How to fix energy in the US A sensible approach

How to fix energy in the US: A sensible approach Steve Kirsch Executive Summary • Wind has everything going for it • Enough wind in 4 states to power the country • All new power should be renewable/clean: wind, solar, • • • • • geothermal Need national electrical grid and H pipelines to optimize (can use existing grid and pipelines today) Today’s ICE’s can run on H or gas or mixture. Car manufacturers can start building H capable cars now (dual power) Putting in H infrastructure now makes transition to fuel cells even easier Need to fund intriguing new wind technologies: sea/sky We will have to do this sooner or later. What are we waiting for? Agenda • Why existing approaches don’t work • A responsible process • A vision and strategy Existing approaches • Carter: Couldn’t get a good plan because no crisis • Clinton: No plan • Bush: Has crisis, but plan is totally tactical, ignores all progress made in the past 30 years. Lousy process, secretive committee membership, political decision making within the committee. How bad is the Bush plan? • Ignores all progress since 1969 in alternative fuels • It’s dumb. A good plan is to do the opposite. • Whitman: “NRDC plan is virtually same as the Bush plan. We agree on almost every count.” [interview on CNN Late Edition w/Wolf Blitzer] point. And you completely ignored our efforts to provide any input.” • NRDC: “Bullshit. We differ on every single Bush v. NRDC Policy Subsidize coal industry Bush plan supports NRDC plan opposes opposes opposes Drill in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Drill in other sensitive areas Reduce royalties for offshore drilling Interfere with Clean Air Act enforcement supports study/supports study/supports study/supports opposes opposes Bush v. NRDC Policy Improve energy efficiency of buildings Improve appliance efficiency standards Improve vehicle fuel efficiency Subsidize nuclear power industry Reprocess nuclear fuel Cap CO2 emissions Bush plan missing NRDC plan supports supports supports opposes opposes supports oppose/study study supports study/supports opposes Bush v. NRDC Policy Funding for energy efficiency R&D Funding for renewable energy R&D Ties renewables funding to Arctic drilling Public benefits fund for efficiency Standards for distributed generation Renewable energy portfolio standard Bush plan cuts NRDC plan increases increases opposes supports supports supports cuts supports missing missing missing A responsible approach • Democratic plan isn’t much better: we can’t continue to think short term. • We must have a VISION. Without this, it is impossible to develop consistent strategies and tactics. • Next, we must adopt a strategy which we believe will achieve the vision. • It must be a bi-partisan plan, endorsed by energy experts (without ties to any special interests) adopted for the good of the American people. A responsible process • Appoint a non-partisan, small committee of experts in energy • Task them with: - Defining the long-term vision of energy in the US - A strategy to achieve that vision - Recommendations for steps we should adopt now • Make their conclusions publicly available for challenge • The committee will weigh credible input and either modify their recommendations or explain why the input was rejected • Adopt their recommendations into law How I can help • Ask 5 university presidents to name 3 of the best people in • • • • • energy Take the list of 15 people and ask 30 non-political respected organizations of all types to vote for the 5 they feel are most qualified or write-in their own suggestion(s) Appoint a panel of the 5 experts with the largest number of votes The 30 organizations, and the public, can provide input to be considered by the panel Ask each the 30 organizations to support the final result and to ask 2 organizations each to endorse the results Result: An energy policy that is created for the best interests of the American public endorsed by 90 of the most prominent groups in America A possible outcome Vision • Our country is 100% powered from energy sources that are: -Clean/safe for people and environment -Renewable/available -Inexpensive -Reliable -Eliminate dependence on foreign energy sources • Export the technology to other countries to reduce the threat of global warming Strategy • Efficiency: this is the most cost-effective way to • • • • “create” new power Wind: Most new power is wind energy, esp in ND, SD, Texas corridor. Options: land, sea, sky-based. Hydrogen: Excess wind power beyond that that can be immediately used by the grid (e.g., at night) is converted to Hydrogen (H). This hydrogen can be used to fuel cars and trucks, and stored to generate electricity from fuel cells in times of insufficient wind capacity. Build a cross-country network for: -electrical transmission -Hydrogen transmission Tactics • Phase in H over 5 years. • Auto manufacturers required to produce 100% hydrogen vehicles within 5 years, at first with standard internal combustion engines, and later with fuel cells. • Align phase in with availability of H from wind power and H transmission lines. • Fund development of new wind technologies (sea, sky) • Subsidize solar shingles on new homes so slightly less than the cost of standard shingles Result • We accelerate the switch to the most abundant, • • • • inexpensive, renewable, reliable, and clean energy source on the planet We eliminate dependence on foreign oil We virtually eliminate the threat of global warming We stop polluting the environment; California for the first time in 30 years, finally has a path to compliance with federal and state clean air guidelines We sacrifice virtually nothing to get there now since the long-term investment will have to be made sooner or later. It’s cheaper for everyone if we make it sooner.