RE: Greenpeace et al. [& giving idiot children guns/energy]

["Thomas E. Potter" <pottert@erols.com>]

It is worth noting that Amory Lovins' opinions about coal plants have

not always been so negative.  In the late 70's and early 80's he

proposed in various places, including congressional testimony, that

national energy policy should focus on strong application of

conservation and renewables, with coal (no nukes, of course) to fill his

projected need for added electricity production capacity.  (He

recognized such a need  remaining even after application of

conservation).  He actually saw consumption of coal expanding through

2000, even though he projected that, by that time, conservation would

have practically eliminated growth in overall energy consumption and

that about 30% of our energy consumption would be provided by

renewables.  He relied on coal because, at the time of his projections,

natural gas prices were very high and projected to climb indefinitely.

Given that his projected application of renewables barely developed at

all, his plan would have led to large increases in coal consumption,

save for one happy development--the collapse of natural gas prices.

Consequently, the necessary added electricity production capacity was

largely natural gas fired instead of coal.  Had that not occurred, we

would presently be listening to his recommendations regarding what to do

with all the coal plants he originally recommended, given growing

concern about possible contribution to global warming.  But I think we

know what that recommendation would be--substitution of more

conservation and more renewables.  What else?  This whole history seems

to me to be an excellent illustration of the need for electricity fuel

diversification.



Tom Potter



John Jacobus posted:

>From: "Jacobus, John (OD/ORS)" <jacobusj@ors.od.nih.gov>

>Subject: RE: Greenpeace et al. [& giving idiot children guns/energy]

>

>For a different perspective consider what is going on in California,

where

>the citizens expected (demanded?) cheap energy without the problems of

air

>pollution, waste, and the unsightly mess of having power plants and

smoke

>stacks.  In many ways I feel the way Amory Lovins does about coal

plants.



<snip>





************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.