Travelling halfway across America in two days can be an eye-opener. Shelley and I generally like a long drive, as tiresome as that can be at time. I suppose the pace of life—that is, they way you take in the world around you—is more relaxing in a car than sitting 20,000 feet above the earth where things below almost appear static from the confines of the seat in an airplane.
Not so with a car. You can move around a bit easier and of course you can always make a stop. For me, those stops are often a function of my age. At 74, you can guess what that entails without too much detail. And of course there are stops for fuel, food, and fun.
Fuel is a topic Shelley and I often muse about. We are somewhat fascinated by how the price of gasoline shifts from state to state. In Virginia we started our journey buying gas for $2.99 a gallon. By the time we transited the Shenandoah Valley, it was $2.77. To be sure, the taxes in NOVA are higher and so is the demand. But that’s a big shift. When we refueled in Berkley, West Virginia, it was the same $2.99 we paid when we started. East of Louisville, Kentucky it was $2.79. Not too bad. But when we drove through Illinois, where taxes are very high, you will pay $3.59. We passed up that opportunity to refuel later in Herman, Missouri where the precious commodity was $2.77, the same as the truck stop in Virginia. And this morning, we paid 2.84 in Independence, Missouri where we’ve stayed with kids and grandkids the last two days.
I am not an economist. But I am quite certain that lower oil prices have an impact on these prices. That is why, I think, we really do need to increase fossil fuel discovery and gasoline production. The reality of supply and demand doesn’t seem to escape the ideological shifts in who runs the government, although it can be said with certainty that we are paying less that we’ve experienced in recent years. You can draw your own conclusion about that.
I suppose many of you agree with me that we should do our best to preserve clean air and water. But if we are to have a robust economy in America, it is one where all sources of energy are considered. Unfortunately, solar and wind won’t get us where we need to be. It’s a simple fact of life that fossil fuels are more economic. My prediction is that years from now that wind and solar will occupy the same wing of the museum where you can find a history of the buggy whip, knickers, and the “princess” phone. (Younger people will have to look that one up.)
The future is nuclear. In the US we have the skill and knowhow to build safe nuclear plants. And our research into nuclear fusion—the power generated by the sun—will be revolutionary. Indeed, the future may see micro fusion-based generators that will run all manner of things we need to power our society.
So why is it that we are having such a divisive debate over energy production? Isn’t it clear that the short-term demands an “all of the above” approach to that proposition? And furthermore, that the clear future is nuclear fusion, which has virtually no adverse impacts on the environment. So why is there not a major national strategy to deliver this technology with the same vigor that we are pursuing in cure for cancer?
I think our ideological battles are in the way. And much of that fight revolves around the battle over global warming, now called climate change by its advocates since the warming argument has become a bit suspect given the data. (Yep, it got really cold in my house last winter.)
Honestly, it will take clear-minded leadership to move us forward on energy. I think we have that in the current administration in Washington. And I suspect that even those politicians who have worshipped at the altar of “climate change” are facing a “reality change” if they expect to be reelected.
That change requires that the environmental agenda be placed in the proper context. Yes, we want a clean environment. But if we want a cleaner one, it requires a nuclear energy sector that is permitted to “build-baby-build.” That means for a short time we will depend on nuclear fission reactors—those that produce nuclear waste—until we can arrive at the place where helium is the only a side effect from nuclear fusion.
By the way, there also is great research going into hydrogen fuel for all manner of transit. And it won’t be as expensive as gas in Illinois.
0 Comments