Transition or Future

Some of the news about Somerset is the announcement that the city seeks to become a major hub for supplying natural gas. It is a move in the right direction for our environment since natural gas is a far cleaner fuel than is gasoline or coal. The Commonwealth-Journal even posted a photo of Mayor Girdler with a new Honda Civic refitted to use compressed natural gas as its fuel. There are plans for the city to establish a fueling center to supply vehicles converted for the use of compressed natural gas. This is a good example of how governments can provide the impetus and startup funding for new ventures. If the idea catches on I presume that private enterprise will step in and begin to supply the demand.

The relatively recent explosion of the supply of natural gas has revealed the potential for it to be a useful fuel for the near future. Due to new methods of extraction there is potential for the United States to actually become energy independent. Don't look, however, for the tankers to stop running from the Arabian Gulf to the Gulf of Mexico. In many cases it is still cheaper to purchase oil from those sources and often the grade of crude oil is superior to what we can get from, say, Canada.

I read an article recently how a plan by our President to project fuels of the future did not include clean coal. Quite a hubbub was raised so now his plan includes that fuel. Problem is that clean coal does not exist so I guess it is harmless to include it. Maybe we should include nuclear fusion as well even though that technology is still somewhere in a future we can't quite reach just yet. I have seen that the University of Kentucky is interested in partnerships with China which is pouring funding into developing clean coal technology and conversion of coal to diesel. Which raises the question of why private enterprise is not working on that technology if the demand for coal really exists.

One of the great deficits of our national thinking is the inability to develop long range plans. Analysts say that is one of the advantages that China has over us. They will develop a fifty year plan and stick to it while our attention follows the 24 hour news cycle. For ventures as large as developing a reliable source of energy for the future we can't just simply allow market forces to generate demand when the time comes. The United States must be proactive in anticipating market needs and move to direct funding to those anticipated needs long before market forces create a profitable demand.

So, while I am encouraged by Somerset's actions we must realize that this is not the end game. The end game must continue to be a nonpolluting, renewable energy source to drive the next century's industries. Natural gas can effectively fill a void as a transitional fuel from coal and oil to a nonpolluting fuel such as wind, solar, geothermal, hydrogen fuel cells or fusion. The future of those sources is stellar while the use of carbonaceous fuels must inevitably die. Even as we use cleaner carbon fuels and improve efficiency we must still realize that the use of those fuels can't be endless and here is why.

Even with as little pollution as the improved use of carbon fuels can deliver there is still a cumulative effect on the environment. Sometimes the word “environment” is a cue for people to get all up in the air but just think of it as fouling your own nest. Even the lower animals don't do that. But in the larger sense the problem is the damage to our nest created by the extraction of those carbonaceous fuels. The devastation caused by strip mining is awesome in the truest sense of the word. The damage is not only visual but also invisible in the degradation of our water supply and loss of habitat for the natural residents of those areas. We are extracting oil from harder to reach places such as the ocean depths. We are extracting crude from oil sands that require a large expenditure of energy and its consequent pollution. Our reliance on these fuels has to decline even sooner than our supply of those fuels. Natural gas can serve as a relatively long term transition fuel but the current glut of natural gas is created by the newer methods of recovering that gas. The process known as “fracking” is causing many environmental problems that were unforeseen and even now are being denied by the energy producers. The process of fracking involves the use of chemicals, water and other substances the companies won't reveal. There are explosions set off at the bottom of the well to create cracks in the rock and then the chemical concoction is pumped into the well under pressure to widen the cracks and release the gas. There are widespread reports of people who live near where this method is being used becoming ill and suffering other negative effects. There are many reports of the underground water supply becoming contaminated with the fluids used in the process. What made the lights go on for me was the “60 Minutes” report where a homeowner in Pennsylvania lit the water coming out of his taps in his house. Yep, opened the tap and lit the water. Now, we know that under normal circumstances water won't burn but when mixed with the byproducts of fracking it can. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to realize that can't be good.

So, kudos to the City of Somerset for its forward thinking and willingness to assume the cost of development. But it would benefit everyone if government and private enterprise would be thinking about what is to follow.

That is my take on both government intervention and the eventual demise of fossil fuels. I am curious as to what your ideas are on this matter. Write me.