That mission is to discover, develop, and implement practical ways to save us—the United States and the world—from the ravages of the fossil fuel dragon. We should do our utmost to make everyone aware of available options for safe, affordable energy generation and use. We should also try to motivate entrepreneurs to pursue the development of as many of these options as are found to be practical, while continuing to look for new and better ones.
It is paramount that we develop realistic solutions to the energy crisis from among the multitude of products and systems that are in use, under development, or even latent ideas in the minds of America's creative genius. We must collect and examine descriptions of fuels and energy systems—past, present, and future—and of many possible and practical ways to replace fossil fuels with renewable fuels or energy systems. It matters not to a driver what powers his vehicle when he presses down on the accelerator pedal. Any power system that provides adequate mobile power economically when that pedal is pressed will satisfy his needs. All of the new systems could replace fossil fuels as the prime energy source for our nation and even the world. In the process, this could lead to a carbon-dioxide-neutral energy system, one that adds no new carbon dioxide to our atmosphere. The options needed are real and practical alternatives to fossil fuels that will replace the use of petroleum and coal-based fuels with renewable, nonpolluting fuels or electrical energy and in the process:
1. build an American energy system that will stop the hemorrhaging of billions of U.S. dollars, mostly to despotic nations that preach our destruction.
2. build an American energy industry that boosts our economy and provides good jobs—real, productive jobs for many Americans.
3. stop the growth of atmospheric carbon dioxide and that possible link to global warming: and accomplish most of this within just the next ten years.
Our total energy system consists of many types of energy systems, sources, fuels and conversions. The requirements of the components of such a workable system should be judged by the following criteria:
1. They should be comparatively inexpensive to use.
2. They should be developed using environmentally sound, sensitive principles.
3. They should be far easier, simpler and less expensive to implement than systems exemplified by the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle.
4. They should be adaptable to our existing infrastructure with minor changes.
5. They should use raw materials we already have or that can be developed here, locally.
6. They should be applicable to existing vehicles with upgrades or conversions.
7. New fuels should be useable with existing IC (Internal Combustion) engines of all types.
8. They should be developed using existing, evolving technology able to be essentially complete within ten years.
9. They should create a system that is a net zero contributor of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
10. They should use evolutionary as opposed to revolutionary changes—these will lead to constantly improving, adapting systems driving numerous growing and improving technologies.
11. They should be developed by America-based industry with the many resulting substantial benefits to our nation—social, political, and economic.
While the main thrust of such systems will be to provide new, better, less expensive and less environmentally intrusive systems for energy and transportation, many benefits other than just getting away from fossil fuels accrue. These include direct positive effects on four of the first seven of the top twenty-two most serious concerns of the American public as shown in a public survey conducted by MIT and cited below.
Public Perceptions and Concerns
Howard J. Herzog, a principal research engineer at the MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment (LFEE); MIT graduate student Thomas E. Curry; and professors David M. Reiner and Stephen Ansolabehere developed a survey including questions about the environment, global warming, and climate-change-mitigation technologies, and the most important issues facing the United States today. The survey in its entirety can be viewed at the following website:
http://sequestration.mit.edu/pdf/LFEE_2005-001_WP.pdfQuestions showed that the environment in general and climate change in particular are not high-priority issues for the public. The environment came out thirteenth on a list of twenty-two possibilities for the most important issues facing the United States today. The front-runners on the list were terrorism, health care, and the economy. On a list of ten specific environmental problems, global warming came up in sixth place, well behind water pollution, destruction of ecosystems, and toxic waste.
IMPORTANT NOTE: This list represents public perception of the severity of a problem, not the reality. It is well known that media attention to a particular problem or situation influences public opinion. Since the survey was taken, and with the growing hype about global warming, that concern now tops the list of environmental concerns, having moved from sixth to first in just a year. That could well be described as the Chicken Little effect. Whether or not it is an actual cause for concern is irrelevant. Public perception and the assumption by so many public figures that human created carbon dioxide is causing catastrophic climate change for the worse makes it a real concern to many people. Some realities of our current understanding of climate change including global warming are described in the section on global warming starting on page 161 in this book.
The solutions recommended in this book directly relate to and could be a powerful and positive force toward the following items on the survey, showing their position of importance to U.S. citizens according to the survey taken in 2005. The number two concern, health care, though not directly affected would benefit from the economic growth these solutions would provide.
No. 1 Terrorism
No. 2 Health care
No. 3 The economy
No. 4 Unemployment
No. 7 Federal budget deficit
No. 13 The environment
Changes in Three Years
Public perception has changed considerably since 2005 because of many factors that include the rising cost of petroleum and petroleum products, the rising cost of food along with worldwide shortages, the lack of any significant terrorist attacks on the United States, and the general acceptance as a proven fact that global warming caused by human production of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels represents a real and imminent threat. Add to that the long ago predicted mortgage meltdown and it becomes evident our economy has taken several damaging blows. This latest economic blow was brought about by foolish and even unscrupulous lending practices and speculation that should have been illegal, but were not. Once more our politicians hurry to lock the barn door after the horse has been stolen.
Those who are complaining the loudest are the very ones who orchestrated this crisis. Now they have the gall to ask to be put in charge of the solution. How stupid do they see the public? Are they right? That all of this together has not brought on a collapse of our economy is a testimonial to the strength of that economy. Just how well it continues to grow or decline depends on many interwoven factors. Not the least of these is the result of political actions. The specter of increased taxes and government controls on business in America looms large in the minds of business managers and owners all around the world. People will always react to their perceptions rather than to realities particularly regarding poorly understood phenomena. This is amplified in importance by the media's preponderance to report in detail any bad news or frightening scenario. Add to that those politicians and media personalities who use any possible bad suppositions no matter how insignificant as bludgeons with which to batter any who would dare to disagree with them or their agendas. The effect on the public's perception of virtually anything is powerfully influenced by all the ranting and raving.
A poorly supported yet probably fairly accurate report on the current state of public's perception provides the following new list of related concerns:
No. 1 The economy, especially as it relates to rising food prices, the mortgage meltdown and suddenly lower fuel prices
No. 2 Unemployment
No. 3 Federal budget deficit
No. 4 Terrorism
No. 5 Health care
No. 11 The environment (global warming leads)
This is strange considering that until the sudden economic downturn, the economy continued to expand and unemployment had risen only to around 6%, a normally acceptable level in good economic times. The public's attention has shifted from those figures and in 2008 focused on recession, the mortgage and corporate credit debacle, unemployment, and rising energy and food prices that they see and deal with every day. These every-day realities truly frighten them. With politicians and the media constantly waving the recession flag for more than a year, it is no wonder people are nervous. In fact, deliberate pessimism of the media was probably a powerful force in creating the recession or at least making it worse.
Consider how an effective, all-out effort to change to alternative energy could bring positive changes to several of our most serious problems.
No. 1 The Economy—a greatly expanded American energy industry would be an enormous boon to our economy if it only shut off the hemorrhaging of money for oil.
No. 2 Employment—thousands of high-paying new jobs would be created right here.
No. 3 Federal budget deficits—profits from new and expanded industries would pour billions into the federal treasury; money now going out overseas.
No. 4 Terrorism—cut off the billions in oil money now going to so many despotic regimes and into funding of terrorism, chiefly to Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who plan our destruction.
No. 11 The environment—may be far down the list of public concerns, but net carbon dioxide emissions would be greatly reduced if not eliminated. That can’t be anything but good.
A Monumental Task with Many Obstacles
Even with these substantial benefits bundled into grand plans, the planners must still deal with significant forces. These forces can make a new idea work or relegate it to the ash can of history. Real difficulties and obstacles must be overcome in order for any new system to become a reality no matter how positive and/or effective that system might be. The battle to get the most beneficial systems noticed and made a reality may require more effort than the implementation of the idea or system itself. The process, once begun, may take unexpected twists and turns in moving, sometimes forward and sometimes back, but always in the ultimate direction of success.
Our space program and its goal to put a man on the moon in ten years followed just such a wandering path en route to its success. We can expect no less from our efforts to find a new fuel/energy system that has a far more powerful practical and obviously profitable goal. Clearly, President Kennedy's commitment to put a man on the moon in ten years and the follow-up on that commitment was a major force in making it happen. Media hype and glamorization helped garner public support and enthusiasm. That was a government program operated by a government agency implemented mostly by private contractors according to government bid specifications. It was a process oriented solution with a single defined goal.
What we need now is leadership that is courageous enough to state a goal such as convert to new, home based energy systems in ten years and then work ceaselessly toward achieving that goal. We need leadership that will initiate a system oriented, broad-spectrum approach to solving our growing energy crisis. This is an even greater challenge than putting a man on the moon. It is a serious challenge that could be instrumental in securing our survival. We need this ten-year goal declaration to be well stated and backed by leadership with the vision and dedication to follow it through. The commitment would be to develop new energy systems that will provide American-made renewable fuels or other portable energy systems and will add no more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere and do it within the next ten years.
This commitment is a much broader goal than putting a man on the moon. It has many branching and interconnected avenues that could lead to successful solutions. The key to final success will be found in the development of many areas of research rather than just one or two. These include the best combination of energy sources, means of obtaining that energy, means of moving the energy from source to point of use, and finally the systems of using that energy. A variety of equally effective systems fitting differing needs could be developed by a diverse group of privately funded entrepreneurs and inventors. The result could become a variation on the current theme where we use several types of fuels in different configurations for similar purposes.
Delaying that, as many are now doing by talking about reaching that goal in thirty or fifty years, is a recipe for disaster. We do not have that kind of time to wait. Just run the numbers. Continuing to transfer billions of American dollars offshore for thirty to fifty years will destroy us economically long before we can develop an alternative fuel economy. Even ten years could be too long, but I believe we can handle that. Certainly it would be less disastrous than thirty to fifty years.
What we do not need now are politicians that use class envy, and every negative action they can promote as smoke screens to hide their own obvious and damaging failures. Not just to hide their gross negligence, but to use false factors as the reasons for new and oppressive taxes, and government powers to control commerce and punish those they see fit to punish for any reason. These power-hungry opportunists and their lackeys in the media ridicule and oppose anything proposed or suggested by anyone who is not in their camp.
Here's just one example of the many new energy sources available. This is information about one large oil field from the U.S. Geological Survey. It is the official results of a groundbreaking study released on June 9, 2008. The report confirmed a massive oil reserve in an area the locals have nicknamed the Bakken, which stretches across North Dakota, Montana and southeastern Saskatchewan. The study estimates an immense 3.65 billion barrels of undiscovered oil in the Bakken. Compared with the agency's estimate back in 1995, the study reports a 25-fold increase in the amount of oil that can be recovered. The reported mean estimate of 3.65 billion barrels of oil is for undiscovered oil only, and does not include known oil. The total amount of recoverable crude in The Bakken deposit could be as much as 400 billion barrels. Once impossible to extract, this oil has yielded to new horizontal drilling and rock fracturing techniques. The Bakken is now being hailed as the single largest oil find in U.S. history. Experts estimate that this light, sweet (low sulfur) crude will cost Americans about $16 a barrel. Let's hope we can obtain major production from this field before opportunistic obstructionists can figure out a reason to prevent drilling there.
It may be that the current crisis can be diverted by new recovery technology in this field, but hopefully the incentive to produce viable nonfossil fuels and other energy systems will continue. Eventually we will run out of fossil fuel and will need alternatives. The attention given to new energy and fuel systems will undoubtedly involve effort into other seemingly unconnected areas. We are still deriving long-term benefits from technology developed for our space program. It would certainly be the same for any fuel/energy program. It is amazing to discover that so many of our serious problems are interrelated and how finding one solution often leads to another almost totally unrelated solution and so to the demand for another workable system.
Existing Systems
Presently there are at least seven petroleum-based and mined fuels used in a variety of engines and boilers. These are in addition to coal used mostly in power plants. Use of all of these fossil fuels adds carbon dioxide to our atmosphere. There are at least six nonfossil-based fuels currently being used or being considered for use. Most are manufactured from plant materials and add no net carbon dioxide to the atmosphere in use. Some do add carbon dioxide in their process of manufacture. There are a few nonfossil solid fuels, mostly used for heating and cooking. A wide variety of harvesting and manufacturing processes are used to obtain or make these fuels. Some of these manufacturing processes require more energy input than the resulting fuel can produce.
There is also the special case of nuclear fuels that use radioactivity to generate heat to boil liquids that drive turbine generators. Since these do not use combustion, they do not release carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
The only reason we need fuel is to provide heat energy which we then convert to electricity or mechanical power. There are at least five combustion-based systems in use. The internal combustion piston engine is the most common and the most developed. Turbine engines make up the rest of the internal combustion types. Other sources of power include piston steam engines, turbine steam engines, several types of nuclear reactors, fuel cells, and batteries. All of these power sources turn energy derived from chemical reactions or nuclear fission into electricity or mechanical energy which then powers vehicles, tools, and factories.
There are at least six types of batteries in use, some of which are new and just beyond the development stage. These new technologies will come of age when continuing development of improved technologies lower their costs and improve their safety and efficiency.
Electric motors of many types and sizes, long important in stationary applications and semi-portable tools, are growing in use in vehicles. The fastest growing application of new battery technologies is now battery-powered, cord-free tools and electronic equipment. Application of these new batteries to hybrids, plugin hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), and even pure electric vehicles (EVs), is just in the beginning stages.
In the power plant segment of our energy system there are at least eight different sources of energy used to drive the generators that produce our electricity. Each has its own positives and negatives and all can pose serious environmental problems.
All of these parts of our energy system have been described to illustrate how complex it is. Making any major change would be a difficult and arduous task. Even deciding which changes to make—what system to develop—will be difficult. The answer could lie in a very successful technique used mostly in America for a long time, individual entrepreneurship in an unfettered, free-enterprise, business environment.
The Challenge Ahead
There are literally thousands of individuals using their genius to develop new energy technologies motivated by the promise of rewards for themselves and for their organizations. We are not alone in free entrepreneurship. The powers that control China have suddenly realized its value and are now encouraging it. This has created one of the biggest economic turnarounds in the history of nations. Other countries have seen the light for some time and their economies are booming. Even India, the other Asian giant, is beginning to loosen the socialist government reins that have held their economy in check for so long. The phenomenal growth of the Irish economy is another example.
Internet access to the rest of the world and primarily the free world has been a factor in these changes. Even some governments that once controlled virtually every aspect of their people's lives are now recognizing the value of free entrepreneurship, and capitalism. Profit is no longer a dirty word in many of these nations. Tom Friedman details these changes in his recent book, The World is Flat 2.0.
Ireland is a prime example of what can happen when government frees businesses and entrepreneurs from oppressive controls and taxes. After years of wallowing in poverty in a country where government controls and high taxes on business stifled progress and discouraged investment of both time and money, the Irish took a dramatic new course. Government interference and controls of business were largely abolished. Complex reporting that bogged down management was mostly thrown out. Corporate taxes once among the highest in the world were reduced or eliminated. Government changed from being the enemy of business to being a strong supporter. The results speak for themselves.
A few years back, Ireland was one of the most vibrant economies in Europe. Business was booming like never before. There were many high paying jobs and investment capital flowed freely into a nation that once couldn’t coax any investors. In the just twenty years more then 1,000 foreign companies had moved to or opened operations in Ireland. Local firms were also flourishing and expanded with worldwide impact. Employment had grown so much that Ireland needed to import thousands of workers just to keep their industries running. All of this success was because of the new positive attitude of the government of Ireland to the development of business. This radical new attitude brought on the availability of world class support services including banking, trade finance, transport systems and advanced telecommunications.
Historians like Tom Garvin were having trouble keeping score. "I have to make a mental effort to remember the Dublin of the 1950s, which was in many ways a Third World city," recalls Garvin. "Horses, no motorcars, children in bare feet, dirt everywhere, people living in slums, no television, no bathrooms - a really impoverished European country that didn't seem to be going anywhere." That picture changed and was unbelievably different: hopeful, optimistic, enthusiastic, almost ecstatic. This amazing economic outcome resulted from government working with business rather than against it and removing oppressive tax burdens rather than imposing them. What also helped was a pro-business attitude of people and even the media rather than the class hatred and anti business attitude we see so prevalent in our own country today.
NOTE: Unfortunately, Ireland pursued a course of massive benefits including welfare and health care based on the economic boom going on forever. When the recession hit, the costs of these programs quickly overpowered the government and the banks similarly to what happened in Greece, Iceland, and several other European countries. With the European Central Bank announcing that it has bought more than $20 billion of mostly high-risk euro-zone government debt in one week, its new strategy is crystal clear: “We will take the risk from bank balance sheets and give it to the central bank, and we expect Portugal-Ireland-Italy-Greece-Spain to cut fiscal spending sharply and pull themselves out of this mess through austerity.” It remains to be seen whether they will do so or follow the lead of the current US administration and continue spending themselves blithely into financial oblivion.
The concerted effort to solve our energy problems if augmented by a positive attitude and concerted action by everyone here at home would certainly stimulate the economic growth that has sustained our economy at such high levels for so long. If our efforts at solving our energy crisis are driven by hope for substantial economic rewards we will surely succeed and hugely so. If on the other hand, those anti-business voices of doom and gloom succeed and control our government with the new oppressive regulations and taxes they have promised, our economy could will surely go into reverse and much more quickly than even the present slow down has indicated. The fall of the dollar we are currently experiencing will accelerate. Those entrepreneurs who might have solved our energy crisis will do so in Ireland, or China, or India as our stifled economy sinks into depression and our energy needs go unsolved.
How we approach and deal with this serious problem and the attitude we take toward those who have the power to solve it will ultimately decide which technologies prosper and which fall by the wayside. The steadily rising costs of petroleum fuels has made alternative systems practical that were far too expensive when oil was five dollars a barrel. One possible stumbling block to these changes could result from an effort by OPEC to increase the supply of oil and thus reduce the price. Eventually dwindling supplies of petroleum would wipe this out as a practical tactic.
There are many serious and demonstrable problems solving the energy crisis will effect right now. The biggest is the outflow of billions of dollars for oil to nations that preach our destruction. The boost to our economy alone would create a bonanza in this country like we have never before seen. New jobs, new technologies, new industries, and new entrepreneurs would flourish. Even without new taxes (what a dream that is) government revenue would soar from the increased economic activity. The demise of the oil industry would certainly be replaced by the new energy industries. Actually, those oil companies that got aboard these new technologies rather than opposing them, could use their present wealth to invest in them and grow rather than fade away.
Whether or not human contribution of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere creates global warming is actually only remotely connected to our energy related problems. If these new energy systems eliminate the wholesale use of fossil fuels, so much the better. Even if it has a negligible effect on global warming, it can do no harm to maintain the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere near to where it has been for a very long time. That would also satisfy the demands of the global warming proponents and opponents and redirect their energies elsewhere to other far more dangerous challenges facing humanity. Concrete benefits to the rest of the world with the exception of the oil-rich nations would also be substantial.
Some predictions:After studying energy systems of so many kinds I am convinced that the future will see the greatest growth in energy generated in the form of electricity, distributed and used by a wide variety of systems. I see rapid growth in electric generating capacity primarily in nuclear, but with geothermal a close second and possibly eventually leading. I see a decline in coal fired power plants unless we find a practical technology to gather and sequester carbon dioxide, a very difficult and expensive challenge. I see wind and direct solar generation as always being too expensive and remaining minor players in contribution to the grid. Their use in small, local applications where connection to the electric grid is expensive and to home heating and providing hot water will probably be a substantial benefit and addition to the energy mix. Hydropower will not grow much as environmental concerns will make it increasingly expensive. One interesting possibility now being studied is the conversion of ocean wave action to electrical energy. Thus far, costs and practicality seem reasonable and downsides appear to be virtually nonexistent.
Vehicles will become more electric and less fuel powered as battery technology continues to improve and rapid charging systems are developed. There will always be hybrids, mostly electric vehicles with onboard charging capability, because charging capabilities may be unavailable in some places. Of course there could also be additional growth in micro turbine generators which are already being used for both remote and emergency power applications. Variety will be great at least as technologies progress and new ones come along.
There are several effective new fuel and energy systems to replace the existing system based on coal and petroleum with one that does not use fossil fuels. The benefits of such systems are many, varied, and have far-reaching positive attributes. These include immeasurable economic and political benefits for the citizens of any state or country that adopts them and environmental benefits for the entire world.
There are many innovative new products and technologies that could help us move to a new energy system with a low, or possibly zero-net carbon dioxide environmental impact. Many of these are already available and on the market. Others are soon to come. All that is needed is acceptance by the buying public and the associated development of better technologies and manufacturing capabilities. Some effective PR would provide a big boost.
Two possible direct replacements for gasoline are butanol (butyl alcohol) and 2,5-dimethylfuran (DMF). Both have been available for a long time primarily as solvents and paint thinners. Both can be used in current gasoline engines with little or no modifications. Their high cost relative to gasoline is now changing as gasoline prices rise. New manufacturing techniques have already lowered the production costs of these new fuels to competitive levels. These also have the possibility of being made out of waste plant materials by active biota. Several new techniques have already shown some success. All that is needed is further research and development of processes that can be scaled up to meet the kind of quantities required for a gasoline replacement.
One caveat regarding alternative fuels is already creating serious problems that can only grow worse. Enough corn, wheat and soy beans are being diverted from food to energy use (as ethanol and biodiesel) to bring about some major increases in the costs of these grains. Most have hit all time highs on the grain markets and no sign of a relaxation of this upward trend has yet appeared. Farmers everywhere are thrilled with this new bonanza. Increases in prices for all baked goods, meats, eggs and milk—anything that uses or requires grains—are already quite noticeable in stores.
Another concern that has quite a different but equally negative effect is the growing of palms for palm oil to be used as biodiesel fuel. Much tropical rain forest is being cut, burned and cleared to grow palms for the highly profitable oil they produce. Destruction of rain forest with its huge capacity to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere could more than counter any gain in the carbon dioxide balance from use of biodiesel from palm oil. I’m certain there are other problems with conversion to renewable fuels from crops.
There are many other ways to produce biodiesel that could become practical were we to pursue them aggressively. One that is well documented is the use of Algae fed nutrients from waste water or other biological waste materiels to produce useable oils. View the Internet site http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html. for more information on this example of just one possible process. Many of these new technologies would bear fruit if more research were provided. This would accomplish two needed goals. One would be to produce biodiesel without interfering with food crops. The second is make profitable use of waste materials that now cost money for their disposal.
Using food crops to make biofuels has already caused disruption to the food supply which is only going to grow worse. Because of this, I favor emphasis on new fuels made from non-food chain raw materials along with new battery technologies, electric vehicles and a great expansion of geothermal power generation to cover the increased energy demand. These are some of the only readily acceptable and practical options that can lead us away from dependence on fossil fuels without a major disruption of our food supply or serious damage to our environment. I see no practical development of cost-effective fuel-cell powered vehicles, hydrogen or otherwise, without a major breakthrough in technology. Although such a breakthrough is always possible, there seems to be no hint of any in the foreseeable future.
There are powerful and deeply entrenched economic and political forces all over the world that actively oppose any system to replace fossil fuels. This is because it would challenge their power and control over energy. I trust our nation will overcome this opposition and lead the world by becoming the first to adopt such a system. If we don’t, I’m certain China, India and several other countries will jump at the chance to be first with new energy technology and its associated benefits.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The book, Energy, Convenient Solutions, is about alternative systems based on renewable, non fossil fuels, expansion of non polluting energy sources, and the total replacement of fossil fuels with their accompanying addition of carbon dioxide to our atmosphere. The ultimate goal is to show how we can do this economically and quickly by explaining what can and is being done and how we can accelerate the change. No, it does not have all the answers, but it does present practical ways we can move to an environmentally safe, economically secure energy and transportation system in as short a time as a decade.
In order for us to succeed in making this change it will require a completely new view of energy and how to create, store, transport, distribute and use it. Making this change smoothly and without painful disruption of commerce and transportation is a significant challenge. The change must be evolutionary rather than revolutionary and make use of as much existing and practical new technology as possible. As a matter of fact, one of the prime messages of the book is that it can be done using existing technology.
Read Energy, Convenient Solutions to learn how this can be accomplished within ten years using existing technologies. All we have to do is get off our butts and get it done.Several years ago I was quite interested in the hydrogen fuel-cell program for vehicle power, but didn’t really know much about it. Once I began researching it, I found out that it might not be the panacea it was touted to be, particularly because of the tremendous cost in both money and time required both for its development and for the infrastructure required to serve it. Since that time, I have delved deeply into the broader field of energy and benefitted from a much larger and more complete picture of total energy systems and industries. I came up with a number of alternate strategies that are better and possibly even cheaper than our current systems. The results of this research is published in, "Energy, Convenient Solutions."
To read excerpts from the book, goto http://senesisword.blogspot.com
For more informatio visit our website, http://senesisword.com
Last edit February 27, 2011
