h2glow2.gif (16911 bytes) Letters
LogoBGIF.gif (142 bytes) The California Hydrogen Business Council
September 15, 2001

To the Editor: Newsflash -- American, European, and Japanese purchases of Middle East petroleum is funding global terrorism.

Going back in my files, I rediscovered a book entitled "In the Path of God: Islam and Political Power, by Daniel Pipes, published in 1983. Mr. Pipes concluded that "today's resurgance of fundamentalism is an historical aberration allowed largely by unprecidented amounts of disposable income generated by unearned oil revenues." In other words the money that funds terrorism is derived directly from sale of Middle East, mostly Saudi, oil to the West and Japan. Fast forward to 2001 -- commentators on ABC news confirmed last night when the CIA moved to cut off Bin Laden's access to his own money, other wealthy Saudis moved to fund his terrorist organizations. This has been going on for more than 20 years.

Given this "Terrorist Connection", it seems that the major non-military focus of the war on terrorism should be to eliminate excess unearned oil revenues in the Middle East. While perhaps only symbolic in the short-term, the message that oil revenues cannot be used to support terrorism must be sent loud and clear. Floridians can send that message.

After the shock of Pearl Harbor, the United States devised an innovative strategy to win the Pacific war. US Navy submarines brought Japan to its knees by cutting off the flow of petroleum from the Dutch East Indies to Japanese forces and the homeland. The greatest generation did their job well, oil shortages severely inhibited the effectiveness of the Japanese military; shutting off the oil won the war and saved thousands of lives.

After the shock of the World Trade Center bombing, Americans must implement innovative strategies appropriate for this new war against terrorists; we must recognize that these terrorists are funded by unearned oil revenues.

The way to win the war against terrorism is to hit 'em where it hurts -- in the pocketbook. Follow the money, stop the cash flow -- stop buying Middle East oil -- period.

Florida should lead the national fight to break this "Terrorist Connection".

Pundunts will say "this is impossible; consumer protests will not have any impact; the cost will be too great, we have no other choice". Perhaps. But this strategy will work. It must work. Why? Because over the long-term, we have no other choice.

More than 65% of all the proven and suspected worldwide reserves of oil are located in the Middle East. Does it really make sense to invest billions to allow Americans to continue buying Middle East oil when those revenues are used to finance our enemies? While some governments in the region try to be American allies, they fund and harbor groups that have now killed more than 5,000 innocent people.

With friends like these, who needs enemies? There is a better way.

Since the oil production and distribution facilities serving the Middle East oil fields are mostly owned by American and European investors, I doubt that the war on terrorism will officially recognize the Terrorist Connection. In addition, military planners will argue successfully that it would make no sense to destroy oil terminals or sink tankers.

The only way to send a message to our enemies that we intend to win this war against terrorism is for the American people to vote with their purchasing power. Market pull is the popular buzz word; stop buying petroleum.

I propose that the people of Florida start a consumer revolution; an expedient first-step would be to ramp up the unpopular campaign to mandate fuel-efficient cars and trucks. The long-term solution is to simply stop buying Middle East oil; this action is neither difficult nor expensive. In fact, conversion to non-petroleum fuels would be easy and painless for the consumer if the energy industry would simply make widespread investments in appropriate fuel infrastructure and vehicles; not in the Middle East, but in America, in Florida.

Let's make it happen. With proper corporate investment, conversion to non-petroleum fuels could be done at any level, from individual consumer to large fleets. In Florida, the state could easily implement an aggressive program to help individuals and fleets replace petroleum transportation fuels with non-petroleum fuels. Fuel stations -- large and small -- can be built quickly using existing natural gas pipeline infrastructure; modest investment in a few dozen strategically located stations would support immediate deployment of thousands of natural gas car, trucks, and buses.

Installation of natural gas vehicle infrastructure will also support deployment of super efficient, ultra-clean hydrogen fuel vehicles. Given market pull, large numbers of hydrogen vehicles could be available in three or four years.

Why hydrogen?

Fuel diversity -- hydrogen can be efficiently refined from any primary source of energy -- natural gas, coal, hydropower, wind, photovoltaics, biomass, nuclear, even petroleum. With hydrogen fuel infrastructure in place, never again will Americans be held hostage by the Terrorist Connection.

Environment -- Combustion of fossil fuels is the major human source of greenhouse gas emissions, not to mention regional air and water pollution. With mineral and / or geologic carbon sequestration, hydrogen derived from natural gas, biomass, and even coal can be a very clean fuel that creates a clear pathway to renewable hydrogen energy systems.

Safety -- Hydrogen fuels are safer than petroleum fuels.

Cost -- When fully deployed the direct cost hydrogen fuels will be no more expensive than petroleum. And there will be no hidden costs for military protection, environmental clean-ups, or security of supply.

Petroleum replacement should be the major non-military element in the war against terrorism because it creates a win-win-win-win situation for Americans.

First, conversion to non-petroleum fuels will break our total dependence on Middle Eastern sources of oil. Domestic petroleum reserves, even with the addition of contentious offshore and Alaskan North Slope oil, are totally inadequate to meet American needs.

Second, conversion now will strengthen the economy. Investment in non-petroluem fuels and technologies will make the economy more efficient, cleaner, and safer.

Third, conversion will protect and create manufacturing jobs. Investment in upgrades to American energy infrastructure and manufacture of non-petroleum vehicles will ensure employment for millions.

Fourth, widespread conversion from carbon-based petroleum fuels to natural gas and eventually carbon-free hydrogen fuels will significantly reduce the threat of global climate change, regional air pollution, oil spills, and ecosystem disruption.

Florida carries a special burden because of this tragedy. The pilots who destroyed the World Trade Center lived and trained here. More importantly, many of the young men and women who will soon be in harm's way are also based at Florida military installations. I feel that we must do everything we can to prevent more death and suffering. In addition to giving blood, we should start replacing petroleum fuels.

It is appropriate for Florida to lead the movement to break the oil-terrorist connections. The benefits are many and obvious; with courage and conviction forged from a long-term vision and consistent leadership, there is little downside risk.

All we have to do is convince the federal government and the multi-national energy companies to start investing their money in projects that will upgrade America energy systems. This is a simple decision when compared to the alternative -- continuing funding of terrorism through American investment in development of Middle East oil and gas reserves.

Conversion to non-petroleum fuels is a long-term strategy that will have a huge short-term benefit. Conversion may not be as exciting as military action, but it will be much more cost-effective. The longest journey begins with the first step; I propose a short-term goal that is easily accomplished, a simple, but very symbolic goal.

Three major college football games were scheduled to be played in the State of Florida today; they have been postponed. When played on December 1, 2001 these events will be dedicated to the victims. I propose that the Gator, Seminole, and Hurricane football programs convert their vehicles to non-petroleum fuels and announce these actions at these games. What could be more appropriate than to honor the dead by introducing real solutions to the terrorist connection?

David E. Bruderly, PE Bruderly Engineering Associates, Inc. 920 SW 57th Drive Gainesville, Florida 32607-3838 352-377-0932

The stone age did not end because the world ran out of stones; the oil age will not end because the world runs out of oil. Shiek Yamani

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE ICHC SHORT LIST


1) The Riversimple Open Source Car Design

Are Our Designs Free?
Patrick's blog    40 Fires Foundation    June 19, 2009

How does open source car design work?
    The honest answer is that we won't know until we have done it. But we have plenty of ideas, which will develop over the coming months as we share the designs for the Riversimple technology demonstrator and start to produce collaboratively a production prototype.
    There are lots of inspiring examples from open source software, and we are being advised by people with experience in this area. But there are many differences between open source hardware and software design.

Differences between open source hardware and software
    There are some major differences between open source software and hardware design:

- There is a "gap" between the on-line design work and the finished product delivered to the consumer. Not only is there substantial physical testing to be done, but also there is significant work to be done to turn the designs into an actual functioning product (we like the analogy of a food recipe – a recipe is not a meal, you need a chef to turn it into a meal). The answer we believe lies in establishing the right relationship between 40 Fires and the manufacturers (the first of which is Riversimple), where each party has its needs met.

- There’s a technical challenge to share ideas on-line, where there is no satisfactory open source CAD (Computer-Aided Design) application. Our solution is to use a low tech approach at first, using a wiki-based website and freely available 3-D viewers to show the 3-D drawings. In time we may get involved in developing a OS CAD program.

- Licensing. We cannot simply take the standard OS software license (the GPL is the most common), since we are dealing with hardware, which is not so well protected by copyright. See further down for some thoughts on the licensing issues.

We'd like to hear from you!
    As in Open Source software projects, we are not attempting to do everything at once and we don’t have to. The designs that Riversimple is licensing to 40 Fires resemble in many ways the code base which a complex software project starts with.
    However, because a car is different to software and requires different development stages and processes, we will be asking for input into specific areas, as well as procedural matters.
    That's why we would like to hear from you, not only from engineers or designers, but also if you have contributed to large scale open source software projects and can help set up our project management structure. Lawyers with an understanding of copyright and patents would also be useful as we review the most appropriate license to use and if and how we should be using patents for some new inventions which emerge.
    To get involved, send an e-mail to participate@40fires.org explaining your interest and skills.

The stages
    We envisage different stages:

Stage 1  Over the coming months, starting this month (July 2009), we will make available design schematics from the Riversimple technology demonstrator vehicle, together with a description of each component's function in the whole system, and a vehicle design brief for the production prototype. We will provide a mailing list or discussion forum to enable comments and discussions. At this stage we expect Riversimple, as the creator of the original designs, to be leading the discussions.

Stage 2  As the detailed discussions develop, we expect a broad consensus to emerge amongst the participants as to which is the best solution to pursue for each design . By this stage, we expect the conversations to be more democratic, with a broad cross-section of collaborators participate, sharing their knowledge and insights.

Stage 3  We start creating detailed designs collaboratively and publishing them on-line. Eventually an entire vehicle will be created, and tested, on-line. We are aiming to complete the design of the production prototype by the summer of 2010.

Stage 4  Riversimple and other entrepreneurs, under license from 40 Fires, can start downloading the schematics and building and testing the vehicles. With the lessons from this, work can start on an improved production prototype.

Are our designs free (as in beer)?
    Richard Stallman famously said that free software is "free as in speech not free as in beer."

Are our designs free?
    We consider that the designs themselves will be free in the sense of free speech, with one exception. Currently we have chosen a Creative Commons, non-commercial license. So the designs can be used, modified, distributed under the same license terms but not for commercial purposes.
    We have chosen to be conservative at this stage and not allowed commercial use. This may change - we intend to set up a discussion group to debate this. The issue is that we don't want a large, profit-focused organisation taking the designs and starting manufacturing with them yet. We intend that when we grant a manufacturing license, this will be for a small fee (say $10 per car) to cover 40 Fires running costs.
    We are also keen on collaborating so if a commercial organisation wants to use the designs, we'd like to chat with them first before allowing them to use the designs for commercial purposes.
    The licensing issues are very complex (patent law is not copyright law; cars are not software) and we don't pretend to have all the answers. It is quite possible that our license may in the end not meet the strict requirements of the Free Software Foundation. But all we really care about is that the license works to ensure that the cars can be built in hundreds of different variations around the world, by local companies and entrepreneurs as well as big multinationals if they like, and that no one company (whether Ford or Riversimple) can dominate the market and keep the ideas to itself.