A Natural Gas-Centric Revitalization Program

Congress turns over US tax-payer money to the same financial “geniuses” that got us in this financial mess to begin with and then expresses surprise that the money ends up in their bank accounts. Meanwhile, the talking head tools on CNBC want us to feel sorry for these guys … and keep reminding us that there is no way out of this mess unless these geniuses help us out … because they are the only ones that know how everything works. If we don’t reward their excellent performance with multi-million dollar bonuses they might quit! What a steaming pile of cow dung! Let them go!! Let them go earn an honest living for a change! Besides, how could anyone that replaces them do worse?

Meanwhile, Congress, Bernanke, and Geitner keep trying to fix a commodity problem (oil) with financial trickery. Long term, this is a failed strategy. As a result, middle class Americans will continue to experience a falling standard of living, more financial distortions, weak US equity markets, and a less secure future.

Obama has not been the performer many people, including myself, believed he might be. There were three main challenges facing Obama: the financial markets, energy policy, and the environment. Although it is early in this administration, I believe he has failed badly on all three accounts.

On the financial side, he needed to restore trust, transparency, and accountability. He’s failed. The thievery of the US treasury unabatedly continues the trend set by Bush and Paulsen. His appointment of Ms. Shapiro to lead the SEC was a disaster. Madoff? Milken? Long Term Capital Management? Hello?? Is there a trend here? Duh! Shapiro is part of the well connected inner circle of NYC financial fraudsters. Putting Shapiro in charge of the SEC is like the fox guarding the chicken house. I wish someone could explain to me how the “Patriot” Act’s financial controls enable the government to track every dime I invest and spend but somehow couldn’t seem to notice the billions of dollars Madoff was moving around. How is that possible? How can Homeland Security be successful tracking terrorist money if they can’t detect the movement of hundreds of billions of dollars? The answer is, of course they detected it! The SEC protects its own. Obama’s financial policy grade: an “F”.

Things aren’t much better on the energy front. Sure, the stimulus package contained monies for solar, wind, and electrical transmission line initiatives among other goodies. These are a welcome break from the previous administration. That said, where are the robust natural gas initiatives? If the goal is to reduce foreign imports as Obama said, how come he has yet to even utter the words “natural gas transportation” in any energy related discussion since elected? As a result, America’s greatest industrial asset, the 2.2 million mile natural gas pipeline grid connecting 63,000,000 homes where 130,000,000 cars and trucks park every night, remains underutilized. Obama seems content to rely on the Gore environmental purists for energy policy.

I wish someone would explain to Obama that over the next 10-20 years, there is simply no realistic way that wind and solar energy source will significantly reduce the 390,000,000 gallons of gasoline the US burns every day. In this era of government and professional double-speak, it’s very apparent that the environmental purists are actually responsible for increasing CO2 emissions. An ideology that lumps natural gas in the same category with coal and oil simply because it is a “fossil fuel” is simply wrong headed, illogical, highly polluting, and keeps us addicted to foreign oil. Obama’s energy policy grade: “D-“.

Combined with an off-track energy policy which will do practically nothing to reduce foreign oil imports, Obama’s lack of initiatives to replace coal electrical generation with natural gas generation is another environmental mistake. Despite the huge release of toxic sludge and ash into the Tennessee Valley by the TVA’s Kingston Coal fired power plant, Obama has yet to use his bully pulpit to publicize the event which is undoubtedly one of the biggest environmental catastrophes in the history of the country. Likewise, the EPA (which RFK, Jr. calls the “Environmental Destruction Agency) continues to be a pathetic excuse for a government agency (right up there with the DOE). Obama has yet to hold the EPA’s feet to the fire for policy which simply reinforces the oil and coal interests and constructs barrier after barrier in the way of natural gas transportation and power generation. Despite having direct access to smart people who know better and have advised him so, Obama is continuing the oil and coal centric policies to the detriment of the country’s future. Obama’s environmental policy grade: “D+”.

We may have traded in the “C” student cheerleader for the “A” student lawyer, but the overall result is still miserable financial, energy, and environmental policies. For those who chastised me for my relentless criticism of George Bush, I told you I would criticize Obama with the same zeal if he faltered. Well, faltered he has so here I am. A few SA readers warned me that Obama would be more of the same old school Republican/Democratic inept leadership. As much as I hoped Obama would be different, he really isn’t. Underneath the great speeches and sound bites, actual policy remains abysmal.

I make mistakes too, and I must admit to an error of mine which was recently pointed out to me by SA user “WiseGas” (thank you!). I mentioned in several articles that the Honda Civic GX NGV (HMC) was only available to citizens of NY and CA. While this was told to me by a Honda rep over the phone, mirrored my own experience, and was indeed the case at one point in time, it is no longer true. WiseGas is from Florida and referred me to a local Honda dealer. I called the dealer and sure enough, you can buy a Civic GX in Florida and other states as well. To find the Honda dealer closest to you with a GX sitting on their lot, enter your zip code on this website.

Speaking of Honda, the company is sitting on a gold mine. Heading into the era of Peak Oil where worldwide oil supply will not keep up with worldwide oil demand, American Honda Motor owns and manufactures two critical assets:

1. The “Phill”
2. Honda Civic GX

Honda owns Fuelmaker and it manufactures the Phill. The Phill is a natural gas appliance which can be installed in the garage so the Civic GX can be refueled at home. The mere fact Honda considered selling FuelMaker to Boone Pickens’ Clean Energy Fuels (CLNE) last year indicates Honda management doesn’t understand their huge advantage. Although the deal was nixed, apparently by Honda Motor Corp, in talking with individual Honda dealers around the country, it is quite apparent that Honda marketing and management has yet to figure out the synergies possible in selling both the Civic GX and Phill as a package deal. Sure, there are some state regulations in the way, but there are many steps Honda could take to ease the availability issues with both the GX and Phill.

If the personal emails I receive on my NGV related articles on SA are any indication, there must be thousands of frustrated consumers (like myself) who would jump at the chance to buy a GX and Phill if only sales, installation, and service were available locally. Honda is sitting on a gold mine! All they need to do is figure out how to leverage the strategic advantage they now possess. If Honda hired me I could mold the Civic GX and Phill businesses into a multi-billion dollar cash-cow over the next 3 years. Promise.

On the other hand, if Honda waits until Toyota (TM) wises up and manufactures this vehicle, Honda will lose its leadership position much as Motorola did in cell phones. Honda cannot afford to waste time while others catch up. It should press its advantage until it pays in gold. That means spending a little money to entrench the Civic GX and Phill all over the country and to make it available to anyone anywhere.

A Natural Gas Centric Industrial Revitalization Program

Instead of more ridiculous financial bailouts (does anyone other than me think the Fed buying US treasuries simply incest?), what America really needs is a reindustrialization plan based on natural gas transportation. If Obama and his leadership team would focus an energy and industrial revitalization program based on natural gas transportation, the US could once again become a world leader instead of a world problem. America’s abundant natural gas resources combined with its tremendous asset of the existing 2.2 million mile natural gas grid is our key competitive advantage over many other countries. If Obama set a goal to convert half of America’s vehicle fleet to NGV’s over the next 5 years, we could:

1. Save millions of jobs in the automotive industry.
2. Reduce foreign oil imports by 5-6 million barrels a day (around 50% of total foreign oil imports).
3. Save trillions of dollars which would otherwise go to foreign oil producers.
4. Increase royalty payments to thousands of farmers and landowners sitting atop American natural gas.
5. Create thousands of jobs in the energy, infrastructure, and CNG sectors.
6. Reduce CO2 emissions by hundreds of millions of tons annually.
7. Drastically reduce particulate emissions from gasoline powered automobiles responsible for the smog in so many American cities.
8. Restore American energy and climate leadership and our reputation as a wise and moral country capable of attacking its own problems instead of other countries.
9. Rally the country behind a goal everyone could understand, participate in, and profit from.
10. Strengthen the US dollar and balance our financial trade and budget deficits.
11. Protect us from dire economic and social consequences of Peak Oil.

The costs of such a program would pay for itself very quickly by reducing the expense of foreign oil, including huge military expenditures to fund oil wars and securing foreign oil transport. Like the interstate highway system, cross country railroads and telegraph lines, the man-on-the-moon project and so many other government sponsored programs, natural gas vehicles and a natural gas refueling infrastructure would pay dividends to all Americans for decades to come. They would remove oil as a critical variable in the energy equation until clean energy capacity is online and clean vehicle technology is robust and mature enough to make the total transition to renewable fuels. Anything less than this natural gas centric policy will not keep America addicted to foreign oil. As we already know, our 65% reliance on foreign oil will continue the economic, environmental, and national security problems which are already at crisis levels.

Will Obama step-up? He hasn’t yet. I sure hope he does.

Disclosures: The author does not own HMC or TM, although he would invest heavily in TM should it decide to mass produce the concept car mentioned in this article.

Comments

[Michael Fit...:]

DougKortof: i hate it when an article's first comment is imbicilic. it just gets things off to a slow start so that relevant and meaningful debate is harder to get going on here. so doug, you like shapiro as head of the SEC? you actually think electric cars and solar and wind can significantly reduce foreign oil imports and CO2 emissions over the next 10 years? you think i supported bush/cheney the past 8 years?? (that one is humourous). well, you're quite simply wrong on all accounts and you obviously have not been reading my articles. so, go eat some pie and comment on somebody else's article will ya? man, i sure hope obama supporters aren't as eager to over-look obama's faults as the bush folks were.

Mar 21 05:51 PM

[Michael Fit...:]

doug: ohhh, now i see what's going on. you're website is all about EVs. see, you don't understand doug, i *like* EVs. the problem is, they simply don't have the capability of reducing foreign oil imports and CO2 emissions over the next 10 years. instead of being so anti-natural gas transportation (which is, i can only conclude, responsible for your harsh post), you should seriously sit down and figure out:
1) where the electric cars (pure electric, not a hybrid volt, which you still fill with *gasoline*) are going to come from
2) what battery technology is sufficient for them to be produced in volume with adequate range
3) even if you do somehow convince yourself of 1&2, then, please tell me, if EVs *are* available in quantity, then how are they going to be charged every night without burning more COAL.
see, it is your environmental purists and "EVs or nothing" that are going to KEEP us addicted to the foreign oil you say you hate while at the same time INCREASING our CO2 emissions. what a terrible and dangerous ideology you support.

Mar 21 05:58 PM

[socrateazz:]

Who told you Natural gas will release no or less CO2 than oil? That is what I got out of your view. Natural gas is also a CO2 contributor. It puts out less CO2 for the energy coal puts out. But I think Gasoline puts out less CO2 than natural gas. I am not sure on that. But if I am wrong, I am not off by too much. It is the CO2 output which places it under the fossil fuel label. The need for the US to prfoduce more of its own energy does point toward nartural gas as helpful. But the real need is in development of real solutions. Wind is helpful and should be pushed. Solar cells are nice but do they actually save energy in the end? If I am correct Irt takes about 12 years to recoup the energy placed into making solar cells. I have used a few panels and I have yet to see one last for ten years. That does not add up. some other solar projects have some promise. But the jury is still out. Tide energy has a lot of real potential. But substantial use is many years off. wave also has some potential. All have trade offs but some of them have to be developed. If you do not realize Obama only knows what he has experienced and been told. And many of those who have influenced him operate on belief over reality. As long as belief causes his actions. You can expect him to be wrong many more times. Wisdom is earned and Obama is not very far along yet! He needs to question all his beliefs first. Those who advise him need to look at real science and truth instead of beliefs. Ask this: Is global warming an actuality or a belief. Where is carbon dioxide a problem? Why? What reactions should any particular action create? Why? If he knew what he thinks he knows, he would make different decisions

Mar 21 08:06 PM

[X-15:]

...........stop making sense....

It is patently absurd OBAMA does nothing. I fear the the science advisor for Obama ( bigtime enviromentalist) whats his name, won the Nobel Prize, believes in a techno-fix. Meanwhile the USA sends 75 cents out of every dollar spent at refueling to our pals in Saudi.Arabia. Ven, Iran, Nigeria.
Obama would have created a big stir in the AMERICAN marketplace by announcing Natural Gas was going to be the fuel that sets USA free. However, obviously this is not going to be the case....we need people that think outside the box, instead we seem to be getting Re-runs in HD.
Energy Dept -- F
SEC -- F
Federal Reserve--F
Congress-- F

Mar 21 11:29 PM

[Ferdinand E...:]

I really like a lot of the things you say, Mr Fitzsimmons, as well as the way that you say them, but you can't convince me - nor can I convince myself - that natural gas is capable of doing the things that you think it can do. I could be wrong of course, but if or when this macroeconomic bad news blows over, the rise in the gas price is going to sour a lot of observers on your gas-based prescription for their salvation. I remember very well the discussions about natural gas that I listened to at conferences a few years ago, and some very smart people were skeptical where the availability of gas was concerned. Naturally, they could be wrong, and perhaps the increase in supply in North America is sustainable, but if it isn't well...need I say it.

Mar 22 09:45 AM

[Michael Fit...:]

hmmm...what happened to the first comment on the article from DougKortof? it seemed to have disappeared. i guess i won't get an answer from my questions to him.

socrateazz: CO2 emissions from gasoline, coal, and natural gas are readily available on the EIA website, or, if you prefer a chart that summarizes them, see a recent article of mine:
seekingalpha.com/artic...
regardless of where you find the data, there is no doubt natural gas emits roughly 30% less CO2 per BTU than does gasoline (and emits none of the toxic particulates of gasoline). is global warming an actuality or a belief? are you serious? this question has been definitively answered and is yesterday's conversation....

X-15: unfortunately, i obviously agree. don't get me wrong, obama is a big improvement from bush (who wouldn't be?), but if you really look at where the rubber meets the road: finance, energy, and the environment, i just don't see that obama is up to the challenges. his pick of shapiro for SEC chief started me worrying bigtime, then the bailouts to the fraudsters continued...then the lack of robust natural gas transportation initiatives. now the federal reserve is going to buy long term treasuries. i am sorry, but no matter how they try to explain that one, it is financial incest and simply a way to print money like the weimar republic. the question now is, does everyone own a wheelbarrow? what happened to the america that used to pride itself on solving its own problems, its industrial might, and its ability to engineer real solutions instead of financial hijinx?

Mar 22 09:49 AM

[Michael Fit...:]

banks: what is it you need convincing on? natural gas cars and trucks? they have been around for years and are a proven and mature technology. US natural gas supplies? they are abundant, just look at the recent near 10% increase in supply because of all the shale discoveries and new technology applied to produce it. don't believe that? look at the huge reserves alaska? don't believe that? look at the price! recently natural gas has been under $4 per MMBtu - people in Utah are filling up their cars with natural gas for under $1 per gallon equivalent. sure, natural gas prices would rise if we had transportation demand, but don't you think oil will rise as well? would you rather send your money to russia, iraq, iran, saudi arabia and venezuela or chesapeake energy, conoco philips, and a host of other US companies that will in turn pay royalties to US farmers and land owners?

Mar 22 09:56 AM

[koolsool:]

Thanks for another great post Fitz. It expresses the frustration & disappointment of us people who think that changing our energy policy is the most important thing that is on Obama's agenda. I too thought Obama was going to be different. He has a huge opportunity to get America on the right track, which is using our 100 years worth natural gas reserves for energy security & pollution control. But he is totally botching the opportunity. I wish there was a way to get him to read your posts. I wish he was not from a coal state. Maybe if he was from Oklahoma, he would be more opened minded on natural gas.

Mar 22 10:11 AM

[bluesmoke:]

Fitz - I saw this article when it posted yesterday, and I saw the knuckleheaded response you got. It was so stupid that I decided to wait a day to see what happened. Too bad the first post got deleted because your response was right on the money.

Koolsool - Agree completely.

Why natural gas is being ignored does not make any sense!

Mar 22 10:59 AM

[Old Trader:]

Fitz,

It comes as no surprise to me that Obama has chosen to fill his cabinet with ivory tower theorists with a classical liberal bent (at least on the science/economics side....there's NO question the GS alumni at Treasury have LOADS of "practical" experience in the markets...snark off).

As a life-long Chicago area resident, Obama brought to mind one Carol Mosely Braun. She was a 1 term Il. senator who wasn't reelected because of dubious campaign funding issues and a questionable romantic dalliance with an African dictator (which occurred while she was in Africa on the taxpayers' dime on "fact-finding" missions).

Of course, if anyone campaigned against her in her initial run for office, that was defacto evidence the person HAD to be a racist miscogynist. The fact that she was a smart, black woman trumped her obvious lack of any meaningful qualifications for the position.

Mar 22 01:49 PM

[Michael Fit...:]

thanks for the comments. i think i have to find something other than natural gas transportation to write about. i'm as popular as an old scratched up 45 LP... i just wish i could find something as important. any suggestions? i am about to start a local natural gas initiative in my hometown, perhaps i can write about that if it becomes interesting. oops, natural gas again!

koolsool: yeah, obama's team really dissapointed me when they didn't require GM and F to make their NGVs that they sell around the world available in the US as a condition to receiving US tax-payer money. then the shapiro appointment. then the continued bailout fraud. it just seems to go on and on. as far as obama reading my posts, do you remember the hefner book ("The GET") i wrote a book review for? well, hefner was at the clean energy summit in washington, DC a few weeks back. pickens, podesta, secretary chu, gore, RFK. Jr. and many others were there as well. podesta has read "The GET" (and the book contains a quote from podesta in the forward) so he is well aware of US nat gas reserves and the logical case to leverage them. now, podesta is a big player in obama's administration, so they talk alot. therefore, the fact that obama hasnt implemented robust nat gas transpo policy isn't because he hasn't been exposed to the idea and the economic, environmental, and national security issues it solves, it's because:
1) he is from a coal state (illinois) and bought and paid for or
2) is scared to death of big oil or is worried about the loss of lobbyists money
either way, it's an economic, environmental, and national security disgrace. i really thought he'd be "different". there is still time for him to change, and he has made some progress. i dunno. i guess i expected much more.

bluesmoke: haha, yeah, maybe SA deleted it because it was pretty bad. sometimes they delete comments containing curse words and i think i remember some off color remarks in that post. regardless, thanks for reading and for your support for natural gas transportation.

old trader: well, i am surprised with obama. i really think he is a logical guy with a good head on his shoulders, which is quite a change from the ideological knucklehead we had before. i don't know anything about braun, but i do know that it seems obama, despite a few initiatives i really like, is entrenched with the "status quo" when it comes to the SEC(financial markets), big oil (energy), and the environmental "purists" who are, in actuality, increasing both CO2 emissions and particulates as their "all green or nothing" approach is tightening the foreign oil noose around america's neck. sigh.

Mar 22 05:21 PM

[mediapro:]

I always enjoy reading your posts because of your obvious, studied commitment to this issue. NG is an interesting critter, and we all should know more about one of our most abundant, less-polluting fossil fuels.

Most of all, I appreciate your attention to reader posts. The follow-up and comments are almost as informative as the articles. Too many authors post and article and, when challenged, simply ignore the reader posts.

I heard something recently about a new NG find in New York and Pennsylvania, previously inknown fields so rich that they are holding lotteries for land use rights with farmers getting in line to be the first selected for land leases. Do you have any info on this?

Mar 22 06:51 PM

[optionsgirl:]

That's the Marcellus Shale Field.


On Mar 22 06:51 PM mediapro wrote:

> I always enjoy reading your posts because of your obvious, studied
> commitment to this issue. NG is an interesting critter, and we all
> should know more about one of our most abundant, less-polluting fossil
> fuels.
>
> Most of all, I appreciate your attention to reader posts. The follow-up
> and comments are almost as informative as the articles. Too many
> authors post and article and, when challenged, simply ignore the
> reader posts.
>
> I heard something recently about a new NG find in New York and Pennsylvania,
> previously inknown fields so rich that they are holding lotteries
> for land use rights with farmers getting in line to be the first
> selected for land leases. Do you have any info on this?

Mar 22 09:43 PM

[longoil:]

Fitzman,

Energy is NOT being taking seriously by the Obama administration. Go to the official government following website and see what I mean.

www.whitehouse.gov/age.../

This platform looks like it was written by a high school sophomore and NOT by the energy experts Obama claims to have on his team..

It is a collection of random election talking points and not a comprehensive energy plan. It lacks a timeline and overall strategy such as:

1) Short Term: Drill for more oil and gas
2) Medium Term: Transition to alternative energy via NGV, PHEV, electric cars, etc. Implement energy conservation initiatives.
3) Long Term: Achieve self sustaining energy supply via wind, solar, nuclear, etc completely independent of hostile nations like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia and Venezuela and achieve zero emissions.

I agree with your energy plan overall because it meshes in well with what I perceive to be the solution.

Mar 23 09:15 AM

[Michael Fit...:]

mediapro: thanks. optionsgirl was correct, it is the marcellus shale. however, this shale isn't really "new" - my grandfather was producing oil and natural gas in western NY state back in the 1930's, and i am sure you are aware that US oil and nat gas discoveries began in that area of pennslyvania and new york. i remember once i visited my grandfather's old lease where my cousin was still producing natural gas. my cousin had an old map, and said he found 6 of my grandfather's drilled holes, but there was one he couldn't find. i told him i could find it and started walking the lease. eventually i saw a large flat rock (limestone), and i told my cousin there it is. he said where? i said under that rock. we lifed that rock and thank god neither of us was smoking - natural gas came shooting out of that hole under fairly high pressure. very cool.

options: hey, how and where have you been?

longoil: yup, i think you and i are in agreement. i am very dissapointed in obama's energy initiatives. although much better than bush, he seems to have been convinced by the environmenal purists that electric cars are the total solution. i fear the US has to live through another peak oil price spike before we get the message. the question is, can we survive another? who would have thought 5 years ago that $145/barrel oil and $4.50/gallon gasoline and a resulting severe recession wouldn't have been enough evidence to convince policy makers we need a strategy change?

Mar 23 09:48 AM

[jack kreg:]

Fitz, thanks again, your thinking about NG fueled transportation system bodes to be a major positive force for America, and I support you soo strongly for that. Having said that, we are probably on opposite ends of the political spectrum, as I did not expect Obama to be much different than the recent Pres Bush, who was an equally big spender. Both are from the spend, borrow and spend more molds, except, Obama adds the populus "higher taxes on the rich", who got rich, not through hard work, but through expolitation of the poor, hence the need for income re-distribution.
Still, your mantra for NG is laser focused on a major prospect for American greatness, which we all should have as our focus. thanks again, stay with it,
I too like the idea of state initiative, CA is my state??

Mar 23 11:46 AM

[mediapro:]

Thanks.


On Mar 22 09:43 PM optionsgirl wrote:

> That's the Marcellus Shale Field.

Mar 23 05:47 PM

[tunaman4u2:]

1.69 TRILLION CUBIC FEET in US reserves, nat gas under $4 while oil surges on the same bloated inventory & we don't use this stuff.
You're right Fitz, this is stupid

Mar 26 05:00 PM

[User 357469:]

I too agree. It is very stupid. But unfortunately the economy is run by the oil companies and banks with too many politicians from both past and present administrations in their pockets. Until that changes nothing else will change except the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer while our planet is being destroyed. Obama promised change. Well from what I see the only change coming is a tremendous increase in the public debt while his friends who put him in office will become even richer than they already were. I suspect that Obama needs a dictionary to help him understand the differences between a stimulus, a bailout, and a payoff.

On Mar 26 05:00 PM tunaman4u2 wrote:

> 1.69 TRILLION CUBIC FEET in US reserves, nat gas under $4 while oil
> surges on the same bloated inventory & we don't use this stuff.
>
> You're right Fitz, this is stupid

Mar 27 02:14 PM