Friday, December 9, 2011

Part 5: Answering Previous Questions

Here’s another answer for a question included in a past posting. This one is from October 10th: Various questions continued:

·         How do we replace the “oil standard” economy with another energy base? Would this produce more jobs and a more stable foreign policy in the Middle East?
·         What role should religion play in government? Any?
·         If religion is to be kept separate from government decisions, why then do we make laws about homosexuality, abortion and other elements based on religious tenets or dogma?
·         If religion is not public policy to be discussed, then why do we ask candidates about their religious beliefs and affiliations?
·         How diverse is our nation and is that a good thing?
·         Are all terrorists Muslims? Should we be afraid of all Muslims?
·         Is America a Christian nation or not?

New answer added today:

How do we replace the “oil standard” economy with another energy base? Would this produce more jobs and a more stable foreign policy in the Middle East?

I think I have answered this in context with other posts but let’s review some points:
·         Oil dominates Middle East foreign affairs. Some of the richest oil deposits are   there; sweet crude quality is high in the region as well; American oil industry helped explore, find, drill and refine the oil in place during the 50’s and 60’s. Middle East oil industry was built by American know-how, and the world markets were also built by American business interests.
·         Oil use dominates American automobile technology for propulsion
·         Oil is the base of much of the American chemical industry
·         Oil and its by-products is a significant source of energy throughout the globe
·         Oil is finite and dwindling; new deposits are rare to find; regeneration of the product from nature is too slow to fuel future generations of mankind
·         Sooner or later new energy sources need to replace oil as the king of energy

We can do this. The evolution of the solution has been underway for several decades. Ascension to the top of the energy heap is slow and faltering. Here’s how I think we can accelerate the process:
  • Set a goal to reduce use of oil as a propulsion fuel to only 25% of current consumption; this will leave 75% of our past oil consumption for other purposes
    • At the very minimum, this will add decades to the dwindling oil supply and give us time to invent our way out of the current bind
    • Redefine Middle East Foreign Policy on the basis of anything other than oil; this may save us wars, disruption of global economy, lives, treasure, etc.
    • Use oil for lubricants until replaced with new technology
    • Use oil as a continuing base for by-product development and manufacture (plastics, chemicals, etc.)
  • Put our considerable research capacity into alternative fuel/energy sources
    • Nuclear power; clean burn of fuel source to eliminate disposal problem
    • Improve nuclear safety operations and plant sites
    • Cheapen fuel cell applications for broader use and practicality
    • Improve solar power applications for economic practicality
    • Improve wave-current power (wind, tidal, etc.) for economic practicality
  • Invent new energy sources
    • Create new energy sources from particle physics research
    • Propulsion physics for space exploration adapted to earth-bound needs
    • Examine means to reduce energy use; this is an engineering task for new materials, higher efficiency of energy using devices, etc.
  • Adapt technology to use the new energy resources as completely as possible
    • New cooking technology
    • New space heating technology
    • New water heating technology
    • New automotive propulsion technology
    • New manufacturing technologies: the making of other things and the resources needed to make the processes function effectively
Our scientific community needs to be funded for our own good. Over the past 20 years political leaders have argued about this and shut down avenues of scientific inquiry that would have solved a number of problems: spent nuclear fuel rod disposal, using trash and garbage as a fuel source to solve disposal, fuel and ecology problems all at the same time. Politicians were unwilling to invest needed funds in this research. Politicians didn’t want specific regions of the country to have the research facilities built there. Along the way, not only did the research not get done, but entire research technologies were grasped by the international academic community and built outside the United States. This is not just a political leadership issue. It is an intellectual leadership issue that will translate into quality of life issues for Americans and the world community. Why do we let these travesties occur? Are we that emotionally immature as a culture?

I think we are better than that. We can do better. Just think: are our current politicians thinking about these things and doing something about them? Or are they arguing about gay marriage, gay rights, hurt feelings among Christians, lumping all Muslims as terrorists, etc.?

We need to insist our leaders fulfill standards. Only then will the important work get done.

December 9, 2011




No comments:

Post a Comment