Jeff Sutter's Blog

McCain is not fit to lead

Allan from Silver Spring, MD — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 09:55:30 EDT

I've got it. Senator McCain is a cricket - capable of amazing jumps but only in random directions including into the wall. And there's no way to know what's going to trigger the next one. What we do know is that he got shot down once. What happened the other three times he crashed a jet? You'd think it had to be equipment failures or the like because why else would they give him another plane. Even so, wouldn't it be poetic for a Democratic 503 to find the aggrieved maintenance people who got blamed unfairly and make a Swift Boat commercial? It'd be a perfect October surprise equivalent to Lyndon Johnson's Daisy and Atom-Bomb commercial that eviscerated Barry Goldwater's support among independent voters. A low blow – undeniably. But a good thing nevertheless. Forgetting the lesson, we’ve had to learn the hard way how “extremism in the defence of liberty” can actually be twisted into a vice.

John McCain thinks that she's an energy expert.

Allan from Silver Spring, MD — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 05:50:39 EDT

I think that the rich get richer and for the rest of us it's "Arbeit macht frei".

Here is a link to a current article with Sarah Palin's byline in an energy publication discussing the development of Alaskan oil and gas resources. It recommends building a second trans-Alaska pipeline with a trans-Canada extension for natural gas and doubling our reliance on the existing Trans-Alaska Pipeline System by drilling for oil in the ANWR. Her Alaskakin perspective leads her to promote it as a good idea for America but her discussion is devoid of any comparison to alternatives. She seems conversant enough with the issues to refer to some of the challenges involved but makes no mention of the very real national security risk of loosing even the oil now being delivered by the existing pipeline for an extended time.

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/energycentral/energybiz0908/

Oil needs to be heated to 120 degF to be able to make the 800 mile trip from Prudhoe Bay to the Gulf of Alaska at Valdez where it is loaded into tankers for the trip to the US. When it was approved, the pipeline was supposed to be capable of restarting after being shut down for three weeks in the middle of winter. As built, it will not meet that requirement if the temperature is lower than +40 degF. In winter, when it goes to -40 degF, it will take less than four days for the cargo to congeal into an 800 mile (dare I say) lipstick that's unpumpable until the weather warms up. As things are, the pipeline transports 20% of the total US production of oil, the loss of which would cripple the west coast for long enough to severely undermine the whole economy.

The Trans-Alaska pipeline is is commonly understood to be the single most potent terrorist target in the US. Built during less dangerous times, it was not hardened or even insulated sufficiently to recover from, much less withstand, a serious attack. Now the Governor of Alaska wants us to up the stakes by increasing the oil flow from a newly developed ANWR field and by building a 1,715 mile natural gas pipeline from the North Slope to the TransCanada hub in Alberta. And she wants to do it on the cheap like Rumsfeld:

"In order to protect the value of our resources, we must be sure that the cost of transportation is not made unnecessarily expensive."

It's nuts. Whatever you think of the T. Boone Pickens plan for converting commercial vehicles & trucks to natural gas, his map of all the natural gas fields in the continental US begs the question of why it's a good idea to invest billions to get the gas from Alaska by tripling the size of the pipeline bulls eye. Absent lower cost alternatives that abound, expensive and risky measures like these could be considered. As it is, undeveloped Alaskan resources should be considered more of a last resort than the first thing you'd turn to - the same as making war because it costs and risks too much. But sure enough, Big Oil has found another proxy and sure enough, The Washington Post reportes that 20% of white women just jumped ship and ran off to get on the Alaska bandwagon.

Deep Throat was right when he advised: "Follow the money." Even Alan Greenspan admitted that the Iraq adventure was primarily about oil. The oilers are not comfortable until they're running their agenda straight at us hard enough to generate so much cognitive dissonance that it hurts. I guess that undecided people vote for big oil supporters thinking they'll get some relief.

Apply Directly to the Wallet. Apply Directly to the Wallet. Apply ...

Sara's no different - Republican energy experts are mostly like white coated actors in drug adds telling us what's good for us. They do it because some of us are ditzy enough to believe them - like if rape is inevitable just roll over and enjoy it. I'm sorry, we're being violated. If she walks like a junky and she hawks like a junky and she's got her hand in our pocket and tells us it's OK because our gang is getting the money but we still run the risk of geting busted: she's a junky. It appears that her expertise is more in the nature of diverting our money to the Alaska drillers.

And in case you think any of it will trickle down (aside from paying for Alaska state government where citizens get a check instead of a tax bill), you've forgotten to follow the money: Exxon and BP are currently spending more of their windfall profits and government subsidies buying back common stock than they are on exploration while they leave existing offshore drilling leases untouched. When Senator McCain talks about giving oil companies even more leases to leave fallow as CHANGE, people who believe him are buying a bridge to nowhere that he doesn't own and for which they can't pay. With fingers crossed behind their backs, the Republican candidates are thinking: "Plus ca change! plus ca la meme chose".

It's OK to not take the Government Money

Allan from Silver Spring, MD — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 11:05:42 EST

My wife was disappointed that our candidate appears to be not true to his pledge to use the Fed money until I raised the point that because his private contributions are from grass roots sources instead of special interests, it was the moral equivalent.

Unrealized Benefits of Transport Electrification are Within Reach

Allan from Silver Spring, MD — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:31:20 EDT

R. James Woolsey, CIA Director during the 90’s, wrote an editorial in the Wall Street Journal last December talking about the national security advantages of ending the US dependence on imported oil. He described the dramatic reduction of oil imports and greenhouse gas emissions that will happen if transit combustion is moved from the street to power plants. (1) A week later, GM rolled out the Volt concept car at the Detroit Auto Show. It will be powered by the plug-in hybrid electric drive train that Mr. Woolsey was advocating. (2)

Since electricity costs one third of what we currently spend on gasoline to power cars and recharging would be done overnight, it was apparent to Mr. Woolsey that widespread adoption of plug-in electric drive technology would be practical, particularly since 84% of the 220 million cars on the road in the US can be replaced by plug-in electric cars, having equivalent performance and amenities to existing fuel powered cars, without having to build additional generation and transmission infrastructure. The only remaining bar to implementation was the need for safe and affordable high power batteries with a vehicle lifetime service rating that weren’t available.

Three weeks later, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its 2007 report finding that greenhouse gas emissions coming from human activity are definitely causing global warming and if they are not abated, progressively more severe consequences will follow including the flooding of our coast lines – a key finding was that the ocean level has been rising faster than was predicted in the previous report. Twenty five million people have already been displaced by global climate change. (3)

But there have also been technology advances this spring that indicate that there’s reason for optimism. New materials innovations are now out of the laboratory and in production that, when widely adopted in the US, will cap greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. High power, long life batteries that recharge in 10 minutes are now being manufactured in the US that can power both fully electric plug-in vehicles and plug-in hybrids. (4)

The First Practical Electric Drive Vehicle

It used to be that battery electric propulsion was only good for golf carts, fork lifts, and neighborhood cars that went 30mph. But seemingly out of the blue a private Canadian company doing business in Ontario, CA is producing a no compromise, all electric, five passenger sport utility truck (SUT) with a 130 mile range that cruises at highway speeds with the air conditioner running. (5) They’re being marketed to fleet operators to whom they makes fabulous good sense. Using a high power charger, the batteries “fill up” in ten minutes (or over night from a 220 V outlet using the onboard charger). Phoenix Motorcars will introduce an extended range SUV later this year to accommodate families.

Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV)

The Phoenix SUV will have performance that’s comparable to a Ford Escape Hybrid (0-60 in less than 10 seconds vs. the Ford at 10.3 seconds). If electricity costs ten cents per kWh, charging the Phoenix will cost $7.00 to go 260 miles. Even getting 34mpg which is great for an SUV, with gas at three dollars per gallon it costs $23.00 to travel that distance in the Ford – over 3 times more.

And that’s only half of the savings story - the maintenance profile of battery electric vehicles is 25% of the most durable internal combustion configurations. How can that be? Well, for openers, the motor has only one moving part. And then there’s no:

Transmission to flush or fluid to change
Cooling system to flush or fluid to change
Lubrication system or oil & filter to change
Ignition system to tune or air filter and spark plugs to change
Exhaust system to rust out or EGR components to maintain
Fan or fan belts or timing belts to replace
Front break wear (regenerative breaking instead)
Lead acid battery to replace (Phoenix batteries last 250,000 miles)

If you’re a fleet operator, the reduced maintenance translates into increased availability that means you need fewer electric vehicles to keep the required number in service – for some fleets that means close to half as many. A 260 mile per day range will get most people where they’re going so much of the time and saves them so much money that renting the right vehicle for extended trips is perfect. But plug-in hybrid cars being planned by GM and Toyota will be able to go 650 miles with the combination of a less costly battery and a gas tank.

Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV)

Plug-in hybrids have an all electric drive train, a battery sized to go 40 miles (per day = ~15,000/yr that’s the US average) and on-board gasoline powered generation strong enough to recharge the battery going 70mh down the highway. In normal use this car is inductively charged from a regular outlet using paddles with no exposed metal - commuting will be mostly electric. GM expects a 150,000 mile service life.Based on common usage profiles, the Volt will average over 150 miles per gallon – three times the mileage of a regular hybrid. In January GM said that they were waiting to produce them while lithium battery technology matured.

They must be encouraged by progress since then because this month they announced the transfer of 500 engineers from R&D to Volt production engineering. (6) They now plan to build 1000 vehicles by 2010 and a million in the next five years. It appears that GM’s strategy is to leapfrog the Toyota hybrid franchise to gain a leadership position making plug-in hybrids that get double or more the fuel economy after the cost of electricity is added in and half or less of the combined emissions between the car and the power plant.

GM and Toyota are working with the A123 Company that supplies fast recharge batteries for DeWalt and B&D tools. (7) These batteries do not emit the oxygen (when they heat up during fast charging) that’s emitted by Li-Ion battery packs. And they tolerate heat better to resist thermal runaway issues that plague laptop computers using first generation Li-Ion batteries with a carbon anode and a protective layer that brakes down. (8)

By reducing the internal resistance to a few thousandths of an ohm, the Altair Nanosafe™ batteries used in the Phoenix SUT eliminate the problem completely because they don’t heat up during fast recharge. (9) These batteries are so heavy duty that AES Corp (1/10 of US power generation) has invested a chunk of money and gotten a seat on Altair’s board. They’re interested in being able to get high capacity battery installations that can respond to load fluctuations that come and go in abrupt chunks giving their generators time to adjust and to time-shift ad hoc generation from wind that’s a growing part of what they do. (10)

Implications of Transport Electrification

Even though the battery problems appear to have been solved, widespread adoption of plug-in transit is not assured while it threatens oil company profits. Compared to a Prius (45mpg), an electric power plant burns one half of the oil and emits one third of the carbon dioxide (well to wheel) per mile to power a Phoenix SUV. (11) Plug-in hybrid and battery electric sedans comparable to the Prius will be even more efficient and that means if they become popular we will use a lot less oil.

It’s within our technical and manufacturing ability to convert enough of the cars in the US to plug-in electric transport to cut oil utilization by half or more in the next decade – about the amount we now import. This is coming just in time; some estimates show world oil production peaking in 10 years. Aside from doubling the time it will take to deplete oil supplies, the impact on international politics and economics would be something to see. If we stop importing oil:

The issues mid-east Arabs & Persians have with America become abstract
…except that the price of oil declines as demand is curtailed.
Trade deficits are cut sharply when oil leaves the picture.
Pressure on interest rates and inflation abates.
World-wide carbon emissions are rolled back by electrification in the US alone.
Developing countries leapfrog directly to electric transport and save money.

Oil companies have been successful at derailing conservation initiatives thus far. It’s unfortunate but arguable that they have a duty to their stockholders to be diligent at protecting their market. Even if public opinion coalesces unsympathetically as Mr. Woolsey predicts, these companies have the clout and the resources & creativity to act all over the map to sour opinions and place bumps in the road. (12)

The Problem with Oil Company Opposition to Conservation

I worry about the wealth of opportunities there are out there for organized oil interests to hamper the progress of changes that promote conservation. They are currently running an ad campaign that advocates increasing oil production with no mention of conservation to meet growing energy needs.

Though novel, it would be equitable and pertinent to add a modest increment to the inevitable carbon tax (about 13¢/gasoline gallon equivalent) to fund a proportionate stock buy-back program to stabilize affected fuel producer corporate earnings per share (eps) as their output scales back because of transport electrification efficiencies. And the capital would be freed-up for investment in other ventures. I’d give a lot to avoid the opposition we can expect from embattled oil companies unless there's something to alter their view. 13¢/gallon doesn’t seem so bad if it gets them to join the club of everyone else and support the wholesale conservation that it will take to stabilize the climate and preserve our shorelines.

I know, I know – this looks like shameless corporate welfare but it really isn’t. These stocks are so widely held (1.75 Trillion Oil & Gas Sector market capitalization) that there will not be a material transfer of wealth and the money doesn’t go to the corporations anyway – it makes stockholders like your parents, who depend on a pension or a mutual fund for retirement income, whole. Indeed, market driven creative destruction is not to the point – these companies will continue to be valuable for the foreseeable future while their output is used more sparingly.

Consumers are slow to adopt change. Spending big bucks on a car, many people want to have as little drama as possible – that’s why mouse-gray Camrys are so popular. But times are changing and electrification is so beneficial that it’s only a matter of time until the word gets out. Toyota plans to make a million hybrids in 2010 and GM is right behind with plans to build a million plug-in hybrids by 2012. From there, production from all manufacturers must scale up tenfold to be able to hit that 84% replacement sweet spot by 2020.

On the other hand if you like drama, live in California, and have an extra $96K burning a hole in your pocket take a look at the all electric Lotus-based Tesla Roadster. (13) It goes from 0-60 mph in 3.9 seconds, 250 miles on a charge, has a 130 mph top speed, and it’s drop dead gorgeous. Powered by nearly 7,000 liquid cooled Li-ion laptop batteries, the 250 hp motor, that produces full torque from a standing start, is the size of a watermelon and weighs 70 pounds. They’re being produced now.

And there are the Th!nk (14), Zap-X (15), and a radical Mini QED (16) that has 160hp motors in all four wheels (only adding 4lb to unsprung weight because the breaks are eliminated) in development.