On Apr 8, 11:04*pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:

Of course there are many aspects of the energy problem. *They are all,
however, exacerbated by stupid, over-the-top environmental rules that are
abused by folks with a not-so-hidden agenda.

Just TRY to get something as simple as, oh, say, a runway extension
completed, and observe the almost unbelievable quantity of environmental red
tape that must be overcome. *Now imagine building an OIL REFINERY. *Ain't
gonna happen with the current set of rules.

If I were "King for a day", I would decree the following "4 Steps to
American Energy Independence":

1. New refineries are not being built because draconian environmental rules
prevent them from being constructed. *As of now, all environmental
restrictions on oil refinery construction are lifted.


Right. And would you want that unregulated refinery built upwind from
your hotel?? Didn't think so.

It's too bad all those existing refineries were shut down. It would
be a lot easier to expand those than to build new ones. By the way,
from 1975 to 2000 the EPA received exactly 1 permit request for a new
refinery. The oil companies haven't exactly been tripping over
themselves trying to build new capacity. During that time period,
there have been lots of requests to the EPA to expand existing
refineries. This expansion has been allowed, so it is a myth to claim
that environmental laws have prevented the oil industry from building
or expanding refining capacity.


2. New oil is not being pumped because draconian environmental rules prevent
new oil fields from being developed. *As of now all environmental
restrictions on development of known oil reserves are lifted.

What new American oil fields have they been prevented from developing?


3. New nuclear power plants are not being built because draconian
environmental rules prevent their construction. *As of now all environmental
restrictions on construction of new nuclear plants are lifted.

Here again, from 1978 until 2007 the NRC received exactly zero
requests for nuclear plant permits. The problem isn't that the
industry is getting turned down. The industry isn't trying to build
new plants. The reason is that nuclear plants are so hideously
expensive, and the payback period is so long, that it is a huge
financial risk to build them.

But we can agree that they probably should be built. Nuclear plants
actually emit less radiation than coal-fired power plants. Less
mercury too. And newer designs should be safer than the older ones we
currently operate. But before we ramp up the use of these, we need to
have a solution for long-term (10,000 years) storage of the
radioactive waste. Right now it's just sitting around at the existing
plants.

4. By decree, hydrogen fuel is now the way of the future -- period. *From
this point on, by my decree, the scientific and industrial capacity of the
United States will be used to perfect a hydrogen distribution system to
replace our current gasoline distribution system, and all cars will be
powered by hydrogen. *Source:http://tinyurl.com/6hklhf

Sounds good, but where do you get the hydrogen??


These four steps will, in a matter of a decade, resolve 90% of our problems.
Unfortunately, it will take another Great Depression to shake our system
enough to force a repeal of the environmental restrictions that make
resolving our energy problems impossible.

I can see that you really want to believe that it is environmental
regulations that are causing these problems. That gives you a nice
boogey man you can rail against. But it is more complicated than
that.

Phil