Today I reprint quotes from the Army’s Engineer Research and Development Center. In it you will read about the Army’s assessment of our energy situation here in the U.S. This is something that the Army is concerned about as any type of armed conflict could seriously restrict the flow of oil into our country.
In fact, an article out today quoting Iran saying that any action taken by the U.S. against Iran will cause a major reduction in oil exports. If you look at a map of the Middle East, you will immediately note that Iran could just about stop all ship traffic through the Straight of Hormuz. It should be noted that over 90% of the Persian Gulf oil flows through Hormuz.
On a happier note, the assessment does indicate that we have a 250-year supply of coal to help us meet our energy needs.
Another factor is demand. If the world undergoes a severe recession or worse, the demand for oil will drop dramatically.
Army's Engineer Research and Development
Center concludes:
"The days of inexpensive, convenient, abundant energy sources are quickly drawing to a close. Domestic natural gas production peaked in 1973. The proved domestic reserve lifetime for natural gas at current consumption rates is about 8.4 years. The proved world reserve lifetime for natural gas is about 40 years, but will follow a traditional rise to a peak at about 2035 and then a rapid decline. Domestic oil production peaked in 1970 and continues to decline. Proved domestic reserve lifetime for oil is about 3.4 years. World oil production is at or near its peak and current world demand exceeds the supply. Saudi Arabia is considered the bellwether nation for oil production and has not increased production since April 2003. After peak production, supply no longer meets demand, prices and competition increase. World proved reserve lifetime for oil is about 41 years, most of this at a declining availability. Our current throwaway nuclear cycle uses up the world reserve of low-cost uranium in about 20 years. We will see significant depletion of Earth's finite resources in this century."
But coal remains very plentiful...relatively speaking. At current rates of consumption, the U.S. possesses a 250-year supply. You could say that the United States is the Saudi Arabia of coal, which is one very good reason why we will devise ever-more-ingenious ways to utilize it.
Of course, the downsides to coal are obvious from a strategic and environmental perspective. Strategically, coal is still a hydrocarbon. Using it to generate electric power doesn't eliminate our dependency on fossil fuel. But it does give us time to find either renewable alternatives and/or "the next big thing" in energy generation...whatever that may be.
Environmentally, coal produces mercury, sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide. The mercury causes birth defects. The sulfur and nitrous dioxide cause lung and respiratory ailments. And it's possible that carbon dioxide is accelerating the natural cycle of changes in the Earth's climate. It's true that some of the new processes in coal gasification and liquefaction remove coal's most detrimental byproducts. But in nearly every new clean-coal process, there is still the issue of what to do with carbon dioxide. One solution has been to ship it to oil companies to inject back into the ground for storage. Even if that begins to happen, it's likely that carbon dioxide emissions will increase with new coal-fired plants. But all of these issues may take a back seat to a simple question: Can using more coal help us use less foreign oil?
If the alternative to exploiting the nation's coal resources is an open-ended military engagement in the Middle East, I suspect there's going to be a lot of support for developing the only significant energy resource America still possesses. The benefits of coal, such as they are, are simply too good (and too convenient) for the country's economic and political leadership NOT to embrace.
No comments:
Post a Comment