Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of Energy Independence | Robert Bryce

Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of Energy Independence | Robert Bryce | Interesting but there are omissions

books:

Gusher of Lies: Th...

	Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of Energy Independence Robert Bryce PublicAffairs, 2008 - 384 pages average customer review:based on 35 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

Every LIBERAL should read this book

He makes many good points and provides much needed facts about the reality of worldwide energy inTERdependence, the inadequacies of the alternatives and the fallacy of giving up fossil fuels.

Liberals will be shaking their heads in delight as he rips Bush, Cheney, the war in Iraq, etc. I'm convinced he is one of your own - even though he claims to be neutral.

But he is a pragmatist when it comes to the main topic of this book - our energy needs. We simply have to quit lying to ourselves about what can be done about the challenges we face. Wind power, solar and biofuels cannot provide even a fraction of the overall energy needs of the nation. This book does a nice job of proving that beyond any shadow of doubt.

I say liberals should read this because in my opinion they are the ones that are standing in the way. (And yes McCain is a liberal too) And they are also the ones poised to take over every branch of government January 2009. As I say, this is one of your own talking...maybe you will finally listen.

for more information click here

Interesting but there are omissions

Bryce states energy independence is a political construct reiterated by every President since 1973. It is promoted by everybody including Bush, Obama, McCain, Al Gore in An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It, and Thomas Friedman in The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century. Energy independence is used as an argument for fighting terrorism, reforming the Middle East, enhancing energy security, insulating us from oil embargos, getting us out of Iraq, and lowering oil prices. But, it is utopian.

Energy independence does not achieve its objectives. Even if we did not import oil, we'd be vested in the Middle East stability as oil prices are set globally. Any disruption in supply anywhere causes oil prices to spike on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Despite the energy independence mantra, US oil imports have risen from 38% of U.S. oil consumption in 1973 to 60% currently. This is despite our economy being 40% more energy efficient. This is the Jevons Paradox explained in The Bottomless Well: The Twilight of Fuel, the Virtue of Waste, and Why We Will Never Run Out of Energy: "Efficiency fails to curb demand because it lets more people do more... faster - and more/faster invariably swamps ... efficiency gains." Terrorists fund themselves with crime, drug, but not oil. The Middle East has never reformed itself despite long stints of low oil prices.

"The Ethanol Scam" chapter is excellent. If all U.S. corn was converted into ethanol, it would supply only 5% of U.S. oil needs. Ethanol production is inefficient consuming 100% of the energy it generates vs only 5% for gasoline. Ethanol government subsidies amount to $1.50 per gallon. One company ADM controls 29% of U.S. ethanol and is the main beneficiary of such subsidies. The corn conversion to ethanol causes food price increases of $3.72 per gallon. Over full production cycle, ethanol emits 50% more CO2 than gasoline. It also emits toxic nitrous oxide. E85 (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline) causes vehicles mpg to drop by a third. Large scale ethanol production would deplete U.S. aquifers. It requires 880 gallons of water for irrigated corn or 170 gallons for non-irrigated corn to generate a gallon of ethanol vs less than 5 gallons of water for gasoline. Ford and GM build flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs) because the Fed counts only estimated gasoline consumed when figuring out fleet efficiency. Thus, a 15 mpg FFV turns into a 29 mpg rating. The only beneficiaries of ethanol are ADM, Ford, GM, and corn growers.

Bryce explains why alternative fuels will not dent fossil fuels dominance. Coal-to-liquids (CTL) technology has remained economically unfeasible despite massive subsidies. The CTL conversion emits 50% more CO2 than gasoline. Solar and wind power are uneconomical. They are both intermittent. And wind is intermittent at the worst time (peak electricity demand on hot days with no wind). To guarantee an adequate electricity load to avoid black outs, utilities have to keep burning coal, natural gas, etc... at all times. The EIA projects solar and wind will generate less than 1% of U.S. electricity by 2030.

Many of Bryce recommendations make sense.
a)U.S. Government should eliminate most subsidies. This would curb the ethanol scam among others.
b)The U.S. should reduce the number of gasoline fuel blends dictated by State regulations. Those increase gas costs, reduce gas supply, and have unproven environmental impact.
c)U.S. to redefine energy security as functional energy interdependence supported by a diversified portfolio of energy suppliers within an efficient global energy market.
d)Accept increasing energy use and adapt to changing climate. The prospective boost in China's coal consumption to support its economic growth guarantees CO2 emissions will keep growing. Also, most Kyoto Protocol member countries have failed their CO2 reduction targets by 20% or more.
e)Embrace nuclear power, natural gas, and pursue energy efficiency.
f)Increase domestic oil production. Open up the ANWR and the coasts to offshore exploration. There are tons of oil and gas in those areas.

Some of Bryce recommendations are contradictory. He recommends pursuing solar energy backed by government funds. Meanwhile, earlier he explained why solar will amount to less than 1% of electricity generation by 2030; and that the government should get out of the energy business.

Other recommendations are somewhat controversial. He recommends we engage the Middle East as trading partners. He believes rational trading partners do not fight wars. He recommends we leave Iraq and trade with Iran. Iran has no problem selling its oil to anyone else anyway. The U.S. should share the military burden of stabilizing the Middle East with China, Japan, and the E.U. Readers will interpret these through their own political filter. When Bryce crosses over into foreign policy, I would supplement it with The Post-American World and The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.

Just months after this book publication several facts are outdated. He mentions oil is cheap at $2.82 per gallon in August 2007; but it rose to $4.00 recently. He also states that in the future crude oil could reach $100 to $150 per barrel. It already has in July 2008! He also stated we love big SUV gas guzzlers. But, SUVs are sitting on dealers lots at huge discounts.

When developing his long term energy prospect, Bryce omitted tar sands. Tar sands hold oil reserves are twice regular worldwide oil reserves. And, Canada holds half those reserves. Canada has already bypassed Saudi Arabia as the main crude oil exporter to the U.S. (17.6% of total for Canada vs 14.3% for Saudi Arabia).

Bryce dismissed oil shale as the government spent billions in the 1980s without generating any fuel. Since, oil prices have increased and technology prospects are encouraging. Western U.S. oil shale has estimated recoverable reserves nearly triple Saudi Arabia oil reserves.

Tar sand and oil shale have implications that contradict Bryce. First, the concept of Non-OPEC Peak Oil (declining production) is obsolete (chapter 7). Second, the U.S. will be less dependent on Middle East and more reliant on Canada and domestic resources.

for more information click here

reviews: 1, page 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

products you might be interested in