DannyTN's energy plan
The bulk of the stimulus should go to finance nuclear plants so that we could convert to hydrogen or battery in the event of another oil price shock. And hydrogen storage tanks, and car conversion kits. And in making both electric and fuel distribution grids more robust and less subject to disruption or terrorist attack.
The nuke plants would generate returns that would pay for the financing.
The overhead of the nuke plants could be allocated out to normal electric customers and excess electricity could be sold to hydrogen producers for variable direct cost without overhead. That would further reduce fuel costs.
The National Hydrogen Association> believes that hydrogen fuel could be delivered to stations for a cost of $1.20 per gasoline gallon equivalent and that's before considering my suggestion to allow hydrogen producers electricity at cheaper variable direct cost rates.
You could require that all the raw materials for both the nuke plants and the hydrogen tanks come from the U.S. as long as unemployment remains above 6%.
Build enough for at least a 3 state region, and then implement it. If you can really get the cost down that far and demonstrate it, the free market will finance the rest of the country. But if you can't, you still have an alternative in place that can be quickly implemented to reduce oil demand if oil prices shoot up again.
Comments (7)
According to a special Energy issue by Nat. Geographic, we only have enough uranium for 30 years of power. Then what the heck do you do with the waste? Which Nuke plant is really that profitable?
We have enough Uranium to last at least 80 years and probably at least 200 years worth.
But uranium is not the only fuel we can use in a nuclear plant. We can also use Thorium which is at least 3 times more plentiful than uranium. And there are other elements as well that could be used for nuclear reactions.
http://www.world-nuclear.org
Wastes are small and not a problem, especially if you recycle them.
see Clean emissions , Clean Coal and beyond .
Hot Fussion is not far off using this technology .
Replacing Nuclear Plants .
This Technology uses Microwave Induced Plasma (MIP) to break the compounds to their elements, by stripping the electron(s) off the atoms, breaking the valence bond(s), releasing and capturing the solids, and collecting the gases. I am using the plasma, not plasmafied air, and thus this is a more efficient molecular process. I am currently using a 1050w system. Compared to current 100kw-100mw plasma/air torches. Plasmafication vs Combustion. "It is a MATTER of WAVELENGTH"!
brutal86, I'm all in favor of continuing to fund research on fusion, other particle physics, and green fuels.
But right now we are betting the farm that something is going to come out of the green technology research that will save us. And we continue to leave ourselves wide open to another oil price shock.
It just isn't wise, when we have the means now to develop proven alternative energies.
bellevuedan 1 , I appreciate your feed back - I am a Petroleum Landman in Texas ,I make big money when Oil and Gas goes up . Spent the past 5 years passing Pickens trucks with one huge fan blade going to the wind farms and came across this on Pickens Plan , http://purepowercorp.com/ Now the inventor is here in Houston actually sitting next to me . The list of applications goes on and on , I like the one that replaces the catalytic convertor , byproduct is a small amount of Nitrous Oxide that is pumped back threw the engine giving just enough boost and making the burn and gas millage much better , plus leaving zero emissions .
This is a worthy Technology , way misunderstood . This is what this Technology is ment to fix please watch related Videos Ocean Acidification
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=6900574
I am out in the field all the time , We do not have easy Oil , even natural gas we are drilling 17K-25K Deep except in the Barnett Shale , this tech will help in fracking the shale wich also takes about 8 million gallons of water to Frak , plus it is impossible to guarantee the frack will not leak into water polluting aflures , the Technology I am talking about is for emissions breaking down CO2 . on Coal plants this will work great , we need all the resources . I placed Clean Coal up here and nobody understood that we need it , most think natural gas , that still puts of large amounts of CO2 that we can break down . We need all !
Hot Fussion is obtainable using this and better then Nuclear , evidently they have one working and told to stand down , using the old Plasma Laser Tech . This was told to us by a CIA agent wanting to know numbers we are using . Creepy .
We have Dr. Paul Curto , Head Technologist for NASA for 16 years as CEO . He belive in this and has written letters , besides being the CEO for his name , he like myself are not greedy and I can see catastrophes if we do not do something quik .
Here is some Fracking in the Barnett Shale http://txsharon.blogspot.com/2009/02/smoking-frack-in-barnett-shale-source.html
brutal86, I'll come back later and read your links.
I don't think C02 is a problem at all. Plants breath it and put out oxygen. And they grow faster in response to environments with more CO2. And there's evidence C02 was much higher in the past. I don't buy the global warming hype at all. And Al Gore's through the roof chart has been debunked.
So to me the amount of CO2 produced is a non-issue.
Biden told us that we didn't want clean coal or any coal. I think he's wrong. But I'm not surprised anything coal related is being told to stand down by this admin.
But my issue is that Obama has no viable energy plan and he is leaving us vulnerable.
He's killing Coal, refusing to drill, refusing nuclear and threatening to close the ones we have. He's got a lot of the stimulus plan targeted to fund green energy research. But it's a bet the farm strategy as there is no guarantee any of it will pay off.
Meanwhile he bows to the Saudi King, and I wonder if his energy strategy or lack thereof was written by the Sauds.
Good ideas
As for US only parts - many of the parts, and technologies are no longer available from US sources. We sold our technology + R&D for short term profits. The Japanese, Toshiba specifically, can help. Third world countries must learn to be humble.