What is going on in the world?

The Middle East is going through the changes that no one expected. Really? We profess to believe in the powerful force we call self determination. If that’s the case why did we not see this coming. The fact is some people did see it coming, although when it would come was unpredictable.

We are faced now with great opportunities and grave peril at the same time. How we manage that peril, or if we even can manage it remains to be seen. On the other hand there are things we can, and for our survival as an economic power, must do. We need an energy policy that is strongly tilted toward sustainability. We once had a president that understood that. You remember that nutty little president Jimmy Carter? In 1977 he outlinened an energy plan to make us energy independent by now. At the same time Brazil drew up plans to be energy independent too. They are, we are not. Why? Because our congress, and every other president since, has been tucked snugly in bed with the oil companies. And to be in bed with the oil companies means to be in bed with every oil producing country in the world. A policy that has cost us dearly in fortunes, and more importantly, in lives.

The major wars that America has fought in the last 30 years had nothing to do with deep abiding principles. That’s what they told us, but isn’t true. Even the first Iraq war was over oil. The rescue of Kuwait was the excuse of the moment, but Saddam Hussein wouldn’t have coveted the oil of Kuwait if no one was buying it. Had we developed the science needed to preclude the use of oil we would be satisfying our own energy consumption and probably would be selling it to others. Saddam would have no desire to steal Kuwaits oil if he couldn’t sell it. The second Iraq war was a trumped up piece of crap that had in the end been nothing more than a war to insure that we keep getting our “drugs” which, of course, is oil.

In times of peace it costs the US government (that would be the US taxpayers) $50 billion to police the oil routes and keep the flow of moving for us, and the rest of the world. During wars it’s a lot more.

The turmoil of the Middle East we see today may not have ever occurred if we were not compliant and supporting “addicts”. Instead of being the beggaring addict we could have been the grown-ups. We could have used that $50 billion to help economically develop the region. Even if we failed in our efforts, how much better off would we be? First of all we would not be wringing our hands right now because the price of oil may rise to the point where it will strangle our economy. That is exactly what we are facing. Oil at $100 per barrel extracts $1 trillion per year from our economy. Since 90% of that money is never repatriated, it is like adding $1 trillion in taxes. How’s that for a brake on the economy. If we were able to produce alternate energy we would be spending that money here at home. Even if it did not save us a dime at least we would be giving it to companies and individuals that would spend most of that money right here. That means that you and I may get a piece of it. Money that goes into the abyss we call the Middle East is lost forever.

Al Jezeera Who Woulda Thunk It

Ever since Al Jezeera began television service in the Middle East it has been vilified and generally discredited by many in this country. It has been called a propaganda tool of the extremists in the Middle East. However it has been Al Jezeera that has been broadcasting most of the important information that has been coming out of the Mid-East

It’s not that our own media hasn’t been good on reporting; they just haven’t been there. The reporters and cameramen that work for Al Jezeera have demonstrated courage and determination in tracking down the stories have been coming out of Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, and now Libya. Our Knee-jerk reaction to Al Jezeera when it first started to report was that anything that was said was slanted to the radical elements in the region. Sometimes Al Jezeera reported events that were not favorable to America, but later on we learned that they printed the truth. The truth isn’t always pleasant, but it may be exactly what we must hear.

America has cut back on its news gathering assets dramatically. It is costly and does not bring in the revenues that an episode of “Survivor” may bring in, and so news programs were scrapped. The likes of Edward R. Morrow, Walther Cronkite and Daniel Schorr were giants in the field of broadcast journalism. These individuals operated with large budgets, but at that time the networks thought that reporting important news was worth the effort.

Today, I think that AlJezeera understands the importance of the news mission as well as our own pioneers in the field. The paucity of access Americans have to that news link is appalling. There are two cities in the US where you can access AlJezeera directly. They are Burlington Vermont and a small city in Iowa. We get to see excerpts from AlJezeera news footage every day, because it turns out that it has the widest credible reporting in the Middle East. I for one am thankful they exist.

Edison vs Tesla and Westinghouse

Ernest Fazio, LIMBA Chairman

Thomas Edison was fully engaged in his DC (direct current) system with power plants in Manhattan. All of the wealthy families of the day were tied into the Edison grid. Mr Edison had a remarkable inventor and innovator working for him. He was a tall handsome, brilliant man named Nicola Tesla. Tesla invented the alternating current system, and tried to convince Edison to change his system to AC. Edison was doing just fine with building out his DC system, but Tesla argued that DC had very high line losses and if you want to transmit electric power over long distances you would have to do it by using AC. The benefit of AC was that without any mechanical means the voltage could be raised to very high voltages and the line losses would not be as significant. Edison wanted no part of Tesla’s idea.

Meanwhile Tesla collaborated with George Westinghouse on a proposal to build a hydro-electric power plant at Niagra Falls. The power could then be transmitted to NYC using high voltage alternating current produced by transformers. The power could reach New York City and was a serious threat to Edison’s system.

Edison had the economics of the time on his side. Oil was $1 per barrel. The cost of building a hydro-electric plant had a cost equivalent to $2/barrel, therefore it would not be competitive. Westinghouse had become wealthy on his invention of air brakes that was used on every train in the country, and was convinced that hydro-electric would be economical as the price of oil would rise and the costs associated with building the hydro plant would remain constant. They built it and they won.

We are in a similar situation today. It is still cheaper to burn fossil fuels to create electric power than producing it with wind or solar. How long will that be true? Well last week oil was $91/ barrel. Is it going up? Yes, but we don’t know how much. Predictions are $100/ barrel in 2011. Beyond that who knows.

The facts are, we have other reasons to build alternative energy systems. Reasons such as; clean air requirements, mitigation of global warming gasses, and diversification of supply. The people who are suggesting that the status quo is acceptable are those that are profiting by the systems we have. Are these the people we should be trusting? Have they ever lied to us before?