In the field of politics, our best solutions are rarely applied. Too often, politicians do not have the energy to seek experts who know great solutions, letting lobbyists explain mediocre options to them instead. This results in massive corporate subsidies for technologies that are pie-in-the-sky, while innovative solutions gather dust on the shelf. Nowhere is this demonstrated more clearly than in the field of energy.
Over the last few decades, we have subsidized oil with trillions of dollars more than any other energy source. Even with these huge handouts to multinational corporations, the price has been soaring faster than inflation every year, leading many observers to wonder why our government pays them anything. If our tax-funded research and infrastructure investments cannot lower prices, then we must ask if the money is being wisely spent.
Is oil shale wise? Shell Oil claims fuel prices could be reduced by exploiting oil shale on federal lands. So-called "oil shale" is neither shale, nor does it contain oil in its natural state. It is organic marlstone, plant matter that was not exposed to enough underground heat and pressure to form oil. No one has ever made a steady profit from it because every ton contains only thirty gallons of oil, making mining too expensive to be feasible. So, Shell came up with a process to extract it by heating and refining it underground at 700 degrees Fahrenheit.
But they do not tell you that their experimental process burns most of the energy it extracts. This process applied to "shale" uses an hour worth of nationwide coal usage to produce seven minutes' worth of oil. The process is not only expensive, but can take up to three, impractical years and emits large quantities of arsenic. Shale is not black gold, but fool's gold.
While our elected officials keep us suckling at the teat of Big Oil, numerous good alternatives are being ignored.
Americans throw a great alternative energy source down garbage disposal drains every day. Inventors have created oil from food waste, a process called thermal depolymerization process (TDP). The process uses a mere twenty percent of the resulting energy output to produce, pollutes less, and takes hours instead of years. A company in Carthage, Missouri has been doing this for over five years. In theory, if the U.S. could gather all of its annual food waste and convert it to oil using this process, it would eliminate most of our dependence on foreign oil.
Another excellent solution is "green" or "cellulosic" oil, which is made from the cellulose contained in plant matter. Unlike ethanol, not only can it already be used in most auto engines today, but one can produce it from parts of plants which aren't eaten, like native weeds, grasses, corn stalks and tassels. The inventors claim that using this process, gasoline could be produced for as little as $1/gallon within 5-10 years without endangering our food supply. In addition, because growing plants can act as a carbon sink through photosynthesis, it is possible to grow certain plant species which are carbon neutral. This means that the plant converts more carbon dioxide into oxygen than one emits from refining the fuel and burning it in your engine.
Why aren't these technologies being used everywhere? Blame politicians in bed with lobbyists, who continue to subsidize Big Oil to keep us addicted to their products. After talk radio and their listeners repeat a bad solution enough times to enough politicians, it seems like energy companies can get away with murder.
This is a national security issue. We need to not only become independent from foreign oil, but also from large, multi-national corporations who control both oil and our Congress. As Will Rogers once said, "We have the best Congress that money can buy." However, I believe we can and must do better.
If we do not soon manage to find energy that is clean, abundant, and affordable and if we fail to sort out our health care crisis that has pushed corporate health costs to double what other countries pay, then America's economy will swiftly fall behind other economies that pursue the best solutions, not simply the solutions that lobbyists suggest.
Colin Lee is an IP endorsed candidate for State House District 36A in Lakeville.
