A Disappointing List of Alternative Energy Projects

A Disappointing List of Alternative Energy Projects

I must say that I’m disappointed in this list of clean energy projects that the Obama Administration is funding with its stimulus money under ARPA-E. I use the word disappointed, a considerable understatement, insofar as I promised some of my colleagues that I wouldn’t make a big scene on this issue.

The list seems to contain very little that we were hoping for, and were told that it would feature, i.e., transformative technologies in replacing fossil fuels that would offer near-term results in the real world.

What we see in huge supply are:

Biofuels. This is a poor idea that doesn’t scale well. Even if it were a good way to go, there is no way to create biofuels in sufficient volume to make a meaningful difference in replacing oil. And, as I’ve often asked, why continue to burn hydrocarbons? If we’re going to clean up our processes of generating and consuming energy, why not choose processes that don’t release CO2 and other noxious compounds?

Clean Coal. The processes of sequestering the offending outputs of burning coal are expensive, and riddled with technical issues. Can’t someone stand up to the coal industry and say no to this incredible waste of money and time?

Projects given to government laboratories and universities. Both are known for glacier-like progress through intractable bureaucracies.

What we see little of are the technologies that actually replace fossil fuels and offer the promise of clean energy, like hydrokinetics, solar thermal, geothermal, etc. As I point out in my upcoming book on renewables, there are many fantastic ideas that are already proven within these arenas, the progress of which could be greatly accelerated with funding.

Those of you with naughty kids know what I mean with the term disappointed. Sometimes the best response to misbehavior is not anger; it’s an appeal to a sense of shame. Of course, that implies the possibility of a sense of shame; there are those who say that the corruption in the process is so complete that the perpetrators are incapable of that emotion. I won’t take a stand on that; I simply repeat: Guys, I’m really disappointed in you.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,
4 comments on “A Disappointing List of Alternative Energy Projects
  1. GA says:

    It’s clear what vested interests are being served by the Govt: and it’s not the people, nor the planet.

  2. Mike Hedge says:

    The most genius projects are ready to launch… they are in need of money.

    For the most part, those with money are interested in not having free energy technology. The few elite are making money from keeping things the way they are.

    Mike

  3. Dan says:

    The first alternative energy project that should always be funded is CONSERVATION. THEN whatever we do, won’t cost so much to implement.
    Net Usefulness: The extent to which we are useful over and above what we consume in resources. Nature decides in the long run by whether or not we become extinct.
    It is always easier to conserve first, so that we don’t have to make up lost ground for overconsumption in order to survive.