Gusher of Lies author at Book People on Sunday

This Sunday Robert Bryce, author of Gusher of Lies, will be speaking at Book People. I've heard Robert Bryce speak before in my government class last semester and on the radio this morning. I was disappointed by some of his statements, mainly about peak oil. In my class he told us that the US does not have to worry about peak oil because we are rich enough to secure all of the petroleum we need.

I think the Book People talk would be an interesting event to attend to see some different opinions about the state of energy in our country. The talk is at 3 PM. You can see more information on this website.

diesel car podcast

I created a podcast to discuss the potential of diesel cars in the future of the U.S. transportation mix. Rising fuel costs are leading people to reconsider their choices in vehicles, and I want to know if people would consider diesels. This is important because diesel cars will be coming back to the U.S. market after finally meeting our emission requirements.

I already know what I think about diesel cars (I mean, I drive one), so I created a survey to find out what others think about them. Do you think they're dirty? Clean? Would you buy one? Etc...

What I found out was that the perception of diesels being dirty and slow is still strong. People tend to think of big trucks or old Mercedes Turbo Diesels from the 80's spewing out soot everywhere. This influenced whether people would choose a diesel car, even knowing that it got better fuel economy. But when asked again when a diesel was as clean as a gasoline car, over 83% said they would reconsider the diesel.

This is important because it reinforces another result from the survey, that is: fuel economy and environmental impact are two of the most important aspects of a car. This suggests that diesels might be a promising alternative...but there's a problem. The price of diesel fuel has been significantly higher than gasoline in recent months, so any potential financial savings might be negated by the higher fuel costs.

To determine the savings associated with price increases, I created a basic cost analysis using a diesel fuel cost of $4.19/gal and $3.49/gal for gas. At the current diesel price, gasoline would have to drop to under $2.50/gal for diesel to be uneconomical. Alternatively, at current gas prices, diesel would have to jump to $5.85/gal. It's safe to say for now that gasoline won't drop that low (at least not accompanied by a decrease in diesel as well), or the increase in gasoline costs.

Diesels meet two critical demands for consumers, that is they have potentially lower fuel costs and do this while being as clean as a gasoline car. They also offer great opportunities for biofuels use (non food competing feedstocks, of course) since they require little to no modification. As fuel prices continue to increase and emission standards become stricter, I believe diesels will play a significant role in America.

Look for the podcast on iTunes next week! If you haven't taken the survey, it's still up. Take it here!

Energy land use

My research topic focused on the negative effects on land by energy generation and use. When doing my research on coal mining, I came across this article linked here:

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSL2465800820080224

The article talks about a 4.0 earthquake in Germany caused by a mine collapse in the Saarland state. Luckily no one was hurt, but there was lots of damage to buildings and some power outages.

Now, I knew mining is dangerous, what with gas leaks and cave-ins, but it never occurred to me that cave-ins or mine collapses could cause an earthquake on the surface. In my defense, I had never read an article about it until now. It's bad enough when the dangers are restricted to underground miners, but how much worse is it knowing that it could effect the people on the surface as well? Although I didn't enjoy all the writing, I did learn a lot about my topic by doing all the research, so now I know about all sorts of hazards related to energy. And knowing is half the battle.

India's Energy Dilemma

For my individual project I decided to write about the policies with respect to oil and gas as well as renewables that India already has in place and what reforms I think should be implemented in its quest for development. I decided to leave out coal mainly because of time constraints but also due to tons of literature that is already present on it. With respect to oil and gas, I found that the National Exploration and Production Policy was by far the best thing that happened to India's energy sector. This policy which made foreign investment available for exploration and production, has increased the Indian reserves by almost 60%. In the paper I talk about some of the negatives but mainly positives of the NELP. I also discuss some of the renewable energies that are actively being pursued in India and their related policies. I found that wind was perhaps the most subsidized technology with solar not far behind.
India is taking some bold steps in terms of policies to guarantee its energy security for the future. My worry for India is that in its quest for energy independence it does not compromise infrastructure development which is equally vital for its growth.

Getting the Lead Out

Actually, the title of my paper is, "Losing the Lead: A Case Study of Transportation Fuel Transitions and Considerations for the Renewable Fuel Standard". I like the phrase "Getting the Lead Out" because one of my favorite radio stations back home would play one hour blocks of Led Zeppelin called "Getting the Led Out".

Today in the U.S., the transporation fuel market is facing a fairly substantial transitional time with the passage of EISA 2007, which boosted the requirements of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) to a 'final' target of 36 billion gallons by 2022. Instead of focusing on negative aspects of first generation biofuels or diggin into technical aspects of next generation feedstocks and advanced processing technologies, etc, I took a higher level systems and policy view by examining historical transitions in the transportation fuel market. Examples include the removal of lead additives from gasoline, the experience with ethanol in Brazil, the more recent introduction of ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) in the U.S. diesel market, etc.

In my paper, I examined the introduction of unleaded gasoline following the passage of the 1970 Clean Air Act. If you are interested in the history, take a look at my paper when it gets posted. I provide a somewhat brief (and dry) review as I wanted to avoid the controversial aspects of the leaded gasoline history and focus on the pertinent technological, institutional, and economic aspects of the transition. The main idea is that much can be learned from these historical cases, which can in turn be applied to the present day introduction of renewable fuels.

After reviewing the history, policy, and industrial impacts of the transition to unleaded gasoline, a set of lessons were gleaned from the experience to develop a sort of framework for assessing the current transition that the EPA-administered RFS will force upon the U.S. transportation fuel market. I did not go through the full assessment in my paper, and recommed this as a next step.

After submitting my paper, I realized that one very important lesson was left out: Ex ante analysis of the potential for unintended consequences. When unleaded gasoline was initially introduced, more intensive refining of hydrocarbons--primarily naptha--to produce higher octane molecules (e.g. benzene) was widely used to make up for octane enhancing lead additive. We soon learned that benzene, and other aromatics, are suspected carcinogens. An additive still used in some areas of the nation to enhance octane is MTBE (methyl-tertiary butyl ether). We now find this junk polluting ground water acquifers and the like; this has led many states to ban MTBE and shift towards ethanol as the additive of choice.

As Texas State Rep. Hardcastle would say, "the answer to one questions always leads to five more questions!"

Corn-Based Ethanol and its Contributions to Soil Erosion

I chose to write my paper about corn-based ethanol and its contributions to soil erosion. I also analyzed some of the impacts of soil erosion on surface water resources that are used for drinking water.

Currently, soil erosion from corn production for ethanol totals an estimated 65 million tons each year. As ethanol production increases in response to the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, this erosion is projected to increase.

Additionally, corn stover (the stalks, leaves, and cobs left over after grain harvest) is under consideration for use as a feedstock for cellulosic ethanol. While this increases ethanol production by utilizing crop wastes, this negatively affects soil quality and productivity while also contributing to increased soil erosion. Harvesting corn stover for cellulosic ethanol production removes crop residue that would normally be left in the field to decay, returning nutrients and organic matter to the topsoil. Harvesting stover also removes the soil protective cover, leaving topsoil highly susceptible to soil erosion.

In order to preserve soil quality, researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln suggest no more than 28% of corn stover should be removed for cellulosic ethanol production. Based on current corn production, this results in potential production of 8 billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol annually.

In addition to negative impacts on topsoil, soil erosion also degrades surface water resources from additional sediment and pollutant loading. Topsoil carries many of the nutrients necessary for crop growth, as well as many farm chemicals (fertilizers and pesticides). When this topsoil washes into surface water, these contaminants travel with the sediment. Utilizing these surface water resources for drinking water presents additional challenges in delivering safe drinking water. Potentially costly modifications or additions to water treatment plant equipment may be necessary to handle the additional sediment loading.

This analysis emphasizes the tradeoffs associated with energy production, specifically biofuels. As a nation, we must weigh the impacts on all our resources - soil, water, and energy - when making energy decisions.

Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles--Transportation of the Future

Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles have brought together a multitude of technologies to be considered for one of the newest forms of transportation. Driven by battery power to an electric motor, the car will run until the battery has drained to a certain capacity and then the Internal Combustion Engine will turn on to recharge the battery or power the vehicle directly. This setup can be seen in the figure on the right. The main technological restraint from this vehicle's penetration into the market is the battery.

Today batteries like Nickel metal hydride and lithium ion are being used due to their less susceptibility to the "memory effect". They can retain charge after many charge/discharge cycles. The batteries for these vehicles will need to be scaled up 3 to 5 times to provide the mileage needed by the average driver. This increase in size and power will be expensive and make these items very valuable. Design features to prevent criminals from stealing these batteries will need to be taken, unlike the situation with catalytic converters.

With federal funding, researchers have been able to look into the questions about PHEVs. Questions that dealt with topics like the environmental impact and the economic feasibility.

It turns out that with many different scenarios, Plug-in Hybrids produce less Greenhouse Gas Emissions than the Conventional Vehicle and the Hybrid Electric Vehicle. These results can be seen from the figure above on the left. These results from the Electric Power Research Institute and the Natural Resources Defense Council were able to show that the PHEV is better for the environment especially in the future when electricity generation methods are expected to become cleaner.

The public also is concerned with how they will be able to afford this more expensive vehicle. With today's gasoline prices, the savings from switching to electricity to power your vehicle can allow to pay for the extra costs in about five ten years. This is excluding the possibility of battery prices falling in the recent future.

Because of the status quo with transportation, measures need to be taken to change the path we are following. The Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle will help us reduce our dependence on foreign oil, centralize our pollution source to make it easier to clean in the future, and push the edge on technologies like batteries.

Weapons of Mass Distraction: Debunking the Case for Electricity Generation in Iran

My research paper focused on the economic merits of nuclear electricity generation in Iran. Regardless of Iran's true motives, nuclear electricity generation makes little sense for Iran.

Although Iran does have electricity sector problems, these troubles stem from bad policies, not choice of primary energy source. Because most of Iran's electricity is generated by natural gas-fired power plants, massive natural gas subsidies have led to unabated consumption and the inability to cover neither maintenance nor new plant construction costs.

Embarking on an expensive nuclear program only distracts attention away from Iran's existing electricity infrastructure inefficiencies. The explicit (construction, maintenance, decommissioning, and uranium costs) and implicit (resulting sanctions, international isolation, loss of much needed foreign investment) costs of Iran's continuing nuclear program belies any economic logic.

Photo Courtesy of The New York Times.

The True Cost of PHEVs

For my individual project (I chose to make a podcast) I calculated the "true cost" of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles. I calculated costs for four categories: Traditional (fuel) costs, cost of air emissions, cost of water use, and cost of national security impacts. The last one ended up as a discussion with no true $$$ outcome.

The results showed that, while PHEVs are the cheapest even under my new calculations, this could change as water concerns grow. That is, as water conservation slides to the forefront, PHEVs will slide away. Also notable, as national security concerns become more costly, PHEVs become more economical.

Included is what I believe to be an interesting discussion on carbon cap and trade, as well as how each of the three current Presidential hopefuls are including PHEVs in their energy policy proposals. Also is a brief discussion of EISA 2007....


All in all, I learned a lot by doing this project (both on PHEVs and on iMovie and GarageBand.. which I have never used before being a non-Mac person).

Energy and Obesity

For my project I discussed how obesity levels and current trends relate to levels of energy consumed. Food production and its contribution to obesity were discussed including where energy use is most prevalent. Some of obesity’s other causes were discussed and how these causes contribute to the energy crisis. While the relationship between obesity and energy consumption, in that the more that people weigh, the more food they consume and the more energy it takes to move them around, is clear, the far-reaching consequences are not as clear. Energy is used in food production at every step of the food cycle. Fossil fuels are used to fertilize the crops, power the machines that harvest them, transport the food around, and prepare the food at the users home. When food is eaten in excess of what is needed to maintain a healthy weight or when food is wasted, all the energy mentioned above is lost. Other contributions to obesity such as television watching and exercise use are discussed. With regard to televisions, the type of televisions is changing to a more energy intensive type and the size of televisions is growing. The more time spent watching television, the more likely someone is to be overweight. As people exercise less, obesity rates also increase. As sedentary lifestyles become more common we can expect this trend to continue. At the end of the paper, an analysis is presented which details how much gasoline can be saved with a slight decrease in the weight of the average American. The conclusion was that if the average American can manage to lose 25 pounds, the United States would use 1.3 billion gallons less of gasoline.

Clean Energy in Africa: What can we Learn?

For my individual project I looked at some case studies of clean energy investments in sub-Saharan Africa. The cases are very diverse and really highlight the tragic situation in sub-Saharan Africa but at the same time show how some groups are really making a difference. Different types of investment vehicles are used to provide students in Senegal with light to study or to provide health clinics in Rwanda with power. The case studies provided some lessons that might be very helpful in addressing the climate change issue in the US.

You’re probably asking yourself the question: what does Africa have to do with the US? In fact, Africa and the US, in regards to climate change, don’t have much if anything in common but the African case studies provide an opportunity to look at extremes and extremes are an excellent way to assess something – be it a theory, an equation or an implementation as in this case.

Most clean energy investments in Africa are focused on solar and the logic is that sub-Saharan Africa has no electricity (<5% of the people have access to electricity) so let’s give them electricity. Yes electricity is good and I’m not saying let’s not give them electricity but how many people are asking – what does Africa REALLY need? Perhaps sub-Saharan Africa needs something else. That something else is income generating clean energy like micro and pico hydro or cleaner biomass etc…The main point to get out of this is that not every “clean” option is the right option. Today we are seeing the same thing with corn ethanol in the US!

What does that mean for the US? Well in the US we’re looking at all these different forms of clean energy like wind, solar, ethanol (first and second generation) and the logic is we need to go rid of dirty coal and imported Saudi oil. Billions of dollars are being invested towards that effort and I’m not saying that that is a bad thing. However, maybe that’s not the problem we need to be solving! To me, it seems that we’re doing exactly what the grocery store does: Paper or plastic? Paper is the new clean energy (you fill in whatever new technology you want) and plastic is coal/oil/gas etc… What about the canvas bag?

There is a question that is rarely, if ever asked: why are we searching for alternative fuel sources? Really, what are we trying to do? Most people would say we’re looking for alternative fuels to replace carbon emitting fuels because of the adverse effects of carbon. However, how many people have asked themselves whether we really need all the energy we are currently consuming in the first place. The canvas bag option, in this context, involves a change of how we interact with energy and the role that energy plays in our lives. I use the African case studies to show that in some instances, in the name of doing the right thing, the wrong solution is provided.

Some of the changes that I advocate for in the paper involve a reversal of city expansion into suburbs (basically increased dense urban living – similar to what Austin is doing), home construction using concrete as opposed to wood and sheetrock to increase air tightness and another one involves the design of the electricity system (design for a portion of the peak and not the peak itself – similar to highways). I recognize that these are drastic measures and they’re somewhat different from the basket of solutions that are offered right now but who knows we might not have the luxury to choose whether to do these things or not…

Impact of DTV Transition

I studied the impact of the digital TV transition.  If you're not already familiar, on 2/19/08 all analog TV signals will cease to exist.  The interesting energy impact is that digital TV's, especially HDTV's, and the Digital-to-Analog (DTA) converters are energy hogs.  But the problem with directly correlating the DTV Transition to energy consumption is that research shows that consumer behavior is trending towards DTV and HDTV anyways.  Plus the majority of the population that is only receiving analog signals are predominantly poor, elderly & non-English speaking.  Traditionally these groups are under fixed incomes, leading one to believe it is highly unlikely that they will run out and buy a flat screen TV from Best Buy.  

That said if the 47 million households effected by the transition do purchase the DTA converter, the EPA and Energy Star estimates at least 3 Billion kWh/year.  That's alone is quite a significant increase.  Additionally if only 5 % of the population purchased a new TV, either a plasma, LCD or Rear Projection, the likely outcome would be approximately 3.5-4.5 billion kWh/year.  So we're looking at a reasonably large demand considering our electric grids are already over used so it is fair to question policy that might lead citizens, either directly or indirectly towards consumer products that use more energy.

There is also an interesting environmental impact that I will not get into with any depth here, but do know that the average CRT TV has 4-8 lbs. of lead in it, so please don't just throw it out.  There are recycling options, albeit limited, available so if you find yourself without a TV, take the time to properly dispose of it.  Check out the Electronics Take Back Coalition for more details.

Lastly, there are some energy use benefits of the transition.  First off if the bandwidth is used for what it is intended, a nationwide broadband, there should be additionally opportunities for tele-commuting, decreasing the transportation impact on energy consumption.  Furthermore, digital media is going to become more and more prevalent as downloads, as opposed to a product one drives to the store or has physically delivered to one's home.  Small impact on an individual scale, but again, depending upon consumer behaviors, could create large scale changes on the macro-level.  e-Medicine is certainly a plus that might allow doctors to diagnosis patients from a distance, eliminating the need for patients in rural areas to commute to the doctor or vice versa.

All in all, the policy issue is muddled.  There are certainly pros and there are certainly cons when it comes to the Digital Transition.  From what I can find it is inconclusive although the potential energy impact is undeniable.  I also think the environmental impact, considering the toxicity of the lead in the TV's, is of great concern.  I intend to urge TV manufacturers to follow SONY's lead and institute a take-back program that allows the manufacturer to properly reuse/recycle/dispose of the product once it has reached the end of its usefulness.

And lastly, while this has little to do with the DTV Transition, I couldn't help but share Colbert's take on the ethanol induced food crisis.  Enjoy.

Elementary Environmental Education Resources

Before beginning my topic for this research paper, I thought there wasn't much out there when it came to resources for teaching environmental issues to children. Now that I have finished my research, I realize I was wrong.
There are curricula for basic environmental education, water resource and management education and solar energy education to name a few. There are also grants, called GreenWorks! grants to fund environmentally focused projects for school age children.
Also, magazines and websites are hopping on the green trend too. I think they have finally realized that if the adult population is interested in environmental issues, their kids are going to want to know what is going on as well. National Geographic for Kids has interactive recycling games, and green tips from funny characters. Highlights for Children, that magazine I loved as a child, includes a lot of articles about saving energy and doing your part for the environment.
I am really glad I did research on this topic because it gives me a lot of hope for our future. I know that they will be able to be the generation that takes action on our environmental issues.

The Beginner's Guide to Oil and Gas Investing

For my term paper, I wrote an oil and gas investor's guide geared towards the beginning investor. I thought it would be interesting to inform people on the options available for someone wanting to put money into the oil patch.

It starts by giving background on oil and gas basics, such as petroleum geology, leasing mineral rights, and drilling and producing oil. I felt that an introduction to these concepts and terms would be important so the investor would be able to hold an intelligent conversation with the operations people.

It then goes on to discuss the different types of financing vehicles available, such as energy sector funds, individual stocks, drilling, completion, royalty, and lease acquisistion funds. It then goes on to discuss common financing structures for direct participation such as "third for a quarter" and "an eighth back".

Nuclear Transportion and the Yucca Mountain Repository

Here are the conclusions from my individual research paper. Enjoy

A solution for the long-term disposal of high-level radioactive waste continues to be a hotly debated topic. The current projected method of deep burial in the Yucca Mountain would have dramatic impacts to U.S. nuclear waste transportation. A substantial increase in cross-country shipments of spent nuclear fuel would significantly raise the risk exposure of radioactive waste accidents to Americans and the environment. Accordingly, significant levels of political opposition to the proposed plan continue to retard the implementation of a long-term solution. Proponents for the Yucca facility argue that opposition to the plan is based merely on Not-In-My-Backyard politics, rather than scientific assessments. Alternatively, opponents point to scientific studies that indicate an inordinate amount of risk associated with frequent long distance transportation of nuclear waste.

While my paper does not attempt to assess the scientific feasibility of Yucca Mountain, the risks, financial concerns, and politics associated with transportation of spent nuclear fuel is addressed. Under this framework the following recommendations are given:

Thorough assessment of the effects of severe accidents and acts of sabotage/terrorism on the performance of the shipping containers – The global political climate has changed since 9/11. Under this reality a more thorough risk assessment of the ability of shipping containers to perform under a security breach needs to be made.

Assessment of the risk exposure to urban areas – The implementation of a central repository would heavily rely on the nation’s rail system to deliver the nuclear waste thus exposing U.S. urban areas and its residents to potential dangers of radioactive waste. A similar study to that made by The State of Nevada of the SNF transportation risks to Las Vegas needs to be made for all U.S. urban areas potentially affected.

Reevaluation of the financial and budgetary issues – Given continued political opposition, project delays, and public backlash experienced in Europe, the DOE should revise its project budget to consider these possible/likely effects. Additionally, the DOE should consider the drop in property values and ensuing lawsuits that will likely occur once a transportation route structure is agreed upon.