Jack Yetiv

Russian Energy and U.S. Implications

Sorry, forgot to say that other than the above, I completely agree with the author's comments about the need for a meaningful energy policy because I think energy is much more threatening to the Western world today than all the 9/11 terrorists combined--times 10.

Jack

Russian Energy and U.S. Implications

I STRONGLY agree with Sirlacksalot,

Switching from one carbon-based, finite-supply fossil fuel to another is sheer folly for a whole host of reasons:

1) I believe nat gas pricing is on an uptrend and will continue to climb as oil does. The fact that we have lots of gas in the US will moderate this rise, but won't stop it completely. Also, you will see more gas-powered ppowerplants get built in the next few years as coal-fired plants become politically untenable.

On a per-BTU basis, gas is already too cheap compared to oil, which is why gas has moved from $8 a year ago to above $11 for much of the past couple of months.

Therefore, nat gas isn't going to be that cheap going forward, and if you want to figure the cost of nat-gas-powered transportation going forward, plan on $12 to $13/MCF. Don't use historical numbers like $8/MCF.

2) Nat gas still produces CO2.

3) The infrastructure to use nat gas as a public transportation fuel will cost tens (if not hundreds) of billions of dollars and will take at least a decade and probably much longer to install.

4) LNG terminals are pretty darn hard to get permitted--the ONLY one on our Pacific West coast is in Mexico, not the US.

5) By the time nat gas infrastructure would be ready, solar power will cost half of what it does now, and less than any fossil-fuel-based power plant (because all coal and nat gas plants will be obligated to have CCS equipment, and because coal and gas will probably be substantially higher than they are now).

There is NO doubt in my mind that the solution to transportation in the US (and Europe) is plug-in hybrids that are charged by renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, wave power, biomass, etc.

We already have THAT infrastructure built (your house wiring and transmission lines thereto), most people will plug in their cars at night because of TOU pricing (time-of-use pricing that will charge much more for peak KWH versus off-peak at night), and this will help balance the load (many power plants are essentially idled at night, thus increasing the cost per KWH).

Also, PIH's will average 100+ mpg because most people would never use the gas engine on short trips, and most commuting trips are short and within the battery range of most PIH's that are in prototyping right now.

Indeed, someone who makes almost all short trips within the capacity of the batteries will experience mileages of several HUNDRED miles to the gallon, and might only fill up their tank once or twice PER YEAR.

PIH's are undoubtedly the wave of the future. And several car manufacturers are expected to roll out PIH's before the end of next year, with large-scale rollouts in 2010 (I estimate that the US public will have 3-4 choices before the end of next year, and probably 10 choices by the middle of 2010--24 months from now).

Jack Yetiv