogen from water has been known a long time. Companies such as H2Gen in Virginia are currently producing and selling hydrogen generators to industries (Gillies "Generating Hydrogen"). BMW is the first company to create a fleet of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (Pogue "The Future"). And other high-tech solutions to "produce, store and distribute hydrogen" (Lavelle "Biodiesel") are in development. Whether this development can be accomplished in the time frame our nation needs is a consideration. There are some estimates that it will take "from 5 to 15 years more -- to affordably, effectively integrate fuel cells into the global mass market for cars and trucks" (Brown "Its Still Not..."). However, it is possible these integration time intervals can be shortened with government policy such as was undertaken during the Manhattan Project. Steps toward this goal could be made through the development of an government energy research agency, considered recently by congress. Although, creation of such an agency could drain money needed for other energy projects, according to Sandy Thomas, co-founder of H2Gen (Hammer "Congress Weighs"). At Sandia National Laboratories, research into alternatives to gasoline-fueled internal combustion engines is currently being conducted (White "Big Brains"). They are considering ethanol and other biofuels, but the technology to make it commercially viable is atleast a decade away. The drawbacks to using biofuels such as ethanol is that it does not use the existing pipeline, and ethanol also requires a large amount of water that has lately become a scarce resource in many parts of the U.S. Sandias research into hydrogen cars has considered storing hydrogen on board a vehicle both in liquid and solid forms. Liquid hydrogen must be stored super cold. Refueling a solid hydrogen tank is a heat intensive process. Sandia is also experimenting with many different types of tanks, catalysts, and ways to increase the efficiency of gasoline-powered cars. The biggest hurdle to all of these technologies, however, is competing with how cheap the old technology has become. The development of hydrogen technologies may also spur the development of other renewable energy sources such as wind and solar. A mix of these technologies could conceivably lead to a zero emissions way of life. Currently, Europe is leading the world in "reducing its energy dependence and in taking action to counteract global climate change" (Hill "5 Myths"). Europe is investing in a mix of windmills, solar arrays, hydrogen fuel cells, tidal power stations, and energy-saving buildings. The changes Europe are making are both high-tech and low-tech, such as creating more pedestrian paths in order to cut consumption. The E.U. has goals to make renewable energy a large part of their energy supply and to reduce carbon emissions in the near future. They are proving that the changes towards a renewable energy economy can be made, an example that the U.S. could follow. It is more probable that we will reach the objective of developing hydrogen if the public does not continue in denial about global warming, a condition that persists (Begley "The Truth"). There is also some debate about whether nuclear energy is needed in conjunction with hydrogen technology ("The Global Warming Debate"), in order to produce the energy needed to extract hydrogen. But these alternatives are being blocked by what Begley calls the denial machine: a group of think-tanks opposed to the idea of global warming ("The Truth"). Possibly the best advantage of hydrogen is the fact that it will be produced domestically, even locally or in peoples homes. Breaking away from our dependence on foreign countries to fuel our way of life will greatly increase our national security. This is especially true of our volatile relationship with Middle Eastern countries. It is very conceivable that ending our need for oil will also end our nations involvement in current Middle Eastern wars. Diffusing Middle East tension can bring greater peace to the entire world. Continuing to rely on oil will lead us further into global conflict. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that U.S. troops engaged in such large numbers in the oil-rich nation of Iraq are fighting the first oil war of what could be many in order to preserve our American way of life. For people that do not believe the war in Iraq is an oil war, try to imagine why our troops have not invaded Darfur to protect the people and set up a democratic government there (or North Korea, etc.) or why, if this was a war against terrorism, the U.S. didnt focus on Afghanistan and Bin Laden. The difference between these countries is oil and oil supply routes. During a time of oil shortages exporting nations will generate animosity over their profiteering, making international conflict more likely (Heinberg "How to Avoid..."). If our oil supply is to continue to be protected, this will become a more costly venture in human lives as oil supply dwindles and the oil-rich Middle East increasingly wields more power over the last reserves. We are reaching the peak of oil and global oil discovery rates are in decline. It is clear we cannot continue on the path we are on; "only one new barrel of oil is being discovered for every four that are being extracted and used" (Heinberg "How to Avoid..."). There is debate about when the oil peak will be reached, with most arguments debating whether we are in the oil peak now or if it will occur in a couple decades. But there is no doubt we are reaching the endgame of the Age of Oil. Besides war, the consequences of reaching this inevitable global oil peak include the impact on the global economy. For those that think the disappearance of oil will have little effect on them personally, consider that since we now have "systemic dependence on oil for transportation, agriculture, and the production of chemicals and plastics, every sector of every society will be affected" (Heinberg "How to Avoid"). In order to avoid these consequences, it is important that our nation start making the transition to another way of life, a transition that will take time that we may run out of if the oil flow suddenly stops. This makes approaches one and three of the NIF booklet actually dangerous and irresponsible choices, possibly leading to the end of civilization. In conclusion, a solution to the worlds energy crisis is within our grasp. It will probably take extensive intervention on the part of the U.S. government, to an unprecedented level, to ensure we make the transition to a hydrogen economy in a timely fashion. It is up to the people of the U.S. to envision this future, to band together to demand it of our government, to encourage our leaders to be brave enough to forge ahead. The price of a transition to a hydrogen way of life may be high in time and money. But in the end, it will be worth it. As a bonus, the United States will once again hold the respect of the world. And once again Americans will display the bravery and ingenuity that was our trademark from the start. Works Cited Begley, Sharon. "The Truth About Denial." Newsweek, 13 Aug 2007. Brown, Warren. "Its Still Not a Fuel Cellars Market." Washington Post, 16 Sep 2007, p.G02. Crabtree, George W., Dresselhaus, Mildred S. & Buchanan, Michelle V. "The Hydrogen Economy." Physics Today, Dec 2004, p.39. Gillies, Andrew T. "Generating Hydrogen, Battling Earmarks." Forbes Magazine, 20 Jul 2006. Hammer, Ben. "Congress Weighs Creation of Energy-Research Agency." Washington Business Journal, 4 Jun 2007. Heinberg, Richard. "How to Avoid Oil Wars, Terrorism and Economic Collapse." Energy Bulletin, 31 Jul 2005. Hill, Steven. "5 Myths About Sick Old Europe." Washington Post, 7 Oct 2007, p.B03. Lavelle, Marianne. "Biodiesel; Ethanol; Hydrogen Gas; Natural Gas." U.S. News and World Report. 17 Feb 2003. Pogue, David. "The Future of Hydrogen Cars." New York Times, 29 Mar 2007. Rourke, Brad. The Energy Problem: Choices for an Uncertain Future. Dayton, OH: National Issues Forums Institute, 2006. "The Global Warming Debate." Newsweek, 3 Sep 2007. White, Joseph B. "Big Brains at Sandia National Lab Tackle the Future of Combustion." Wall Street Journal, 22 Oct 2007. Read More