According to a recent, fascinating article in the religious-based online magazine The Trumpet, entitled “Real World Solutions to Foreign Oil Dependence,” columnist Robert Morley reveals that Greenland is literally becoming the world’s first bona fide “green” country.
While it’s true that Greenland is constructed on a huge, hot rock, which makes it a little easier for Greenland than for most countries to tap nature for power, they’ve been making the most of the geothermal and hydroelectric power that surrounds them.
Can the United States be doing more? The article points out that according to a 2006 report by MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology):
… the extractable geothermal energy in the U.S. totals approximately 200,000 EJ—a whopping 2,000 times the annual consumption of primary energy in the United States in 2005. Factoring in reasonable technology improvements in the future, the report said the economically extractable amount of useful energy could increase by more than a factor of 10, thus making geothermal generation sustainable for centuries.
It seems to me that it should be possible for us to wean ourselves off of foreign oil and high-polluting fuels, but I don’t really know enough about the challenges. I would appreciate it if any scientists or experts in the energy industry who read this could post some enlightening facts and insights. What is the U.S. doing to develop technologies to tap geothermal, hydroelectric (from the oceans), and hydrogen as sources of energy? Are we doing enough?
I’m aware that hydrogen currently requires more energy to produce than it gives off, but if we could generate more electricity than we need from geothermal and hydroelectric sources, why couldn’t we use that energy to create a more “store-able” fuel like hydrogen?
I’ve never jumped on the global warming bandwagon, because, quite frankly, I don’t think we have enough reliable scientific evidence to prove that the world is warming primarily as a result of human activities. I am concerned, however, about how our quality of life will be affected by an energy shortage.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
It’s good to hear BP & GM talk about alternative fuels, but 50 years to implement is too long.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/05/news/companies/bigoil_hydrogen/index.htm
Perhaps this link will spark more attention:
http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar/
It is GM’s electric concept car the Chevy Volt. If more people begin to demand alternative fuel cars, we should be able to speed the rate at which the technology is developed.
We have started an Investor Forum where Investors can meet and discuss topics like this:
http://investor-forum.thesubway.com/
We found an interesting article about the problems with Ethanol on ConsumerReports.org:
http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2008/03/ethanol-e85.html
“But there are some problems with increasing ethanol blends. Ethanol contains less energy than gasoline, so increasing the amount of ethanol in gasoline will likely result in lower fuel economy. Increasing standard fuel blends from zero to 10 percent ethanol, as is happening today, has little or no impact on fuel economy. In tests, the differences occur within the margin of error, about 0.5 percent. Further increasing ethanol levels to 20 percent reduces fuel economy between 1 and 3 percent, according to testing by the DOE and General Motors. Evaluations are underway to determine if E20 will burn effectively in today’s engines without impacting reliability and longevity, and also assessing potential impact on fuel economy.”
TheSUBWAY.com would like to invite readers to post their own views and ideas in TheSUBWAY.com’s Investor Forum:
http://investor-forum.thesubway.com/