Below are a few letters received at EnergyBiz Insider on topics that appeared in the past few weeks. They capture the essence of how many readers say they feel.
________________________________________
Powerful Words - September 28, 2009
The speeches at the UN were, as always, "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing".
"A goal without a plan is just a wish." -Antoine de St. Exupery
"Key Republicans say that the enactment of that legislation would cause energy prices to rise." So does the CBO; and, simple logic, though logic is unlikely to prevail over religious fervor.
"But all the 'foot-dragging and nay-saying' is not going over well among the Europeans, who have taken the lead on this issue. It has said that the United States is just one of 190 nations coming to Copenhagen, although it accounts for 25 percent of world's greenhouse gas emissions."
I acknowledge that it is awe inspiring to imagine the Europeans "leaping boldly into the breach", especially when "foot-dragging and nay-saying" might well be the more appropriate response.
Edward A. Reid, Jr.
President
Fire to Ice, Inc.
This will result in a boom in the construction of nuclear generation around the world except here.
Individual elected officials are being bullied by their respective political parties which in turn are dominated by the radical elements.
We need a few brave souls from BOTH sides of the political spectrum to step forward and support a balanced energy plan that President Obama can support.
Balance means nuclear, clean coal, gas plus all the alternatives we can reasonably deploy!
Albert Pope
Principal
XTnrgy, LLC
So why don't we assume that it will get warmer and just deal with that?
We already know that the earth has recovered from hotter, more carbon-intensive eras than this one, so climate will stabilize rather than run away.
This is the Y2K problem all over again.
Tom Hafer
Global Warming has been in progress for at least 13,000 years by best reasonable scientific estimates (since the last big ice age ended). This is fact. What is not fact is the hypothesis that mankind is contributing in a significant way to the rate at which global warming is occurring. Even more speculative hypotheses claim atmospheric emission of carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels is a significant part of mankind's contribution. A more thorough review looking back to the data reveals the extreme paucity of experimental and measured data, and the very wide precision ranges associated with those very few measured values.
In my opinion, the present hysteria calling for "caps of CO2 emissions" is akin to predicting heights of waves tomorrow off Catalina to within 1/8-inch. The probable accuracy of the few measured data points simply does not support the tremendously extrapolated projections of extreme climate change caused by mankind.
Keith E. Bowers
Registering Greenhouse Gases - September 30, 2009
Some of the groups on LINKEDIN like CO2 sequestration, oil from some other sources like ethanol, diesel from algae, solar panels, hydrogen fuel cells, and somehow looking into area of reducing emissions and energy conservation in industry and public life by making green houses with some teeth in city codes.
There are other options for energy which reduce pollution and CO2 like natural gas use in the automobile industry. India, China and other Far East countries are doing it, but we are so much behind due to all the lobbying and making profit by fossil fuels, some of which are expensive to explore and also trader playing with this in a casino-like market place.
There is so much to be done and only if there is will then it can be done not on the back of lobbyists.
Just some fraction of thoughts.
Dr. Amarjit Bakshi
President
Refining Hydrocarbon Technologies LLC
It's nothing short of communism.
Cliff F. Eckhart
I saw an article that milk requires two pounds of CO2 per pint. Walmart is considering such a system.
Are all the sources of CO2 to be registered?
The end result is the number of people and their standard of living. No one wants to address that issue.
Dale Osborn
Transmission Planning Technical Director
Transmission Asset Management
Midwest ISO
Offshore Wind Could Surge - October 09, 2009
Two thoughts come to mind regarding offshore deployment. Deep sea deployment may give us a way to store energy using compressed air technology. I recall reading an article that use of the Australian-improved Gortex would allow the use of bags underwater to store compressed air. As I recall, the initial article said we would need to place turbines in waters with at least 600 meters depth. A second possible bonanza would be if the VIVACE generators work as hoped. The lines would give the VIVACE generators a place to tie in right away. This would give us a one-two punch for renewable generation and deployment.
Tom Saidak
At some point, consumers and taxpayers will realize they are being hornswoggled by "Anthropogenic Global Warming," "Greenhouse Gas Causation" and "Carbon as a Pollutant." Will it happen before or after the productive private economy is wrecked?
Edward A. Maciula PE
Thank you again for a very informative and interesting article on offshore wind. I did notice one item that might warrant correction; 40 GW to 150 GW of offshore wind and/or 17 percent of Europe's electricity is said to cut carbon emissions "by 200 tons per year". That would seem to be about a million times too small a figure. I would recommend correction. Other than that item it is a great article, and I always enjoy your very readable style.
Robert Freehling
Research Director
Local Power
Respond to the editor.
