| |
 |
 |
 |
|
International Clearinghouse for Hydrogen Commerce
www.hydrogencommerce.com
CONTACT |
 |
Hydrogen
and
National
Security
Part 1
2
The Case Against Imported Oil,
Coal,
Nuclear Power, OPEC, Imported LNG and their Lobbyists |
|
|
America's ill-advised choice to abandon democratic ideals for access
to foreign reserves of petroleum comes at great cost. The hidden price
of oil includes the tremendous expense of the vast military network
that Resource Imperialism demands, accompanied by the terrible risks
of global destabilization that result when populations see their
national resource heritage stripped away by international corporations
and their craven puppet regimes.
But renewable energy does not bear this burden - nor does renewable hydrogen.
This makes hydrogen fuel a bargain in real dollars.
Dollars spent making and purchasing hydrogen fuel
circulate within the producing country, enriching it.
This makes hydrogen fuel a bargain for national security. Therefore a global hydrogen economy, where each nation
is its own source of fuel, will promote world peace.
Why wait?
-- Richard D. Masters, ICHC
|
|
PAYOFF OR BLACKMAIL?
Paying Insurgents Not to Fight
Paul Craig Roberts
Counterpunch February 19,
2008 |
|
It is impossible to keep up with all
the Bush regime's lies. There are simply too many. Among the recent crop,
one of the biggest is that the "surge" is working. Launched last year, the
"surge" was the extra 20,000 - 30,000 US troops sent to Iraq. These few
extra troops, Americans were told, would finally supply the necessary
forces to pacify Iraq. This claim never made any sense. The extra troops
didn't raise the total number of US soldiers to more than one-third the
number every expert has said is necessary in order to successfully occupy
Iraq. The real purpose of the "surge" was to hide another deception. The
Bush regime is paying Sunni insurgents $800,000 a day not to attack US
forces. That's right, 80,000 members of an "Awakening group," the "Sons of
Iraq," a newly formed "US-allied security force" consisting of Sunni
insurgents, are being paid $10 a day each not to attack US troops.
more |
|
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant
Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan's first term. He was
Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic
appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic
and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research
Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. |
|
AS
WAR ERUPTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST,
WE NEED TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION:
WHY WON'T WE BUILD A WORLD THAT WORKS?
commentary by Richard D. Masters,
ICHC
July 16, 2006 |
|
WILL
OIL-FUNDED TERRORISM AND WAR STIMULATE INVESTMENT IN RENEWABLE ENERGY
SOLUTIONS?
NO. THE DECISION HAS BEEN MADE FOR THE U.S. TO BE A
WARRIOR NATION DRIVEN BY OIL.
WE'VE SEEN OUR SENATORS GIVE AWAY VITAL RENEWABLE ENERGY
FUNDS IN A MASSIVE
ETHANOL FRAUD. NOW THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE HAS FORCED
A HALT TO WIND FARM EXPANSION IN
THE "SAUDI ARABIA OF WIND," THE MIDWEST.
WHY?
HOW CAN A GOVERNMENT SWORN TO PROTECT ITS CITIZENS WASTE
FUNDING, DENY SOLUTIONS, AND STOP THE FREE MARKET EXPANSION OF VITAL
DOMESTIC ENERGY SOURCES IN TIMES OF EXTREME VULNERABILITY FROM IMPORTED
ENERGY? THIS MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE UNLESS YOU FOLLOW THE MONEY.
SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY WRONG HERE.
NOW THAT WIND POWER
HAS BECOME COMPETITIVE WITH NATURAL GAS AND PROMISES TO DRIVE DIRTY COAL
INTO OBSOLESCENCE, WE CITIZENS WOULD EXPECT - EVEN REQUIRE - THAT THE
COUNTRY EMBARK UPON AN AGGRESSIVE PROGRAM TO BUILD UP THIS UNLIMITED, CLEAN,
FREE DOMESTIC RESOURCE TO ENSURE THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION.
INSTEAD, OUR TRAITOROUS CONGRESS REFUSE TO EXTEND THE WIND
PRODUCTION TAX CREDIT WHILE THEY PILE ON MASSIVE SUBSIDIES TO OIL, COAL AND
NUCLEAR -- AND SEND OUR MILITARY TO SEIZE FOREIGN OIL FIELDS!
WE NEED TO REALIZE THAT TODAY
THE U.S., INCLUDING OUR MILITARY, IS ESSENTIALLY RUN BY THE OIL, COAL AND
NUCLEAR LOBBIES. THEY HAVE COMPLETELY BOUGHT THE INFLUENCE OF OUR
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS LOCK, STOCK AND BARREL. THESE TRAITOROUS SENATORS AND
REPRESENTATIVES ARE GLEEFULLY SELLING AMERICA'S FUTURE PEACE AND PROSPERITY
DOWN THE DRAIN FOR HUGE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM BIG ENERGY. HOW CAN THEY
CALL THEMSELVES AMERICANS? HOW CAN THEY CALL THEMSELVES PATRIOTS AS THEY
LEAD OUR COUNTRY TO RUIN?
WE NEED TO CLEAN HOUSE!
BUT AT A TIME WHEN ONLY A REBELLION BY VOTERS CAN CHANGE THE STATUS QUO, THE
CITIZENS ARE ASLEEP. WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.
BIG OIL, AS THE GREATER PART OF BIG ENERGY, HAS BOUGHT THE
U.S. GOVERNMENT. BIG OIL NOW STEERS OUR FOREIGN POLICY TOWARD OIL WARS
AND HUGE OIL PROFITS.
THIS IS WHY WE ARE NOW ENTANGLED IN WAR, THREATENED BY GLOBAL WARMING,
BANKRUPTCY, INFLATION, AND LEFT WITHOUT SUPPORT FOR A CLEAN DOMESTIC
RENEWABLE ENERGY FUTURE. |
|
THE WAR ON RENEWABLE
ENERGY |
|
 ADDICTEDTO OIL
Filmmaker Kevin Levi features three-time
Pulitzer Prize Winner Tom Friedman in a new documentary
"We're in a War on Terrorism today in which we're funding both sides in
the war with our energy purchases. We fund the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force
and Marine Corps with our tax dollars. We fund Al Qaeda, Islamic Jihad,
the regimes that support them, and the charities that support them
indirectly, with our energy purchases. So we're funding both sides in the
War on Terrorism,
and that’s flat out nuts."
Tom Friedman
"We tax sugar ethanol from Brazil but we don't tax crude oil from the
Middle East. We can only be stupid for so long..."
Charlie Rose Interviews Tom Friedman on Energy Policy
Charlie Rose Inc. June 12, 2006 |
Tom Friedman: "Charlie, if we don't find an
alternative to fossil fuels fast - to feed the energy demands of China,
India, Brazil, Russia - we're gonna burn up, choke up, smoke up and heat
up this planet so much faster than even Al Gore predicts..."
"I believe green technology - clean power: whether for cars
or homes or industry - is gong to be the growth industry of the 21st
century. Mom, Dad, tell your kids: anything green - green design, green
manufacturing, green consulting - there's going to be a great upper-middle
class job for you there. Green is the new red, white and blue.
"But there's one thing we don't know, Charlie. We know that's
going to be the industry of the 21st century - what we don't know is, are
we going to dominate it, or is China or is Japan or is Europe?"
..."Where is there a free market in oil? It's controlled by
the biggest cartel in the world, number one. Number two, in the last
energy bill - I lost track - there are at least two billion is subsidies
for the oil industry in the last energy bill. But what do we do for wind?
What do we do for solar? Stop. Start. We give you a few hundred thousand
dollars this year. Then we take it off when the price goes up. That's
nonsense. I do believe in the market, Charlie, but let there be a truly
free market. Get a tax there where we have to pay the real cost of oil.
Let us pay the real cost of those ships protecting the oil. Let us pay the
cost of the cleaning up of the atmosphere. Let's pay the real cost of oil.
Then you'll see wind and solar and ethanol be really competitive." |
|
'Not Your Parents' Energy Crisis'
Thomas L. Friedman on his new movie, Big Oil, Zarqawi's death
and comparing General Motors to a crack dealer
Brian Braiker Newsweek
June 9, 2006 |
|
Thomas L. Friedman: Traditionally, what has
happened around the issue of green is that very subtly its opponents named
it—“liberal, tree-hugging, sissy, girlyman, unpatriotic, vaguely French.”
Really what we’re trying to do in this film, and really with everything
that I’ve been writing in my column, is to rename green as “geostrategic,
geopolitical, capitalistic, patriotic.”
|
|
|
|
WILL INSANE OIL WEALTH BRING THE WORLD
TO THE BRINK OF NUCLEAR WAR?
“All of these things were predictable. ...We’ve had a failure
in our nation’s energy policy."
Dick Durban, US Senate Minority
Whip
Bodman: Oil Companies "Have Lost Control"
Alex Johnson
MSNBC April 30, 2006 |
"We have lacked a
truly comprehensive energy policy with energy security as a strategic
goal. American energy policy has been focused on a narrow definition of
energy security that strived to ensure sufficient supplies at affordable
prices. This has translated into policies promoting diversification in
supplies of oil and natural gas, but with little emphasis on energy
alternatives. A policy that relies on a finite resource concentrated in a
few countries is doomed to failure. Our long-term security and prosperity
require sufficient, affordable, clean, reliable and sustainable energy."
U.S. Senator Richard Lugar
Speech to the Brookings Institution
March 13, 2006
READ ENTIRE SPEECH |
When the Founding Fathers declared America's independence they could
not have imagined that 230 years later our nation would be as dependent on
countries that in the words of President Bush "don't particularly like us"
as it is today. For 230 years the U.S. has worked to spread freedom and
democracy to the benefit of billions of people around the world. Now with
60% of our oil being imported, America's mission is increasingly
undermined by the fact that we are hostage to a small club of oil
exporters who oppose the cause of freedom and who hold the key to our
prosperity and security. America's freedom and independence are often
represented by the car and the freedom of movement it grants all of us.
Yet the fuel that powers our transportation sector--oil--is increasingly
in the hands of enemies of freedom who wish us harm. Our dependence on
these countries is one of the greatest threats to our national security
and prosperity. It is clear that if we don't change course our economy
will continue to bleed as our enemies grow stronger.
Set America Free
|
|
Urban renewal or global warming? - "Renewable energy" for India
|
|
BUSH BUILDS
A BETTER WORLD
(for nuclear power and weapons)
A WORLD WHERE RISK MEANS NOTHING
AND ONLY
CORPORATE PROFIT COUNTS
"In the rush to
meet an artificial summit deadline, the White House sold out core American
nonproliferation values and positions. The so-called civil-military separation
plan announced today is clearly not 'credible' from a nonproliferation
standpoint as the Bush administration had promised it would be. Congress and
members
 of the voluntary 45-member
Nuclear Suppliers Group should not accept the
deal as proposed and should press India to halt its production of fissile
material for nuclear weapons"
Daryl G. Kimball,
executive director, Arms Control Association
U.S.-India Nuclear Deal Fails Nonproliferation Test
U.S. Newswire
March 2, 2006
-
The U.S.-India Nuclear Cooperation Deal
Arms Control Association
March 3, 2006
-
U.S.-India Nuclear Cooperation: A Reality Check
Arms Control Association September
2005
The deal calls for broad civil nuclear cooperation for the first time since
India’s 1974 nuclear test explosion, which demonstrated that New Delhi was
willing to use “civilian” technology assistance to build nuclear weapons and was
determined not to join the 1968 nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
The deal endorses and assists India's
nuclear-weapons program. US-supplied uranium fuel would free up India's limited
uranium reserves for fuel that otherwise would be burned in these reactors to
make nuclear weapons. This would allow India to increase its production from the
estimated six to 10 additional nuclear bombs per year to several dozen a year.
India today has enough separated plutonium for 75-110 nuclear weapons, though it
is not known how many it has actually produced.
The US's Nuclear Cave-in
Joseph Cirincione Asia Times
March 4, 2006
|
|
COMMENTARY
Fallout Shelters: The Next Big Thing
Richard D. Masters
International Clearinghouse for Hydrogen Commerce
NOT LONG AGO INDIA AND
PAKISTAN STOOD JUST A BUTTON'S PUSH AWAY FROM A NUCLEAR CATASTROPHE THAT
PROMISED TO LEAVE MILLIONS DEAD AND ENGULF AMERICA AND THE REST OF THE WORLD IN
A NIGHTMARE OF RADIOACTIVE FALLOUT. IT WAS A MOMENT FOR US TO RECONSIDER THE
SPREAD OF "CIVILIAN" NUCLEAR POWER WHICH, FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF 50 YEARS,
HAS PROVEN LITTLE MORE THAN A COVER FOR THE PRODUCTION OF ENRICHED URANIUM FOR
NUCLEAR WEAPONS. TODAY IT DISPLACES RENEWABLE ENERGY AT A HORRIBLY UNECONOMIC
MULTIPLE MADE POSSIBLE ONLY BY THE PURCHASE OF POLITICAL FAVORS FROM TRAITORS TO
HUMANITY. I WILL NOT PHRASE IT MORE LIGHTLY.
CENTRALIZED ENERGY IS THE
PRIMARY CAUSE OF STRIFE IN THIS WORLD. THE INEQUITABLE PROCUREMENT OF FOSSIL
ENERGY IS RATIONALIZED BY THE UNDERPRIVILEGED TO BOLSTER HATRED. THE DESIRE FOR
NUCLEAR POWER IS AN EXTENSION OF THIS HATRED WITH THE END ONLY TO ACHIEVE
REVENGE. THIS CREATES A VIRULENT CIRCLE THAT CAN END ONLY IN CATASTROPHE FOR
MANKIND. FOR OUR OWN FAMILIES. FOR OUR OWN CHILDREN. THIS IS MADNESS.
ONLY IF WE DESTROY THE
INFLUENCE OF CENTRALIZED ENERGY WILL OUR WORLD STAND A CHANCE OF SURVIVAL. THOSE
IN ELECTED OFFICE WHO CHOOSE TO SELL THEMSELVES TO THE PROFIT-AT-ANY-COST AGENDA
OF CENTRALIZED ENERGY RISK THE LOSS OF THEIR COUNTRY, THEIR DEMOCRACY, THEIR
PRINCIPLES, THEIR OWN LIVES AND THEIR FAMILIES IN A HELLISH WAVE OF NUCLEAR
CONFLAGRATION.
WE NEED TO REASSESS.
SINCE THAT MOMENT WHEN
MUSLIM AND HINDU ADVERSARIES STEPPED BACK FROM THE BRINK, ADVOCATES OF RENEWABLE
ENERGY HAVE BEEN THRILLED TO SEE INDIA EMBARK UPON A CAMPAIGN OF WIND FARM
BUILDING, PROPELLING IT BEYOND EVEN DENMARK'S MAGNIFICENT ACCOMPLISHMENT TO
ACHIEVE THE THIRD HIGHEST INSTALLED
CAPACITY OF ANY NATION. WIND POWER IS NOW BY FAR THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE WAY TO
BRING POWER ONLINE. RECENT
STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT A GLOBAL EFFORT TO INSTALL WIND POWER WOULD
PROVIDE ALL OF MANKIND'S ENERGY NEEDS WITHOUT POLLUTION OR THREAT. THIS GAVE US
HOPE THAT PEACE BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN STOOD A CHANCE BECAUSE THE ROOT CAUSE
OF ALL CONFLICT IN THIS MODERN ENERGY AGE IS OIL - AND WIND POWER DESTROYS THE
INFLUENCE OF OIL BY CREATING DOMESTIC SOURCES OF DECENTRALIZED ENERGY WITH
VIRTUALLY UNLIMITED GROWTH POTENTIAL.
BUT
THE WAR ON RENEWABLE ENERGY HAS NOW ENTERED A NEW AND INCREDIBLY
DANGEROUS PHASE. THE INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS INDUSTRY, USING "CIVILIAN"
NUCLEAR POWER PRODUCTION AS A FRONT, HAS PURCHASED THE INFLUENCE OF THE U.S.
EXECUTIVE AND CONGRESS, BOTH WHO UNERRINGLY BEHAVE AS IF THEY ARE FOR SALE TO
THE HIGHEST BIDDER. RATHER THAN ENGAGE IN A SENSIBLE AND HUMANITARIAN POLICY OF
ENCOURAGING THE GLOBAL SPREAD OF RENEWABLE ENERGY, THE UNITED STATES HAS NOW
BECOME THE SALESMAN FOR THE GRIM REAPER.
THE WORLD WILL LONG
REMEMBER WHO ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN.
INCREDIBLY, AT THE VERY
MOMENT PRESIDENT BUSH CLAIMS "OBVIOUSLY, NUCLEAR POWER
IS RENEWABLE ENERGY" AND STUPIDLY LOBBIES FOR THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY IN AN EFFORT
TO BUILD FAST BREEDER PLUTONIUM REACTORS IN POPULOUS AND POLITICALLY VOLATILE
INDIA, THE
U.S. CONGRESS PREPARES TO KILL OFFSHORE WIND, THE MOST PROMISING FORM OF
RENEWABLE ENERGY.
MEANWHILE, U.S. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IS BEING DEVASTATED
BY YOUR SO-CALLED REPRESENTATIVES WITH HUGE CUTS AT NASA AND THE NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY
LABORATORY. SCIENTISTS AT THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
ATMOSPHERIC LABORATORY AND OTHER CROWN JEWELS OF U.S. RESEARCH
HAVE BEEN THROTTLED BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION TO FORESTALL EMBARRASSMENT
OVER
THE DESTRUCTION OF A MAJOR AMERICAN CITY
DUE TO THEIR
COLLUSION WITH
EXXONMOBIL TO MISINFORM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC ABOUT THE
DANGERS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
AND THE DIVERSION OF VITAL FUNDING TO THE PERPETUAL OIL WAR.
THE U.S. MILITARY, NOW SERVING
AS THE MILITARY ARM OF THE SAUDI ROYAL FAMILY, IS
BANKRUPTING THE NATION. A GENERATION OF
DISENCHANTED AMERICAN YOUTH NOW FACE THE DISMAL PROSPECT OF
PERPETUAL OIL WARS TO KEEP THE INTERNATIONAL ENERGY COMPANIES - WHO HAVE
BOUGHT A WILLING AND TRAITOROUS CONGRESS LOCK, STOCK AND BARREL THROUGH THEIR LOBBYISTS - IMMENSELY
PROFITABLE.
THE GREAT WORLD TRAGEDY NOW UNFOLDING
ON POLITICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL STAGES STEMS DIRECTLY FROM THE LOSS OF AMERICAN
IDEALS, AMERICAN KNOW-HOW AND COMMON SENSE. THE U.S. CONGRESS HAS UTTERLY FAILED
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY SCOFFING AT THE PRINCIPLES OF A REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC
AND EAGERLY PROSTITUTING THEMSELVES TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER AS THE UNFOLDING ABRAMOFF SCANDAL ATTESTS.
WE ARE LOSING THE DREAM. WHERE ARE OUR PATRIOTS?
|
-- THE
NUCLEAR WAR AGAINST RENEWABLE ENERGY --
Nuclear Nonsense
Lyn Harrison Wind Power/Renewable Energy Access October
21, 2005 |
As an astute article documenting nuclear's PR spending in the New Statesman, a British
political commentary magazine, put it: "We are all being taken in by a carefully
planned public relations strategy."
A major part of that strategy is to subtly and quietly undermine the
technical and economic ability of wind power to play a major role in electricity supply.
In a true wolf-in-sheep's clothing trick, the nuclear lobby pours forth woolly words on
"partnerships" with renewable energy, while savaging wind behind the scenes.
Among the so-called "fact sheets" from the World Nuclear Association is one on
renewables. It blithely tells us, after a wicked manipulation of statistics, that
Britain's 20% renewables target "is neither technically nor economically
feasible." That is a downright lie. Britain's power system planners are not idiots.
They have studied the effect of 20% wind alone and there are no technical barriers.
....For the most part the nuclear lobby has been careful to sidestep
the economics issue. The "too cheap to meter" claims of the 1960s, when it
proved to be anything but, have yet to be lived down. Instead, the industry's battle-cry
is that "only nuclear power offers clean, environmentally friendly energy on a
massive scale."
That a technology producing highly lethal waste with no acceptable
means of disposal is "clean" and "environmentally friendly" beggars
belief - and the back-handed swipe to wind that it cannot match nuclear on scale is plain
audacious. |
|
|
"Without a diversification of energy
supplies that emphasizes environmentally friendly energy sources that are
abundant in most developing countries, the national incomes of energy-poor
nations will remain depressed, with negative consequences for stability,
development, disease eradication and terrorism."
U.S. Senator Richard Lugar
Speech to the Brookings Institution
March 13, 2006
READ ENTIRE SPEECH |
 |
"No matter what happens in Iraq, we
cannot dry up the swamps of authoritarianism and violent Islamism in the
Middle East without also drying up our consumption of oil - thereby bringing
down the price of crude. A democratization policy in
the Middle East |
without a different energy policy at home is a waste of
time, money and, most important, the lives of our young people.
...We need a president and a Congress with the guts not just to invade Iraq, but
to also impose a gasoline tax and inspire conservation at home. That takes a
real energy policy with long-term incentives for renewable energy - wind,
solar, biofuels - rather than the
welfare-for-oil-companies-and-special-interests that masqueraded last year
as an energy bill. Enough of this Bush-Cheney nonsense that
conservation, energy efficiency and environmentalism are some hobby we can't
afford. I can't think of anything more cowardly or un-American."
Thomas Friedman
The New York Times January 6,
2005
|
|
Ready for $262/Barrel Oil?
Nelson Schwartz Fortune
January 27, 2005 |
The fall of the House of Saud seems the most
far-fetched of the six possibilities, and it's the one that generates that
$262 a barrel. More realistic -- and therefore more chilling -- would be the
scenario where Iran declares an oil embargo a la OPEC in 1973, which Browder
thinks could cause oil to double to $131 a barrel. Other outcomes include an
embargo by Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez ($111 a barrel), civil war in
Nigeria ($98 a barrel), unrest and violence in Algeria ($79 a barrel) and
major attacks on infrastructure by the insurgency in Iraq ($88 a barrel).
-
Iran Crisis "Could Drive Oil Over $90"
Heather Stewart The Observer (UK)
January 29, 2006
The president of Opec, Nigeria's Edmund Daukoru,
fuelled market fears on Friday when he told Reuters that his organisation
was unlikely to step in with extra supplies if the Iranian crisis
worsened. 'If Iran decides to stop production, or is forced to stop
production because of a sanction, I don't think Opec necessarily has a
role to play there,' he said.
|
|
US$12 BILLION
MISSING!
IRAQ: Cronyism and Kickbacks
Ed Harriman London Review of Books
January 25, 2005 |
|
Cost of the War in Iraq |
"We've thought long and hard about this and to get hydrogen refueling stations
to within two miles of every US citizen and maybe every 25 miles on the freeway would take
$12 billion - that's half the cost of the Alaskan oil pipeline. Just think - the oil
industry believes it will cost $200 billion of capital simply to secure the petrol
infrastructure in the coming years."
Larry Burns, General Motors
The Fuel Cell is Alive and Kicking
Andrew English The
Telegraph (UK) October 1, 2005
Iraq War Could Cost US Over $2 Trillion
Says Nobel Prize-Winning Economist
Jamie Wilson Guardian (UK)
January 7, 2006 |
|
The real cost to the US of the
Iraq war is likely to be between $1 trillion and $2 trillion (Ł1.1
trillion), up to 10 times more than previously thought, according to a
report written by a Nobel prize-winning economist and a Harvard budget
expert. The study, which expanded on traditional estimates by including
such costs as lifetime disability and healthcare for troops injured in
the conflict as well as the impact on the American economy, concluded
that the US government is continuing to underestimate the cost of the
war.
THE ECONOMIC COSTS OF THE IRAQ WAR
AN APPRAISAL THREE YEARS AFTER
THE BEGINNING OF THE CONFLICT
Linda Bilmes, Kennedy School, Harvard University and
Joseph E. Stiglitz, University Professor, Columbia University
Audit Finds Iraq Awash in Fraud and Waste
James Glanz Sydney Morning Herald
(AU) January 26, 2006 |
|
"For decades, we have
watched Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states use oil wealth to create
domestic conditions that prevent movement toward democracy. In Russia and
Nigeria, energy assets have offered opportunities for corruption. In many
oil-rich nations, oil wealth has done little for the people, while
ensuring less reform, less democracy, fewer free market activities and
more enrichment of elites. Beyond the internal costs to these nations, we
should recognize that we are transferring hundreds of billions of dollars
each year to some of the least-accountable regimes in the world. Some are
using this money to invest abroad in terrorism, instability, or demagogic
appeals to populism. Now at a time when the international community is
attempting to persuade Iran to live up to its nonproliferation
obligations, our economic leverage on that country has declined due to its
burgeoning oil revenues. If one tracks the arc of Iran's behavior over the
last decade, its suppression of dissent, its support for terrorists, and
its conflict with the West, have increased in conjunction with its oil
revenues, which soared by 30 percent in 2005. Sometimes observers comfort
themselves with the thought that most U.S. imports come from friendly
nations such as Canada and Mexico, rather than from Iran or other
problematic countries. But oil is a globally-priced commodity and even if
our dollars not going directly to Iran, this does not mean that our
staggering consumption of oil is not contributing to the price paid to
Iran by other consumers."
U.S. Senator Richard Lugar
Speech to the Brookings Institution
March 13, 2006
READ ENTIRE SPEECH
|
|
"We're
controlling rising prices and reducing our use of foreign oil by
embracing alternative energy sources. ...Sadly, we simply can't rely on
the Republican-controlled Congress to create a national energy policy
that works."
Catherine Gregoire,
Governor of Washington
Democrats Urge Congress to Focus on Energy
Rachel La Corte
Boston Globe November
26, 2005 |
|
THE FOX GUARDS THE HENHOUSE
INCREDIBLE!!!
Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman requests a study of "the industry's
ability to produce enough oil and natural gas at prices that won't
cripple the economy" from the man responsible for forming dozens of
phony "think tanks" to
mis-inform the public on global warming and sideline renewable energy. |
|
Can Oil Production Satisfy Rising Demand?
USA Today November 24, 2005 |
|
In a previously unreleased Oct. 5 letter to
ExxonMobil CEO Lee Raymond, chairman of the National Petroleum Council,
Bodman asked for a study of the industry's ability to produce enough oil
and natural gas at prices that won't cripple the economy. |
Put a Tiger In Your Think Tank
Mother Jones May/June
2005
ExxonMobil has pumped more than $8 million into more than 40 think
tanks; media outlets; and consumer, religious, and even civil rights
groups that preach skepticism about the oncoming climate catastrophe.
|
|
Now Bodman is
working with ExxonMobil to enable it to dominate the U.S. natural gas
market by dramatically increasing dangerous American reliance on Middle
East imports!
The world's major reserves are in Russia, Iran and the Middle East. What
a brilliant strategy for America's future! Is this why Spencer Abraham
left? |
|
Major Qatar LNG Project Geared To US Exports
Dow Jones
November 15, 2005 |
|
Ras Laffan Liquified Natural Gas Co. Ltd.-3, or
RL3, was launched Tuesday by Qatari officials, U.S. Energy Secretary
Samuel Bodman and ExxonMobil Corp. (XOM) President Rex Tillerson. The
project will eventually be the single most important source of liquefied
natural gas to the U.S. market. |
 |
 |
Vulnerability of Imported LNG and Other Fuels to Terrorists
Annie Korin, Co-Director
Institute for Analysis of Global Security |
|
America’s Oil Dependence
Implications for U.S. Middle East Policy
Gal Luft
IAGS
October 20, 2005
Examining Modern-Day Piracy (AUDIO)
Annie Korin National Public Radio
November 7, 2005
|
|
ENERGY FARCE:
WILL THE REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED CONGRESS'
WAR ON RENEWABLE ENERGY
BRING
ABOUT THE DOWNFALL OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY... OR OF THE U.S. ITSELF?
WHAT IS WITH THESE GUYS? PEOPLE ARE LEAVING THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN
DROVES OVER THIS ISSUE. WE ARE FED UP!
Richard D. Masters, ex-member, Inyo California Republican Central
Committee
Providing the necessary energy services without
further destabilising the climate or destroying the health, welfare and
livelihoods of communities, can be achieved by the rapid expansion of
renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, micro-hydro, wave and
biomass power, coupled with increasing energy efficiency and
conservation.
However, the potential for the uptake of renewable energy is
not being realised, not because of technology failings but due to
political and fiscal barriers - chiefly the estimated US$250 and US$300
billion each year in subsidies which give fossil fuels and nuclear power
generation such a market advantage over renewable energy.
Burning Our Future Greenpeace
December 8, 2005 |
Hydrogen Fuel to Help Lessen
US Dependence on Foreign Oil
Samuel W. Bodman, US Secretary of Energy
Gulf Times (Doha, Qatar) April 24, 2005 |
WASHINGTON: Every year, Earth Day reminds us of our
responsibility to the land – to care for it, preserve its beauty and treat all of
nature with respect. But this year, I’d like to steer our Earth Day thoughts toward
thoughts of America’s energy future.
If you’ve opened a newspaper or watched the local news even once
in the past several months, you know that rising gasoline prices are headline news. Other
oil-related stories in the news these days concern air pollution, global climate change,
political instability in oil-producing countries, the impact of oil markets on the overall
economy, and fears that some day our oil supply might run out.
While there is no simple or easy solution to the oil situation,
researchers in the United States and several other countries are pursuing the development
of a new form of energy that could go a long way toward addressing many of them –
hydrogen fuel.
Hydrogen would help lessen America’s dependence on oil from
foreign countries, help lessen the effects of global politics on the energy markets,
significantly reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions and help create new jobs in a
hydrogen economy.
More than two years ago, President Bush committed $1.2bn over five
years toward a programme that would develop clean hydrogen fuel for cars and trucks. This
plan will hasten the day when hydrogen will become available to consumers as an
alternative to gasoline.
The president’s goal for developing this technology envisions that
“the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and
pollution-free.”
When hydrogen research proves successful, zero-emission hydrogen fuel
cell vehicles could become as common as the gasoline powered-automobiles of today.
Hydrogen fuel can be produced from our plentiful domestic energy resources, reducing the
need for oil, and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles emit only water vapour, which, in turn,
results in cleaner air.
About a year ago, the Department of Energy assembled four
research-and-development teams from government and private companies to work on projects
designed to assess the status of hydrogen technology.
Known as learning demonstration projects, they serve as a great example
of President Bush’s vision to create government-industry partnerships that will bring
hydrogen technologies from the laboratory to the car dealer’s showroom. The projects
cover everything from fuel cell durability and efficiency to vehicle range and fuel costs.
They are indicative of the president’s support for innovative programs that provide
realistic, achievable solutions for addressing America’s energy challenges.
The US government is not alone in making hydrogen energy a priority.
Numerous partnerships between all levels of government, the automotive and energy
industries and their suppliers are making significant progress toward developing and
deploying new hydrogen vehicles and the infrastructure to support them. Continued
technological progress is expected to lead to an industry decision on the commercialised
use of hydrogen fuel by the year 2015.
As part of their research, our learning demonstration partners will
examine 134 fuel cell vehicles and up to 28 hydrogen refueling stations like those
currently operating in California, Michigan, and Washington, DC.
They will collect data in controlled testing environments and on the
open road, allowing us to demonstrate hydrogen technology in real-world conditions.
The data and experience gained in these “learning
demonstrations” will help guide future research efforts and track progress. We also
hope to use this information to further educate decision-makers and the public, because we
believe the more people know about hydrogen power, the more they will support it.
That is why it is so important for Congress to pass a comprehensive
energy bill this year. This legislation contains a number of provisions that support our
efforts to further develop hydrogen energy, in addition to addressing a broad range of
other energy issues that are critical to our nation’s economic future. Energy
legislation has been under debate for years, while prices for gasoline and natural gas
have continued to climb.
By developing alternative fuels including hydrogen, we not
only help preserve our environment for generations to come, but we also help
America’s economy by keeping our hard-earned dollars here at home, rather than
sending them to oil-producing countries overseas. |
|
|
 |
"In sum, it looks like the world – led by the U.S. – is moving toward the
day when hydrogen will replace oil as the major source of energy for transportation. The
only question is how we get there. There are three major scenarios that describe possible
energy environments of the next few decades: Awash in Oil and Gas, Technology Triumphs,
and Turbulent World. Within the alternative vagaries of unlimited fossil fuels, new
hydrogen-based technologies, or broad-based chaos that begs for change, a path must be
planned that is based upon evolutionary change but will respond to revolutionary
influences." |
|
It should be a top national
security priority of the United States to significantly reduce its consumption of foreign
oil through improved efficiency and the rapid substitution of advanced biomass, alcohol
and other available alternative fuels, and this effort should be funded at a level
proportionate with other priorities for the defense of the nation.
Letter
to President George W. Bush
Energy Future Coalition
March 24, 2005 |
MILESTONE: COST OF IRAQ WAR REACHES PROJECTED
IMPLEMENTATION COST OF A HYDROGEN ECONOMY
Richard D. Masters
ICHBC April 22, 2005 |
With the passage of the latest appropriations
package for continued funding of the U.S. military operations in Iraq, the total
expenditure so far -- US$300,000 million -- now matches
the projected cost by
some industry experts of establishing a widespread hydrogen fueling infrastructure
within the United States.
For better or worse, the United States has chosen instead to attempt to
establish free markets and democracy in the Middle East in hopes of securing competitive
access to the remaining supplies of petroleum, leaving the U.S. and its economy
dangerously reliant upon imported oil. |
|
PEAKING OF WORLD OIL PRODUCTION: IMPACTS, MITIGATION, & RISK MANAGEMENT
Robert L. Hirsch, SAIC, Project Leader; Roger Bezdek, MISI;
Robert Wendling, MISI
February 2005 |
|
Our study required that we make a number of assumptions and estimates. We
well recognize that in-depth analyses may yield different numbers.
Nevertheless, this analysis clearly demonstrates that the key to
mitigation of world oil production peaking will be the construction a
large number of substitute fuel production facilities, coupled to
significant increases in transportation fuel efficiency. The time required
to mitigate world oil production peaking is measured on a decade
time-scale, and related production facility size is large and capital
intensive. How and when governments decide to address these challenges is
yet to be determined. Our focus on existing commercial and near-commercial
mitigation technologies illustrates that a number of technologies are
currently ready for immediate and extensive implementation. Our analysis
was not meant to be limiting. We believe that future research will provide
additional mitigation options, some possibly superior to those we
considered. Indeed, it would be appropriate to greatly accelerate public
and private oil peaking mitigation research. However, the reader must
recognize that doing the research required to bring new technologies to
commercial readiness takes time under the best of circumstances.
Thereafter, more than a decade of intense implementation will be required
for world scale impact, because of the inherently large scale of world oil
consumption. |
National Security to Lead
Renewable Energy Deployment
US Energy Independence Goals Propel Renewable
Energy
Jesse Broehl
RenewableEnergyAccess.com December
14, 2004
OIL ECONOMY SETS
STAGE FOR WORLD CONFLICT |
China Forges Major Energy Ties with Iran
Green Car Congress/AFP October 29, 2004 |
| This
may be an energy agreement, but it is a political one as well. China could provide an
important block to any UN action on Iran’s nuclear program. And how eager would China
be to see US intervention in one of its key energy allies? |
"Every tax dollar the
House bill gives to the highly profitable oil, gas and nuclear giants, chokes off
competition from new, undepletable fuels capable of economically replacing oil and nuclear
energy. But for sustainable fuels to be deployed in time to avoid the disaster that looms
from peak oil, Congress must provide a level playing field with oil, coal, gas, and
radioactive fuels."
Roy McAlister, President
American Hydrogen Association
Energy
Bill Threatens Economic and National Security
CleanPeace April 30, 2005
| LEBANON |
Dar al Hayat
August 20, 2004 |
The Hydrogen
Challenge to Arab Oil
Patrick Seale |
World oil prices continue to soar -
driven by the continuing power struggle in Iraq, by fears for the solvency of the Russian
oil giant Yukos, and by surging demand for oil in Asia, notably in China. Even President
Hugo Chavez's convincing victory in Venezuela on August 15 -- and his pledge to continue
supplying the United States with 1.5 million barrels daily in spite of his political
differences with Washington -- has not checked the upward trend.
Some observers predict that oil prices could soon break through the $50
a barrel ceiling. But, they add, there is no need to panic. In real terms, oil prices are
still only about half the level reached in 1979!
High oil prices, however, have some immediate consequences. They check
the rate of growth of industrial economies, and might even trigger a recession; they
stimulate the search for alternative sources of energy; and they pump money into Arab
pockets.
The British weekly The Economist has estimated that 'With oil prices at
their highest level in two decades, revenues of $600 million a day are gushing into the
Gulf, double the volume during the 1990s. The monarchies of the Gulf Cooperation Council
are alone likely to earn $35 billion more from oil exports this year than last…' -
and that excludes big producers such as Algeria, Libya and Iraq.
Preparing for a post-oil era
Arabs should beware. The bonanza will not last forever. Instead of frittering away
their oil wealth on conspicuous consumption, on real estate extravaganzas and uncertain
overseas investments, the Arabs should devote every surplus dollar to preparing their
societies for a post-oil economy. As most Arabs are today under 30 years of age, a radical
change could occur in their lifetime, and it could be painful. Urgent measures need to be
taken to prepare for the day when the world economy will no longer be dependent on Arab
oil.
Instead of deregulating their economies, eliminating corruption,
privatizing their inefficient state-owned industries and stimulating growth in non-oil
sectors, high Arab oil revenues have created a sense of complacency and retarded the
introduction of much-needed reforms. Most Arab economies have stagnated over the past two
decades with the result that 80 million Arabs out of a total of 290 million still live
below the poverty line.
It is almost certain that within three, four or, at the latest, five
decades from now, the petrol pump will have been left behind and replaced by some other
form of energy-provider. At present, the world's 500 million cars are driven by
internal-combustion petrol engines. By 2030, the number of cars is forecast to increase to
more than two billion, largely due to growth in Asia. What new technology will drive them?
Might many of them be all-electric vehicles? Or might they be powered by hydrogen fuel
cells - hydrogen being, after all, the most abundant element in the universe?
Whatever the answer, tomorrow's cars are most unlikely to be the
gas-guzzlers we see on the roads today, pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and
contributing fatally to global warming and climate change.
Writing earlier this month in the Financial Times, Wolfgang Reitzle,
chief executive of a leading international energy company, announced that 'the U.S.,
Japan, China and the European Union have focused on hydrogen technology as the most likely
mainstay of continued economic development.' Industry, he said, is putting its long-term
money on the hydrogen fuel cell. Fuel-cell-powered aircraft, trains, boats and trucks are
in development. The Chinese are ahead of the pack: fuel cell bus services are due to begin
in Beijing next year.
A recent 500-page report by America's National Academy of Science
concluded that 'hydrogen has the potential for replacing essentially all gasoline and
eliminating almost all CO2 from vehicular emissions over the next 50 years.'
Energy is one of the major planks in John Kerry's campaign to unseat
George W. Bush at next November's U.S. presidential election. The Democratic challenger
blames the Bush administration's Middle East policies -- notably the war in Iraq -- for
adding $8-$15 a barrel to the price of oil. He wants the U.S. to reduce its dependence on
Arab oil and to adopt a policy of 'energy independence'.
Kerry has pledged that, if he becomes President, he will spend $30
billion to encourage Americans to buy cleaner cars and to subsidize carmakers to convert
to cleaner technologies. Above all, he wants to promote a shift to fuel cell technology
and has urged U.S. industry to develop renewable sources of energy, such as wind and solar
power.
Kerry's energy policies appeal to the growing 'Green' lobby, which has
applauded his pledge to introduce a ceiling on America's emission of greenhouse gases.
The race for a new energy source
'Energy independence' sounds good but will not be easy to achieve: the United
States consumes a quarter of the world's oil but sits on only 3% of its proven reserves.
In spite of the difficulties, however, no one should underestimate the innovative powers
of American industry, nor its ability to divert enormous resources to developing a new
technology if it looks like being a winner.
Whatever the politicians may say, America's overthrow of Saddam Hussein
-- and its ambition to install a pro-American regime in Baghdad -- were driven in large
part by the looming world oil shortage. World oil supplies are expected to peak between
2010 and 2020, and would then be unable to meet the exploding world demand for oil. The
major powers, with the U.S. in the lead, are engaged in a scramble for remaining oil
stocks - to fill the supply gap before an alternative energy source becomes widely
available, probably in the second half of this century.
According to Wolfgang Reitzle quoted above, hydrogen is the most viable
replacement. 'Every dollar spent on hydrogen,' he says, will save us many more when the
final rush for oil begins.'
But hydrogen -- which as a constituent of water is all around us -- is
not easy to harness. In theory, switching from fossil fuels to hydrogen is extremely
tempting: it would end dependence on oil, reduce air pollution in cities and check the
build-up of greenhouse gases that are already being held responsible for severe climate
change. But, in spite of billions of dollars now being spent on research, no one has yet
found a simple, safe and cheap way to produce hydrogen.
...Change is coming and the higher the oil price the faster it will
come. more |
| UNITED STATES |
May 21, 2004 |
The U.S. food system consumes ten
times more energy than it produces in food energy. This disparity is made possible by
nonrenewable fossil fuel stocks.
Between 1950 and 1984, as the Green Revolution
transformed agriculture around the globe, world grain production increased by 250%. That
is a tremendous increase in the amount of food energy available for human consumption.
This additional energy did not come from an increase in incipient sunlight, nor did it
result from introducing agriculture to new vistas of land. The energy for the Green
Revolution was provided by fossil fuels in the form of fertilizers (natural gas),
pesticides (oil), and hydrocarbon fueled irrigation.
The Green Revolution increased the energy flow to agriculture by an
average of 50 times the energy input of traditional agriculture. In the most extreme
cases, energy consumption by agriculture has increased 100 fold or more.
...Presently, only two nations on the planet are major exporters of
grain: the United States and Canada. By 2025, it is expected that the U.S. will
cease to be a food exporter due to domestic demand. The impact on the U.S. economy could
be devastating, as food exports earn $40 billion for the U.S. annually. More importantly,
millions of people around the world could starve to death without U.S. food exports.
more |
|
|
 |
French supertanker Limburg burns off Yemen - Oct 2002 |
| "By exploding the oil tanker in Yemen, the holy warriors hit
the umbilical cord and lifeline of the Crusader community, reminding the enemy of the
heavy cost of blood and the gravity of losses they will pay as a price for their continued
aggression on our community and looting of our wealth.''
Osama bin Laden October
2002 |
RENEWABLE ENERGY PREPARES FOR ITS DAY IN THE
SUN AS OIL CLIMBS HIGHER. CRUDE OIL RECEIVES A
"FEAR PREMIUM"
OF US$10 PER BARREL FROM INSURERS FOLLOWING FAILURE OF
BLOODY SECOND TANKER
ATTACK
AND ENSUING SLAUGHTER AT THE EXXON-MOBIL
OIL REFINERY.
"We cannot control Iraq with 140,000 troops. Can you
imagine how many hundreds of thousands of troops would be necessary to guard the Saudi oil
installations to prevent such attacks?"
Oppenheimer Market Analyst Fadel Gheit
Oil Hits 14-year High of US$38.21
Baltimore Sun May 4, 2004 |
AMERICAN ABANDONMENT OF CORRUPT ROYAL FAMILY BEGINS. TERRORISTS
BLAMED. WILL SAUDI ARABIA DESCEND INTO CHAOS?
GO HOME
We cannot protect you!
U.S. Ambassador Tells Oil
Workers in Saudai Arabia to Go Home
Daily News/AP Longview
(Washington) May 4,
2004
Huddled in a meeting room in a Holiday Inn still pocked with bullet holes after the latest
in a string of attacks on Westerners killed two Americans and four others, many said they
would heed his words.
more: HYDROGEN OR
OIL? |
|
Defense officials have determined it
costs about $40 to move one gallon of diesel fuel from Kuwait to Baghdad.
Fuel
Cell Technology Has Combat Uses
Matthew Korade Anniston Star January
19, 2004
Hidden Costs Disguise the Fact that Renewable Hydrogen
is Cheaper than Gasoline
How Much
Are We Really Paying for a Gallon of Gas?
Institute for the Analysis of Global Security
Since 1973, the U.S. has faced a
series of energy crises related to the price of oil. The first crisis struck in 1973 when
Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack on Israel on October 6, Yom Kippur. For the
first few days, the attack seemed to be succeeding. To prevent Israel from collapsing, the
United States responded with an airlift of supplies. The Arab members of OPEC, the
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, reacted to the U.S. intervention by voting
to increase the price of oil by seventy percent, and a few weeks later by voting to begin
a boycott of oil going to the U.S. and other Israeli allies.
...In 1979, the second energy crisis began. The seeds of the crisis
were in the Iranian Revolution. Throughout 1978, the Ayatollah Khomeini had been calling
for increasingly violent demonstrations against the Shah of Iran. In December, those
demonstrations peaked in violence that shut down the Iranian oil industry. The following
month, the Shah fled Iran, leaving the country to Khomeini and his followers. Under the
new regime, oil exports resumed, but they were inconsistent and at a far lower volume than
before. In the fall of 1980, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein invaded Iran, and the situation
deteriorated sharply. Iran stopped exporting oil, and Iraq's exports were cut by seventy
percent.
...The third energy crisis began with the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in
August 1990. The immediate effect of the invasion was to cut off the flow of Kuwait's oil
to world markets, and to send oil prices surging upward. ...In January 1991, the United
States military crushed the Iraqi army in the Persian Gulf War, but although Kuwait was
liberated, the fleeing Iraqis set fire to over 730 oil wells--the last of which was not
put out for nine months.
Trust During an Energy
Crisis by Eric Smith, Juliet Carlisle,
Kristy Michaud
UC Energy Institute June 2003 |
|
Algerian
Explosion Stirs Foes of U.S. Gas Projects
Simon Romero New York
Times February 12, 2004
Liquid
Assets
Michael Freedman
Forbes February 12, 2004
LNG is a
Hot-button Issue
Diane Lindquist San Diego Union-Tribune
Februaty 7, 2004
Israel
Sets the Stage for the
World's First Hydrogen Economy
The only Middle Eastern Democracy may work with U.S. Department of Energy
to free itself from the influence of imported fossil fuels. - VIMS
Former Israeli Prime Minster and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Shimon Peres meets with the U.S. Department of Energy's Admiral Tom Gross at the Jerusalem
conference Cooperation for Energy
Independence of Democracies in the 21st Century to develop a roadmap to create,
with major U.S. participation, a sustainable / renewable energy infrastructure for Israel
and bring Israeli participation into the U.S. effort toward finding solutions to
implementing a global hydrogen economy. An Israeli hydrogen economy would serve as a
"beta test" for the planned conversion of the United States, according to Jack
Halpern, leader of the American Jewish Congress' Energy Independence Task Force.
|
|
|
New videos from the Cooperation for Energy
Independence of Democracies in the 21st Century conference in Jerusalem, Israel, address
the relationship between terrorism and Middle East oil. |
|
|
|
Imagine how the
hydrogen economy will change geopolitics. OPEC will no longer be a factor in foreign
policy. Relations with oil-producing nations will be based on common interests. The US
will be free to promote democracy in countries like Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Bases
in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar will be dismantled and naval forces in the
Mediterranean and Persian Gulf sent home.
Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall
How
Hydrogen Can Save America
Wired April 2003
Why the Muslims Misjudged Us
Victor Davis Hanson Manhattan Institute City Journal Winter 2002
Senators Fuel a New Nuclear Power Debate
H. Josef Hebert Southwestern Oregon
Publishing/AP June 10,
2003
Senate Votes for Cut in Oil Use
Harry Stoffer Automotive News June 10, 2003
The vote was a surprisingly lopsided 99-1 in favor...
"The Secretary of Transportation shall consult with the Secretary of Energy
to identify alternative fuel technologies that could be utilized in the transportation
sector to reduce dependence on crude-oil-derived fuels. The Secretary of Transportation
shall take those technologies into consideration in prescribing the regulations under this
section."
S. 1169 - To decrease the United States dependence on imported oil by the year 2015
|
|
"The belief that invading
Iraq will produce a more stable Middle East, and give the West easy access to its oil
wealth, is dangerously simplistic. Westerners live in a world where most of their oil
comes from Islam, and their only long-term security in energy depends on accommodating
Muslims."
Anthony Sampson
Author of The Seven Sisters: The Great
Oil Companies and the World They Made
West's Greed for Oil
Fuels Saddam Fever
Anthony Sampson
The Observer (UK)
August 11, 2002
Economies
Face Oil Slick The
Observer (UK) August 11,
2002
International oil sources fear al Qaeda is planning a
radioactive strike for the big Saudi oil terminal at Ras Tanura - or against US troops
stationed in the Saudi Kingdom and Gulf emirates – that will further push up
world oil prices.
Al Qaeda Talks
Back Debkafile Israel
February 14, 2003
"If you blew up Ras Tanura, you
can't imagine the damage that would do to the United States," said an American oil
executive active in the Middle East.
Pro-Qaeda Oil
Workers a Sabotage Risk for Saudis
Jeff Gerth New York Times
February 14, 2003
|
 |
"This is a program that is connected more with an
emergency than with peacetime development."
David Freeman
Chairman of the California Power Authority |
How Hydrogen Can
Save America
by Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall Wired
April 2003 |
| [ICHC Note: This article has been nominated as one of the most
significant recent published works on creating a hydrogen future.] |
| The cost of oil dependence has never been so clear.
What had long been largely an environmental issue has suddenly become a deadly serious
strategic concern. Oil is an indulgence we can no longer afford, not just because it will
run out or turn the planet into a sauna, but because it inexorably leads to global
conflict. Enough. What we need is a massive, Apollo-scale effort to unlock the potential
of hydrogen, a virtually unlimited source of power. The technology is at a tipping point.
Terrorism provides political urgency. Consumers are ready for an alternative. From Detroit
to Dallas, even the oil establishment is primed for change. We put a man on the moon in a
decade; we can achieve energy independence just as fast. Here's how.
Four decades ago, the United States faced a creeping menace to national security. The
Soviet Union had lobbed the first satellite into space in 1957. Then, on April 12, 1961,
Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin blasted off in Vostok 1 and became the first human in
orbit.
President Kennedy understood that dominating space could mean the
difference between a country able to defend itself and one at the mercy of its rivals. In
a May 1961 address to Congress, he unveiled Apollo - a 10-year program of federal
subsidies aimed at "landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the
Earth." The president announced the goal, Congress appropriated the funds, scientists
and engineers put their noses to the launchpad, and - lo and behold - Neil Armstrong
stepped on the lunar surface eight years later.
The country now faces a similarly dire threat: reliance on foreign oil.
Just as President Kennedy responded to Soviet space superiority with a bold commitment,
President Bush must respond to the clout of foreign oil by making energy independence a
national priority. The president acknowledged as much by touting hydrogen fuel cells in
January's State of the Union address. But the $1.2 billion he proposed is a pittance
compared to what's needed. Only an Apollo-style effort to replace hydrocarbons with
hydrogen can liberate the US to act as a world leader rather than a slave to its appetite
for petroleum. more |
VOICES RISE IN UNISON FOR MANHATTAN H2 PROJECT |
|
"If Iraq gets a democratic
government open to foreign investment, there would be an alternate source of oil supply to
the Saudis, so we wouldn't have to defer to their blackmail, their use of the revenues
that we give them for activities that are very jihadist and dangerous."
Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security
Policy
Saudis Worry
Iraq War Could Create Oil Rival
Robert Collier San Francisco
Chronicle February 16, 2003 |
| TERRORISTS TEST
ANTI-SHIPPING WEAPON OFF YEMEN
"Mark my words, with
everything that is going on in this world with regards to terrorism, sooner or later the
terrorist is going to try to sink a tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, and when that occurs,
and that free flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf ends, you're going to have another great
energy crisis."
U.S. Senator Bill Nelson
Recent
Events Recast Debate on Fuel Economy
New York Times December
7, 2001
Captain Raes said the
Limburg was a new, double-hulled ship, and was barely moving at the time of the explosion,
which took place during good weather. He said that the force of the apparent impact had
pierced both hulls and penetrated 7-8 metres into the cargo hold, which was loaded with
crude oil. He said only a very large ship, or one moving at "serious speeds"
would be able to cause that damage. He said that he did not believe that extent of
destruction could have been caused unless the smaller craft had explosives on board,
particularly as the kind of heavy crude oil the Limburg was carrying was not particularly
flammable.
Craft 'Rammed' Yemen Oil Tanker
BBC (UK) October
6, 2002
Recognition Is Growing that Market
Instability, Terrorism and Related Health and Environmental Issues Are Driving the Real
Price of Oil Far Beyond that of Alternatives
Oil Security Costs Argue
for Renewables
The Guardian (UK) October
18, 2002
A senior government
minister yesterday embraced the "hydrogen economy" by demanding urgent action to
reduce the west's dependence on oil for transport. Peter Hain, minister for Europe, told a
London conference: "Just as we moved from horse to canal to steam to petrol, we now
must move to renewables, for our health, our environment, and yes, our security."
He said the blockade two years ago of UK fuel depots had shown the
vulnerability of the economy to interruptions in fuel supplies.
"Last week's attack on a French tanker off the Yemen is an urgent
reminder that we are not alone in our vulnerability," he told the Royal United
Services Institute.
The former energy minister said the cost of protecting Middle East oil
supplies, paid predominantly by the US, were as high as $15-25 a barrel. But no amount of
money could guarantee the security of oil supplies.
"Thirty years from now
there will be a huge amount of oil - and no buyers. Oil will be left in the ground."
Sheik Yamani
former Oil Minister of Saudi Arabia
and mastermind of the 1973 OPEC Oil Embargo
THE
HYDROGEN ENERGY
FUTURE
Why Europe will lead, America
will follow
and Arabs could starve. |
THE EUROPEAN VIEW
The US Must Follow
Europe's Lead
and Turn its Back on Oil
by Jeremy Rifkin The Guardian (UK) October
9, 2002
The EU and the US are beginning to
diverge in the most basic aspect of how a society is organised: its energy regime. Nowhere
was this emerging reality more apparent than in Johannesburg, at the world summit, when
the EU pushed for a target of 15% renewable energy by the year 2010 for the whole world
while the US fought the initiative. The EU has already set its own internal target of 22%
renewable energy for the generation of electricity and 12% of all energy coming from
renewable sources by 2010.
The difference in approach to the future of energy couldn't be more
stark. While the EU is beginning to mobilise its industrial sector, research institutes
and the public to the task of making an historic transition out of carbon-based fossil
fuels and into renewable resources and a hydrogen future, the US is pursuing an
increasingly desperate search to secure access to oil.
The difference in perspective between Europe and America on this score
is reflected in the attitudes of the world's giant energy companies. The European-based
energy giants,
British Petroleum
and Royal Dutch Shell, have made a long-term commitment to making the transition out of
fossil fuels and are spending large amounts of money on renewable technologies and
hydrogen research and development. BP's new slogan is "Beyond Petroleum" and
Philip Watts, chairman of the committee of managing directors of the Royal Dutch/Shell
Group, has stated publicly that his company is preparing for the end of the hydrocarbon
age and is actively exploring the promise of the hydrogen economy.
By contrast, the American energy company, Exxon Mobil, has remained
steadfast in its long-term commitment to fossil fuels with little effort being expended on
renewables and the exploration of hydrogen-based research development.
The EU is now in a unique position to lay claim to the future by
becoming the first superpower to make the long-term shift out of carbon-based fuels and
into a hydrogen era. A change in energy regimes of this magnitude over the course of the
next half century is likely to have as profound an impact on human society as the
harnessing of coal and steam power more than three centuries ago.
The fossil-fuel era forever changed our living patterns, our notion of
commerce and governance, and the values we live by. So too will the coming hydrogen
economy. At some point, the reality is going to set in that Europe is heading into a new
energy future. When that happens, the ripple effect could cross the pond like a great
tsunami - forcing the US to rethink its own energy future. The last time the US was
awakened from its somnambulance was 1957 when the Russians sent their first satellite into
outer space. Caught by surprise, it mobilised every corner of American society to the task
of catching up and surpassing the Russians. Maybe it's time for another jolt. |
''The
myth of infinite demand for oil has collapsed in a world that is increasingly sensitive to
the impact of fossil fuels.''
Gustavo Roosen
former president of Petróleos de Venezuela
Alternative Fuels Seen as Key to
Oil-price Stability
Miami Herald October 14, 2002 |
THE ARAB VIEW
Facts About Fossil
Fuels’ Future
The Frontier Post Peshwar, Pakistan
October 9, 2002 For
over eighty years, oil has been the asset of the Arab world which foreigners have coveted
and which they have sought to control wherever and whenever they could.
Today, Arab oil faces a triple threat.
First, the Arabs’ political independence is being challenged by
what is nothing less than a new American imperialism.
Second, oil producers in Russia, the Caspian, West Africa and Latin
America are seeking to overturn the Arab dominance of oil supplies, and are actively
competing for a bigger share of the rich American import market.
Third, just over the horizon, lies the real possibility of an
inexhaustible source of renewable energy, based on hydrogen, which could doom oil to a
slow death.
These are all potentially ruinous threats to the prosperity and way of
life of the Middle East, yet there is little sign that the Arabs have woken up to the
challenge and are preparing to face it.
...Perhaps the most serious long-term threat to Arab oil lies in the
industrial world’s search for sources of renewable energy such as hydrogen to replace
the present dependence on hydrocarbons.
Major European industrial companies and scientific institutes are
spending large sums on research.
The European Union has already set itself a target of 22 per cent of
renewable energy for electricity generation by 2010 and 12 per cent for all energy uses.
General Motors has produced a revolutionary car, which runs on
hydrogen, which, according to Jeremy Rifkin, president of the Washington-based Foundation
on Economic Trends, marks “the beginning of the end of the internal combustion engine
and the passage from a civilisation based on oil to the age of hydrogen.” The world,
he says, is entering the twilight of the great culture of fossil fuels, which began more
than 300 years ago with the exploitation of coalmines and the steam engine.
What will the Arab world be like 40 or 50 years from now, when oil will
almost certainly have been dethroned?
Muslim
World Can Use Oil as Weapon - Terhan Times (Iran)
October 20, 2002
 Sheikh Yamani Predicts Price Crash as Age
of Oil Ends
by Mary Fagan
June 25, 2000 Sunday Telegraph (UK)
In an unprecedented personal interview, Sheikh Yamani also
predicts that, within a few decades, vast reserves of oil will lie unwanted and the
"oil age" will come to an end.
In an interview with Gyles Brandreth, he says: "Thirty years from
now there will be a huge amount of oil - and no buyers. Oil will be left in the ground.
The Stone Age came to an end, not because we had a lack of stones, and the oil age will
come to an end not because we have a lack of oil."
Sheikh Yamani, who was Saudi Arabia's oil minister from 1962 to 1986
and is now in charge of an energy consultancy, became the public face of the revolutionary
oil policy that altered the balance of world power in the early Seventies. He predicts
that a combination of recent oil discoveries, the advance of new technology, and heavy
investment in exploration and production will all lead to a collapse in the price of
crude.
He says: "I have no illusion - I am positive there will be some
time in the future a crash in the price of oil. I can tell you with a degree of confidence
that after five years there will be a sharp drop in the price of oil."
Fuel-cell motor technology - which can produce electricity by combining
hydrogen from a variety of fuels with oxygen from the air - will have a dramatic impact on
the oil market, he predicts.
"This is coming before the end of the decade and will cut gasoline
consumption by almost 100 per cent. Imagine a country like the United States, the largest
consuming nation, where more than 50 per cent of their consumption is gasoline. If you
eliminate that, what will happen?" Saudi Arabia, he says, "will have serious
economic difficulties". |
"For the very first
time we may have a genuine competitor for the internal combustion engine. This could
dramatically change the nature of the energy industry as we know it."
Ged Davis
Head of Shell's Global Business Environment division
When the
Oil Runs Out Forbes
October 28, 2002
New Era of Oil
Is Coming, Energy Analyst Tells Audience
Buffalo News(NY) October 8, 2002 |
THE U.S. VIEW
The Oilman's Column
#7
by L.F. Ivanhoe Hubbert Center Newsletter 2001/2-1
How casually people dismiss ANWR’s value. Using the USGS estimate of 10 billion
barrels for the mean recoverable oil at ANWR, the current value (@$30/barrel) is $30 x 10
billion = $300 billion or $300,000 million. Hardly an insignificant amount.
This could fund U.S. Social Security/Medicare for all Americans or
provide money to fight foreign wars for other nations’ oil fields.
 Spiking
the Oil Weapon
R. James Woolsey, Director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, 1993-1995
Wall Street Journal
September 19, 2002
"The wealth produced by oil
underlies the power of the three totalitarian movements in the Middle East that have
chosen to make war on us: the ruling Iraqi Baathists and Iranian mullahs, and al Qaeda,
the latter spawned by Saudi money.
"In light of these circumstances it is time to set aside our
endless wrangling about energy policy. To this point the discussion has been characterized
by advocacy, on the one hand, of futuristic ideal visions of the hydrogen economy and, on
the other hand, of marginal steps producing more political hyperbole than fuel.
"...Whatever our strategy's exact components, if we do not act
now, we will leave major levers over our fate in the hands of regimes that have attacked
us or have fallen under the sway of fanatics who spread hatred of the U.S., and indeed of
freedom itself. Some of these enemies try to kill Americans directly or pay others to do
so; others sponsor the hatred that fires and sustains those who make war on us. For all of
them, their power derives from their oil.
"It is time to break their sword."
A
National Vision of America's Transition to a Hydrogen Economy
United States Department of Energy
February 2002
The market will be penetrated with the widespread use of fuel
cell-powered buses and government vehicles. Emphasis will be placed on expanding from
local pockets of hydrogen energy development to building a national hydrogen
infrastructure. Although hydrogen production will often occur onsite or onboard, it will
also be produced in large-scale refineries that will use coal or biomass as a feedstock
for the simultaneous production of hydrogen, electricity, thermal energy, chemicals, and
other fuels.
Large- and small-scale hydrogen storage using hydrides will become
mature technologies and enter mass production. Other advanced storage techniques such as
carbon structures will be in the development stage but close to commercialization.
National policies will support hydrogen market expansion, and state and local standards
will be in place. Siting and permitting of hydrogen technologies will be more streamlined.
State and local governments will play a major role in this phase.
Eventually hydrogen will overtake fossil fuels for most end-use energy
market applications. Economical and environmentally friendly means will be found for
extracting hydrogen from fossil fuels, biomass, and water. Hydrogen “farms” that
use biological systems such as algae to extract hydrogen from water will be in use.
Gasification plants will extract hydrogen from coal and biomass. Carbon capture will limit
emissions, and new industrial uses will put captured carbon to work for industrial feed
stocks, building materials, and other applications.
A national infrastructure that supports the use of hydrogen for fuel
and electricity production will be in place. United States companies that spent decades
developing hydrogen technologies will be exporting products and services around the world.
American consumers will be enjoying the economic benefits of a financially sound hydrogen
energy sector and the environmental benefits of clean energy systems.
The market for hydrogen vehicles as personal transportation will expand
as a natural outgrowth of technology, market, and policy development. There will be no
need for government mandates. The practice of using hydrogen vehicles to provide heat and
power for the workplace during the day, and homes during the night, will be commonplace.
The line between the transportation sector and the power system will blur. The hydrogen
economy will become reality. |
|
 Drilling for Freedom
by Thomas L. Friedman The
New York Times October
20, 2002
There are two ways for a government to get rich
in the Middle East. One is by drilling a sand dune and the other is by drilling the
talents, intelligence, creativity and energy of its men and women. As long as the
autocratic leaders of Iran, Iraq or Saudi Arabia can get rich by drilling their natural
resources, they can stay in power a long, long time. All they have to do is capture
control of the oil tap. Only when a government has to drill its human resources will it
organize itself in a way that enables it to extract those talents — with modern
education, open trade, and freedom of thought, of scientific enquiry and of the press.
For all these reasons, if we really want to hasten the transition from
autocracy to something more democratic in places like Iraq or Iran, the most important
thing we can do is gradually, but steadily, bring down the price of oil — through
conservation and alternative energies.
I know that Dick Cheney thinks conservation is for sissies. Real men
send B-52's. But he's dead wrong. In the Middle East, conservation and alternative
energies are strategic tools. Ronald Reagan helped bring down the Soviet Union by using
two tactics: he delegitimized the Soviets and he defueled them. He delegitimized them by
branding the Soviet Union an "Evil Empire," and by exposing its youth to what
was going on elsewhere in the world, and he defueled them by so outspending them on Star
Wars that the Soviet Union went bankrupt. In the Middle East today, the Bush team is
delegitimizing the worst regimes as an "axis of evil," but it is doing nothing
to defuel them. Just the opposite. We refuel them with our big cars.
Which was the first and only real Arab democracy? Lebanon. Which Arab
country had no oil? Lebanon. Which is the first Arab oil state to turn itself into a
constitutional monarchy? Bahrain. Which is the first Arab oil state to run out of oil?
Bahrain.
Ousting Saddam is necessary for promoting the spread of democracy in
the Middle East, but it won't be sufficient, it won't stick, without the Mideast states
kicking their oil dependency and without us kicking ours. |
STATEMENT OF CHBC WEBMASTER
PRESENTED TO SHEIK YAMANI, LEADER OF 1973 OPEC OIL EMBARGO,
BY THE BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION (UK)
How Does Oil Influence World Politics?
BBC TALKING POINTS SEPTEMBER 1, 2002
RealAudio
get RealPlayer
"Unless the Western
democracies institute aggressive programs to develop renewable energy resources now, all
future democratic policy will by necessity be based upon access to diminishing supplies of
oil - the great majority held by Middle Eastern dictatorships. Hence, freedom will
be lost and foreign dictators will rule the West by proxy."
Richard D. Masters
Producer/Director of HYDROGEN
HAWAII
"In many ways, we've
been held hostage to petroleum for a century."
Larry Burns
GM Directer of R&D
GM Tries Out
Hydrogen Power as Next Generation Fuel
Macon Telegraph (GA) May
24, 2002
|
|
Dangerous Addiction
Ending America's Oil Dependence
NRDC and the Union of Concerned Scientists
call for massive commercialization of fuel cell vehicles.
 Full Report
National Resources Defense Council |
"In much the
same way that America set about unlocking the secrets of the atom with the 'Manhattan
Project' or placing a man on the moon with the Apollo program, we can surely put more
public investment behind new energy sources that will free us from our dependence on
oil." |
Hydrogen Hero |
Mark Udall Leads The Way In Calling For
Stronger Renewable Energy And Energy Efficiency Programs In Energy Bill
Office of U.S. Congressman Mark Udall
September 12, 2002 |
Congressman Mark Udall (D-CO), co-chair of the House Renewable Energy and Energy
Efficiency Caucus, today lead a bipartisan coalition of 143 House members in urging energy
bill negotiators to include greater energy efficiency and the development of renewable
energy sources in any energy bill that emerges from negotiations this year. Different
versions of energy legislation, which were passed by the House and Senate over the past
year, are being worked out in a conference committee.
"These clean energy resources will enhance our energy security and
reliability, keep energy dollars at home, diversify our energy supply, lower greenhouse
gas emissions and other pollutants, improve public health and create jobs," the
coalition states in a letter to Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Frank Murkowki (R-AK)
and Reps. John Dingell (D-MI) and W.J. "Billy" Tauzin (R-LA), who are the chief
negotiators on the energy bill.
Specifically, the coalition called for maintaining or strengthening
provisions dealing with a renewable portfolio standard, appliance efficiency standards,
renewable energy and energy efficiency research and development programs and renewable
energy production tax credits. more |
get
Realplayer |
Mark Udall's Keynote Address
to the National Hydrogen Association
March 2000
RealVideo by VIMS
House/Senate Conference on
H.R. 4, the Securing America’s Future Energy Act Full Committee on Energy
and Commerce
W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, Chairman
September 12, 2002 |
America Needs an Apollo Program
for Energy Security
by Congressman Mark Udall
March 15, 2002
The September 11 attacks on America have forced
us to rethink the way that we define our national security. Our national security has to
be viewed as a question, not just of military hardware, but also our homeland defense
systems, and our economic vulnerability. And our economic vulnerability is integrally
linked to our dependence on oil.
If there is good to come of the tragedy of September 11, let it be that
we fully awake to the reality of our vulnerabilities - and that we take bold action to
protect our people in the future. One way we can meet this challenge is to recognize that
our dependency on foreign oil must come to an end. If we fail to meet this challenge, our
country will remain vulnerable to the tempestuousness of the politics of oil.
The United States consumes roughly twenty million barrels of oil each
day. Thirteen percent of that comes from the Persian Gulf. In fact fully 30% of the
world's oil supply comes from this same volatile and politically unstable region of the
world.
America's addiction to oil from any source means that our economic
future is vulnerable and will continue to be until we have the vision to look beyond the
gas pump.
With only 3% of the world's known oil reserves, America is not in a
position to solve our energy vulnerability by drilling at home. That means the debate in
Congress over whether to permit drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) is
a dangerous sideshow. It is a sideshow because the most optimistic estimates of oil we
might recover from ANWR would be at most a small part of our needs and not worth the
environmental costs. It is dangerous because we can't afford to waste our attention on
short-term issues when our long-term future is at stake.
The challenge of energy independence is not insurmountable. It involves
a combination of proposals that include modest, but technologically feasible ideas (like
increased fuel efficiency), significant public investment in transportation systems and
stronger support for alternative and renewable energy.
With regard to fuel efficiency, technological advances in automobiles
have eclipsed the old trade-off between fuel efficiency and passenger safety. Enlightened
leaders in the automobile and business sectors already know this and are looking to
improve fuel economy in vehicles for production and to remove older, less-efficient cars
from their fleets. The development of hybrid vehicles with higher fuel efficiency,
combined with consumer education can be a powerful combination. Something as simple as
establishing standards for the efficiency ratings of automobile tires can save the
equivalent of ANWR's underground oil several times over.
Our economic future also depends on an energy program that takes a much
bolder approach to public investment in transportation alternatives. Our states and cities
are crying out for more investment in rapid transit, light rail and multi-modal systems
that move people and not just vehicles. In addition to improving our airport and rail
security, we ought to move more aggressively to help communities bring their
transportation systems into a non-carbon-based fuel economy. This kind of investment would
prove to be far more beneficial to America's economic security than the so-called
"stimulus package" the House of Representatives passed last year or the new tax
cuts proposed by the Bush Administration.
Finally, America needs an energy strategy that begins the inevitable
transition from an oil/carbon-based economy to one where renewable energy sources such as
hydrogen fuel cells and biofuels are more fully utilized. This is not a radical science
fiction dream, nor is it the unrealistic farce suggested recently by one Member of
Congress who derided renewable energy as one based "on wood chips and
windmills." Rather, it is vision based solidly on science and technology that exists
today.
In much the same way that America set about unlocking the secrets of
the atom with the "Manhattan Project" or placing a man on the moon with the
Apollo program, we can surely put more public investment behind new energy sources that
will free us from our dependence on oil.
This doesn't mean that we shouldn't develop any of our oil, natural gas
or clean coal resources. Clearly there is a transition we need to consider before we can
claim energy independence. But if we fail to see how limited our long-term security is
with finite and politically unstable energy resources, we will have failed to heed one of
the most important warnings posed by the awful attacks of September 11.
Also see Renewable Energy - Securing Our
Energy Future by Mark Udall |
Hydrogen and National Security -
Part 2
|
|
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. |
| |
