by Michael Vasilik, Ph.D.
(Continued from Front Page) First of all, is the problem really so bad? Yes. Our country, and most other developed countries around the world, have built societies and based growth upon hydrocarbon sources of energy, like oil, gas, etc. These resource reserves are large, but not unlimited, and unfortunately for the most part not under our control. Depending on whom you talk to, there is only enough oil to satisfy the world's need for about 40 years at the present rate of consumption. However, consumption is rising rapidly (conservatively estimated by the Energy Information Administration to be 34% over the next 25 years in the US), and far outstripping the discovery of new supplies, or the technology of obtaining it from shale or sand. Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, US Congressman from Maryland, speaks passionately about this growing problem and has been leading the charge for developing alternative sources of energy or methods of conservation before it is too late: “Today worldwide we are pumping at least six barrels of oil for every barrel we find”. (The complete version of his presentation to the US Congress is available at www.energybulletin.net/5080.html).
OK, what are our options? First, we could seriously try to do more to conserve our energy usage. Although many of us are already trying to conserve energy, could adding insulation, turning down thermostats and cutting back on travel really make a difference? Sure, it all adds up.
What about other sources of energy? Of course there is nuclear energy, as long as those power plants are not in our back yards. But, it takes a tremendous amount of money and several years/decades to build and bring a reactor on-line (the last new one in the US was completed about 10 years ago by the Tennessee Valley Authority, and there are no active plans for others). A few countries have nuclear capability, but are trying to limit membership in the club. Considering the potential problems – Three Mile Island is still in my memory – maybe there are more practical, socially acceptable alternatives.
What about garbage? Does it seem very prudent to landfill the stuff, when we could perhaps get the energy out of it, since we continue to generate so much of it? The US is still the world's leader in garbage production. There are some methane digesters and other refuse-derived fuel systems that run on gas generated from landfills. Actually, one eighth of the world's energy already comes from waste.
Well, that's a start. What else? Other alternative energy sources include hydro power, geothermal, biofuels, wind and solar. Let's take them one at a time. Power is already generated from lake/river water flowing over dams; China is building the Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze River, which will be the world's largest hydroelectric power station. (When completed, this 17-year project will produce about 11% of China 's energy output). If would be great if we could practically harness the energy from ocean waves and currents, but I know of no large scale cost-effective design to be built. Geothermal is good if you are located in the vicinity of an earth-heated mass of water to provide a steady supply of steam. When you gas up at the pumps, you may notice that a small percentage of the fuel is ethanol, derived from corn and other grain by-products. Energy is derived from wind currents using very large windmills (you may have noticed those gigantic turning blades as you drive along some of our major highways). The price of wind energy has come down, but there are only so many areas where the wind blows hard and long enough to be harnessed economically. Probably the most practical alternative energy source for homes is solar, either active or passive. Active solar systems employ roof panels, photovoltaic cells, pumps, circulating water, etc. They are pretty expensive, but depending on where you live, you may be able to recoup your investment within 10 years from the annual energy savings. Probably the most cost-effective residential option is passive solar energy, where we can employ a combination of window orientation, masonry surfaces, coatings, etc. to capture and store solar radiation for space heating.
So what's the solution, or is there a solution? Certainly our economy and standard-of- living depend on satisfying our growing energy needs. The solution is probably not going to come from you or me, or any one organization. It has got to come from our government or from a united effort of many countries. As a start, this country needs a comprehensive, practical, high-priority NATIONAL ENERGY PROGRAM NOW to actively address our growing energy needs and avert a future crisis (the Energy Policy Act of 2005 is a very slow start). Governor Rendell has just proposed an Energy Independence Strategy for our state over the next 10 years (see www.dep.state.pa.us). The programs to implement this strategy would be funded by increasing our taxes, a matter the state legislature will debate in the coming months.
The most important point is that you and I and our fellow Americans must become more aware and knowledgeable about energy matters, and be more involved in motivating our state and federal representatives and others to fund, develop and implement a practical, aggressive energy policy. Not to do so would be unfair to our future and that of our children.
Dr. Vasilik is Director of ETAC (Electro-Technology Applications Center) at Northampton Community College. During the past 12 years, the Center has helped nearly a thousand manufacturers improve their processes to become more competitive. As part of its support to businesses (particularly small ones), ETAC addresses environmental and energy issues and is currently working on some exciting energy projects, such as using vortex technology to process garbage into energy bars, and using radio frequency energy to remove oil from oil sand.
Back to Home |
