To implement the plan as described below would send an economic shock wave around the world that would come back and bite the USA where it hurts the most. It would nearly bankrupt the economies of many other countries, including our allies, and destroy our grain export and other export markets in the process.
It needs to be done, but not all at once, except in an emergency. It should be phased in over time, perhaps over the span of 30 or 40, or even 50 years. Doing it this way would prevent a lot of potential trouble, and allow the government to compensate for the economic changes that are coming as a result of the impact of the Pyrex extrusion machine, for example, slowly placing limits on crop production so as to prevent large numbers of USA farmer bankruptcies.
The much wiser course of action for the government is to significantly reduce the price of electricity in the USA. This can be done within a few years, without causing the massive economic destruction that abruptly ending foreign oil imports would cause.
Both oil imports and high electricity prices are the direct result of the actions of U.S. oil companies. U.S. oil companies own more than 90 percent of the coal in the USA, and have bankrolled the efforts to stop the production of clean, cheap nuclear power.
I do not have all of the facts, but it appears that I am correct in my assessment that abruptly ending oil imports would cause severe economic damage to the USA, in the form of destroying our export economy. Of course, some say the USA would do OK if it never imported or exported anything. Go over the facts, and you decide: I can't do anything more with this page. I stopped developing it when I realized the damage it could cause: it will likely remain unfinished unless I get some usable feedback.
If what is said in the first few paragraphs below is true, then it would mean that there is a serious foreign problem within the oil companies. Otherwise, it is nothing but shortsighted criminal greed.
The defeat and enslavement of the United States
and a solution that can reverse this damage
Foreigners have been in the process of attacking and defeating the United States. There is fact that proves that this is so. It has been and is being done quietly, and very slowly, so as not to attract attention and opposition. As a result, national security has been decimated, the U.S. economy has been turned into a house of cards that can easily be blown down at any time, and most U.S. citizens have been made into virtual slaves.
The main cause of this problem has been foreign oil imports. Fact proves that the United States never needed too import a single drop of foreign oil. Many of these facts emanate from sources of unquestionable integrity, for example, The Wall Street Journal. Many excuses for a supposed 'need' that exists or existed for oil imports are heard, but all can easily be disproven.
These imports have seriously damaged national security
and the economy. The government closed more than 100 Department of Defense
bases, because the government could no longer afford to operate them. The
economic damage was caused mostly by oil imports, and to a lesser but significant
degree by other forms of U.S. 'energy policy', especially those regarding
In the year 2000 State of the Union address, President Clinton painted a rosy picture about how great the economy is are and will be, but in fact that picture had no connection with any kind of reality.
The average man of 35 doesn’t have a fraction of the actual true net worth his father had at his age. What is your percentage of 100% home equity as compared to your father’s when he was your age? That your house is "worth more" money is irrelevant, because of 30 years of inflation. A can of tomato soup cost 10 cents 30 years ago, and a load of bread cost about 15 cents.
30 years ago, only one parent had to work to maintain a very decent standard of living. The other could stay home, and both could be quite comfortable. Today, in most cases it is a requirement that both parents work in order to avoid total poverty. The middle class as it used to be known has all but disappeared from the United States.
30 years ago, you worked 5 weeks to pay your annual tax bill, State, Federal, property, and all other taxes. Now you work 5 and 3/4 months just to pay your taxes.
Slavery begins when you work 6 months or more to pay your taxes. "Tax Freedom Day" falls around the last week of May or first two weeks of June, depending on who you ask. You pay five times as much in taxes as your parents did.
30 years ago, the United States had 100 more Defense Department bases as it has now. The loss of large numbers of high paying defense-related jobs was bad enough, but that issue pales in comparison to the reduction in U.S. national security. The reason that was given for these base closings was that the government could no longer afford to keep them open and operational. 30 years ago, Americans could afford it, and only 5 weeks of labor in taxes was enough to easily pay for it.
30 years ago, The United States was putting man on the moon once or twice a year. Americans could afford it, and only 5 weeks of labor in taxes was enough to easily pay for it.
30 years ago, the Welfare system was 100 times larger than it is today. This is not to attempt to take a stand on Welfare, there is always a legitimate need for it, and there are always abuses of it. The point being made is that 30 years ago, we had it, and we could afford it, and only 5 weeks of labor in taxes was enough to easily pay for it.
30 years ago, Social Security and Medicare were fully funded, and only
5 weeks of labor in taxes was enough to easily pay for
it. Today, some senior citizens have been found eating dog food to be able
to save enough to afford their prescriptions, and the value of their retirement
income has not kept pace with inflation or the base value it had 30 years
ago. The retirement age has increased significantly, and the benefits decreased
30 years ago, the energy 'crisis' and oil imports first appeared.
One point this page will make is that there never was any real energy crisis, and that the USA never had to import a single drop of foreign oil. ( Don't just take my word for it. A good book for background, from 20 years ago, is "Energy: The Created Crisis". )
Since foreigners have been the only ones to benefit, and Americans have had their economic and security position greatly reduced, the only possible explanation is that the past 30 years of oil imports have been a foreign attack upon the United States.
The problem has its roots in U.S. national energy policy, the Federal government allowing the economy to be severely damaged and slowly destroyed by vast imports of foreign oil. Once all the facts are disclosed, you will realize that this policy has been entirely criminal. However, there is more than one possibility. I see three distinct possibilities:
1) The Congress and President may well have been fed nothing but disinformation regarding energy.
2) Perhaps the government has been mistakenly bowing to some foreign threat, hostage-taking or some other form of terrorism, when the proper response would have been to nuke the offenders back into the stone age, or use the Air Force's rocket guided asteroids from the 'failed' Mars missions.
3) Foreigners took over the government and we haven't figured it out yet. Jews? Russians? The Fourth Reich? Perhaps it's the Canadians. It has been known for decades that there are vast reserves of natural gas beneath Lake Erie. Over the last 30 years. The Canadians have drilled hundreds of natural gas wells, while the U.S. Federal government has refused to grant a single lease to American natural gas companies to drill in the southern half of the lake. At the same time, the government used regulation to set the price of domestic natural gas so low that U.S. gas companies could not afford to drill enough wells to meet the expanding U.S. demand. The result was a natural gas shortage in the U.S. This resulted in having to import Lake Erie natural gas from Canada, at three times what Americans would have had to pay to domestic producers. Realistically, this is not humorous. It probably isn't the Canadians, but there is a problem, and it has roots somewhere.
Things haven't been getting better. Things have been
slowly getting worse. Slowly, so as not
to attract attention or revolution, but surely.
Clinton's rosy picture and forecasts would only be true if those 100 closed
down DOD bases reopened, and we went back to paying 5 weeks in taxes.
You are easily paying a minimum of three times as much for fuel and
electricity now as you would have been paying if oil imports had been prevented.
This is, of course, only the obvious result. There are immense secondary costs, which you are also paying for, the main costs being the amounts that the government pays for fuel and electricity. You easily pay three times as much as you should be paying for street lights and for lighting schools and government buildings, and powering the government's immense computer networks in increased taxes. How much does it cost to light your city?
You pay for the respectable electricity costs of
television broadcasting (the many hundreds of 5 and 10 million watt transmitters
operating 24 hours a day nationwide) in increased product prices. The amount
of use of electricity in megawatts in product and food manufacturing is
truly immense. These and other huge fuel and electricity costs
significantly increases the price of every product you buy, and are also
the main reason taxes have gained so much over the past 30 years.
The facts prove that The United States never needed to import a single drop of foreign oil. The facts prove that it could have been completely avoided by the use of our own domestic natural gas.
For the last 30 years, US energy policy seems to have been engineered to benefit foreigners, increase taxes, reduce national security, and weaken the US dollar.
Make no mistake: available facts prove that the U.S. could have easily met all of its fuel and power needs with domestic oil, domestic natural gas, and other domestic resources, and not had to worry about shortages for 1000 years (if ever, considering that Biomass technology and nuclear synthesis has been proven to be viable). (The Wall Street Journal: "1,001 Years of Natural Gas")
Instead, every citizen of Kuwait gets a guaranteed college scholarship at age 18, with all expenses paid in full, while you wish you had the money for pizza delivery every once in a while, let alone being able to send your kids to college, all expenses paid. What does your kid get? Some of the graduating class of the Middle East came to U.S. colleges and universities to learn how to make genetic, chemical, and nuclear weapons.
A few of you may still have the resources to send your kids to college, but your numbers have been decimated, and are steadily decreasing. Those who have money and power can cause trouble, so the solution has been to very slowly but surely eliminate that class. There is a tendency of the higher classes to cast a blind eye towards the misfortunes of the less fortunate, possibly to avoid drawing trouble to one's self. Social Security, for example. In the past, 30 years ago, one could retire pretty comfortably on Social Security. Today, comfortably is not the word normally associated with Social Security benefits. The retirement age is getting older, and the benefits smaller. The defenseless and unorganized can be attacked to a respectable degree. These amounts have decreased while taxes have increased.
Don't be too quick to be certain that your security
is assured. Clinton made mention of low inflation in his 2000 State of
the Union address, but conveniently left out the fact that the activity
of the stock market for the last 10 years represent not just inflation,
but a runaway inflation. It took from 1900 to 1980 for the stock market
to surpass 1000. In single decade 1990-2000 the stock market has increased
from 2000 to 10000. You would be amazed how fast your 401K plan can evaporate
into thin air. Your future security is about as reliable as the weather.
Before proceeding further, a redress of very important facts:
National energy policy regarding oil imports and electric power generation are the greatest single cause of high taxes. Oil imports have damaged the economy to where the United States had to close down almost a hundred Defense Department bases worldwide over the last decade. Note that during the 1940s, the 1950s, the 1960s, and the 1970s, the U.S. economy was more than healthy enough to support all of those bases, to support a welfare system 100 times as massive as the current pared down system, and many other government programs that no longer exist (and some of these were very useful and valuable). Social Security was fully funded, Medicare was secure, taxes were low, and we pretty much did OK, even having the extra money to land our astronauts on the moon, not only more than once, but on a regular basis.
You don’t think we needed those Army, Marine, Air Force, and Navy bases, or you think keeping them open was a waste of money in the first place? Let me straighten you out.
Those bases and their attendant supply industries provided hundreds of thousands of legitimate high paying jobs, and kept America first and foremost in the development of new technologies, and therefore first and foremost economically.
You probably think that because we have nukes, all those bases are just wasted effort, money, and energy. This marks you as an ignorant fool. If there ever were a nuclear war, there would be far more survivors than dead.
The H-Bomb is the hydrogen fusion bomb. The A-bomb is the uranium or plutonium fission bomb.
Learn: If there ever were a nuclear war, foreigners would not use hydrogen bombs, because the H-bomb makes its target area uninhabitable for tens of thousands of years.
The A-bomb doesn’t. You could walk the streets of Hiroshima or Nagasaki two days after the bombs went off, and not be exposed to any more radiation than you would be by living in a granite building for three weeks, or taking a round trip flight from New York to San Francisco.
If there is a war, the victor always wants to take over the conquered territory. This is the entire goal of the aggressor of war. H-bombs make this pretty much impossible, but A-bombs allow it.
The stronger our conventional land, air, space, and sea forces are, the less likely any foreign power is to consider any type of war in the first place.
If you think that there can never be another war,
the United States can never be defeated, or that man has somehow 'grown
beyond' the need for or tendency to war, you are either a retard or an
ignorant fool. Neanderthal man is alive and well. I have witnessed his
actions many times, and so have you. You might want to pay more attention
to recent events like Rwanda or Bosnia or Russia, that clearly prove that
man has not 'grown beyond' these activities.
A wise man said, "Those who forget the lessons of history are
doomed to repeat them.", and has been proven right about this many
All of the economic problems we have now started at the same time we started importing large amounts of foreign oil. The early 1970s, 1973 to be exact. There is no coincidence. The relationship is obvious and easily documented.
The downside has been an immense tax burden for you to bear, national security being decimated, tens or hundreds of thousands of high paying defense related jobs lost, and the economy being weak and susceptible to the whims of OPEC and other foreigners. Look at the recent price in the rise of gasoline prices. You will see store prices rising as a result, soon enough. As if farmers weren't suffering enough, the whims of foreigners have dictated that the price of diesel for their tractors will be double the past amount this year, and many more farmers will bankrupted. Where is the upside? I can tell you. The facts say there is no upside, except for the foreigners.
U.S. oil and energy interests would be filthy rich whether there were oil imports or not. It is a demonstrated fact the the oil companies had enough power in the Federal government to impose regulation on natural gas companies. This regulation allowed the oil interests to economically destroy many of the natural gas interests, and take them over. The deregulation was almost as bad economically for the gas interests as regulation had been. With this much power in the government, there can be no doubt that the above is true: U.S. oil and energy interests would be filthy rich whether there were oil imports or not. Consider this to be an important exercise in logic.
I would find it hard to believe that an excuse based on the above, the oil interests only wanting to make as much money as possible, hard to believe, but of course I am not all-seeing and all-knowing.
A convenient excuse
which has been forwarded from time to time is that "We have limited
domestic resources, and we want to use the chump foreigner's resources
up first, before using our own." This is outright
bullshit, and that this is so
was known 30 years ago.
All of the above is nothing but bad news. Perhaps if the education system has paid more attention to the relevance and importance of what they teach and choose not to teach, this problem could have been avoided in the first place.
On the other hand, there may be some good news.
There are other facts that prove that oil imports could be eliminated
within four months.
Let's assume that I was made U.S. Secretary of Energy, and that my plan had the support of the President.
The worst that would come from my elimination of oil imports would be
that there might be some limited gasoline rationing
for a month or two as a result, but not amy worse than what went on in
1973 or 1980, which we survived easily enough. None of this conversion
would rely on anything I have invented (although what I invented, the oxygen
concentrator for example, works, and could just as easily be used).
For years, Detroit has been selling automobiles that run on natural gas. These are not widely advertised, and no one buys them, because no one has felt any need to force gasoline service stations to also offer natural gas as a fuel. I would rectify that immediately.
lists some of the vehicles which are currently available singly, or for
fleet use. (CNG = compressed natural gas)
If I were U.S. Secretary of Energy, and my plan had the support of the President, the President would declare a national energy emergency, and call up the Department of Defense and prisoner labor to convert the majority of automobiles in the USA to run on natural gas. Cummins and Detroit Diesel currently make large engines that run on natural gas. A percentage of farm tractors and semi trucks in the USA would be upgraded.
As in the second World War, the DOD would temporarily take over a
few key industries and greatly expand production.
The vast majority of this conversion would be complete in about four months.
To convert 90 percent of existing automobiles with an engine and
CNG tank upgrade would take a maximum of four months.
It is a proven fact that this can be done. We are Americans, fool. In World War II, it was initially estimated that the rate of production of B-17s would be about 100 per month. Within three months, a new B-17 bomber was being produced every 30 seconds.
As it turned out, this was the deciding
factor in World War II. No one expected it was
possible, but within 24 months the immense numbers of B-17s had bombed
Hitler’s forces back into the stone age. The B-17, more than any other
factor, beat Germany. Without the B-17s having decimated the German armament
and supply industries, a landing would have been impossible. If the B-17s
had not been produced at the immense speed of production that was obtained,
we might have lost the war. The Spitfires. Mustangs, and B-17s were no
match for Hitler's ME-262 jet fighter planes, and if Hitler would have
had six more moths, he would have been producing them as fast as we produced
B-17's, and the B-17s would never have been able to strike at the aircraft
factories within Germany that produced the planes. Hitler might well have
gone on to develop the atomic bomb before we did. As it was, the B-17 destroyed
Germany's production and research facilities.
Most automobiles are newer models. 90 percent of licensed automobiles on the road today were manufactured within the last 15 years. These makes and models would be the exclusive target of the upgrades, and all other models would be ignored at first. An exception to this would be that the automotive design engineers who are currently employed at the automobile manufacturers might be ordered or required to produce plans for upgrades that go back an additional 15 years.
After the current models (the 90 percent of all models on the road today) were upgraded, then attention might be paid to older models. If this were the best approach, then the best and cheapest solution for owners of models older than 15 years would be to give them a new loaner automobile, and work out the details of the conversions and costs later. The loaner vehicles would later be auctioned off and / or put to use in government service.
However, this is not the best approach. The best approach leaves things as they currently are, with all automobiles 15 years old or older still running on gasoline, because our domestic crude oil reserves can meet this size demand for gasoline, and this leaves domestic oil producers running at full capacity. Remember, it is not the intention of any progressive plan to destroy U.S. oil companies, as this destruction would spread out to the rest of the economy and cause great damage to all of us. The goal is to cause economic improvement, not economic destruction. It may well be that the facts and figures would suggest that it would be better to only convert automobiles 10 years old or newer rather than 15 years old, the goal being to keep domestic crude oil production running at full capacity.
The actual conversion of an automobile to natural gas is not at all difficult or complicated from an engineering standpoint. The gasoline tank and filler nozzle have to be replaced with a natural gas (CNG) tank and filler nozzle. The motor mounts need to be replaced with mounts appropriate to the new engine, and in rare cases the transmission mounts have to be replaced and drive shaft length adjusted.
All of the new motor mount and other specifications,
for all these vehicles could easily be produced within three weeks. An
Army Reserve tank mechanic specialist, who has never worked on an automobile
or for an auto manufacturer, could do it in four weeks. Redesigning the
two or four motor mounts to accommodate a new engine is a standard practice
in automobile racing, NASCAR for example, and in automobile performance
shops. Someone in either of these fields can design the modified motor
mounts for one automobile in half a day. Most of those people change engines
more often than you refill your gas tank.
The government gave itself the right to counterfeit currency. Actually, most people think that inflation is when the price of everything rises. This is incorrect. That is only the result of inflation. Actual inflation occurs when, and is properly defined as, the government printing up money with nothing in the Treasury to back it up. There are occasions where inflation is a wise practice, namely when there is a guaranteed return on investment, where the economy will be improved rather than damaged as a result. Search the internet or an encyclopedia for the term 'runaway inflation' sometime, to determine the true meaning of inflation, and irresponsible inflation.
In answer to the question, where would the money
come from to pay for all of this conversion, if government reserves were
not enough, there would have to be some inflation. It is what the government
should have done in the first place, 30 years ago. We have to pay more
now than we would have then, but the result is still a vast economic improvement,
and the damage that has been done starts getting repaired. To
quote a U.S. Congressman, as far as the degree of negative impact to which
this inflation would affect your wallet, "it would have about as much effect
as a mosquito bite on an elephant's ass"
After the conversion of automobiles to natural gas was completed (4 months), I would eliminate the use of natural gas for home heating and cooking, and use the DOD and prisoner labor to manufacture and distribute the replacement electric ranges and heaters for free: the details of the one time tax costs would be worked out later, same as your engine upgrades. This does not hurt domestic natural gas producers. They will have to increase production beyond what it is now just to meet the demand for CNG automobile fuel. The government, being responsible, in acting in our best national economic interests will surely see to it that domestic natural gas production increases somewhat as a result of any new measures which are instituted. This will generate new funds for new drilling, which the gas companies need in order to survive, without increasing the cost of the gas.
Natural gas prices will eventually decline. However,
it took 30 years of economic damage to get prices as high as they are today,
and it will probably take almost as long to get the prices back down to
where they were as a percentage of consumer income 30 years ago without
damaging the gas producers. Economic damage caused in the past to the gas
producers is the main reason for today's high prices.
These are only two of the many major changes that need no be implemented, but these changes could easily and quickly be accomplished through the use of the President's power to declare a national energy emergency.
Search the internet for Colorado AND "state of emergency".
To this day, the U.S. government still operates under a declared state
of economic emergency that was declared by President Hoover in 1933. In
1996, the Colorado legislature was attempting to pass legislation to the
effect that the State of Colorado recognized that the original Federal
emergency no longer existed, because they felt that the 'emergency' was
being misused by the Federal government to bypass the Constitution and
due process of law.
There are many other details that need to be addressed
regarding this plan of ending foreign oil imports, and these details will
be addressed later in this document. First, I need to point out a few details
about the future of energy. A good book on this subject is "Energy
Future: Study by the Harvard Business School", probably the best in
depth study of energy resources and reserves in existence, although it
omits some significant facts.
Many outright lies have been spread regarding energy, but plenty of facts exist to expose these lies.
One popular lie is that it is wise to use the chump foreigner's resources first, then use our own remaining resources. It can be proven to be fact that the USA has unlimited reserves of energy. It is true that some of our reserves are limited. However, we are in no way dependent upon those resources. There exist other domestic resources that are easily capable of replacing these resources when they run out.
Natural gas, for example. The Wall Street Journal article from 1984, "1,001 Years of Natural Gas", implies that the USA has about 1000 years worth of natural gas reserves. However, this article ignores two important issues. The lesser issue is the existence of a theory which is supported by, (but not proven by) facts, that implies that natural gas is continually being produced within the earth. If this theory proves to be true, then we can look forward to a continuous but not unlimited supply of natural gas.
The major issue is the existence of alternate synthetic gas production technologies. Bear in mind that these are technologies which would need to be called upon about 800 or 900 years from now, assuming that we will be starting to run out of ground based natural gas by then.
One of these is marine Biomass technology. This is a proven technology, which was advanced as a result of President Carter's energy research programs in the 1970s. There have been experimental research farms that have proven that large scale marine Biomass production of natural gas is a valid enterprise, which if realized could supply the entire U.S. demand for natural gas.
Interestingly, the price of the synthetic marine Biomass produced natural gas was only slightly more expensive per mcf than drilled well gas at the time of the research projects in the mid-1970s. Realistically, with today's high wellhead natural gas prices, if marine Biomass were implemented today, it would be priced considerably less than wellhead gas.
Marine Biomass involves large sea farms. Giant sea kelp grows at the astonishing rate of two feet per day, one of the best natural solar energy converters known to exist. Giant harvesting machines harvest the kelp and compost it in an accelerated manner, resulting in the rapid production of large quantities of methane (natural gas). Small experimental research farms already exist, and these farms proved the concept is safe, reliable, cost-effective, valid, and workable. In addition, not even the environmentalists can realistically find any fault with Biomass, except those few who are against any form of energy or fuel use by man.
As an inventor, I have personally made an immense contribution to this field. See pyrex2.htm for details of the pyrex extrusion machine. This machine can terraform the immense areas of the USA that are now only worthless desert and sagebrush, basically for free, or in other words, it pays for itself with a short return on investment period. This technology can allow immense farms of either marine biomass or other biomass farms (sugarcane or eucalyptus or other high energy land-based crops for example) to be grown on these areas. If an area half the size of Texas were terraformed, the resulting gas from biomass production could easily meet a total BTU demand five times larger than the current USA BTU demand, including fuel, heat, and electrical power generation.
However, the freeing the United States from imported foreign oil does not depend upon anything I have invented. Marine biomass, a proven technology, can easily meet the U.S. demand for energy in and of itself.
While the concept of marine Biomass seems strange at first, it is actually no more bizarre than drilling down a mile or more under the earth to find natural gas. Under the heading of national economic security, it is the responsibility of the Federal government to assure that in the future, no economic damage be caused to domestic wellhead and offshore natural gas producers. In other words, the Federal government has the legal authority to regulate Biomass production so that it supplants rather than replaces land-based and offshore wellhead production, so that wellhead production runs at full capacity.
The other synthetic technology is natural gas production via nuclear power. Nuclear power is inherently inexpensive to generate, and can tolerate large inefficiencies in the transmission of the generated power and still be very cost effective. Synthetic gasoline and natural gas production via nuclear is a very inefficient process, with less than half the generated power actually producing the product, the other half being mostly wasted. The man made diamonds have many industrial uses in cutting tools and polishing compounds.
With enough power, any molecule can be synthesized. Pound for pound, the number of man-made artificial diamonds produced and sold each year dwarfs the number of natural diamonds that are produced and sold. Space is limited in this document to describe such a complicated process as natural gas or gasoline synthesis, but it should be obvious that such production is child's play as compared to the production of man-made diamonds. Suffice it to say that it is fact that can be verified that any molecule can be synthesized if you have enough power to synthesize it. Natural gas can be produced out of thin air with nuclear power (Carbon from atmospheric CO2, Hydrogen from atmospheric H2, and Nitrogen from atmospheric N2). Of course, there are more efficient source atom supplies than air, but it can be done that way.
800 years from now, we are likely to have hydrogen
fusion power. 800 years from now, the Pyrex extrusion machine could easily
be generating the majority of terrestrial electric power, and that power
will be near nuclear in terms of cost vs. efficiency. For all we know,
we might have antimatter and be members of some United Federation of Planets.
The point is, it is proven that we will
have the natural (and artificial) gas resources that we need at that time.
this file is unfinished
first draft: check back on it later
anything that follows is beta or pre-draft and some of it has no relevance
but be rest assured that this plan and the details of it that have not
been presented yet does not cause damage to any US citizen or industry,
including the oil and gas industries...
This is how USA energy use is arranged now:
oil->major->diesel fuel oil->major->heating oil->major->gasoline oil->mid->jet fuel oil->mid->lubrication oil->mid->styrofoam oil->minor->other petrochemicals oil->minor->fractions (butane,propane)
natural gas->major->heating natural gas->major->electric power generation natural gas->mid->fractions natural gas->miniscule->motor fuel
coal->major->electric power generation coal->minor->fractions (gas, gasoline, diesel, petrochemicals) coal->miniscule->heating
hydro->exclusive->electric power generation nuke->exclusive->electric power generation
electricity<-major<-coal electricity<-major<-natural gas
electricity<-minor<-nuke electricity<-minor<-hydro electricity<-miniscule<-solar
This is how it needs to be arranged:
oil->major->diesel fuel oil->mid->jet fuel oil->mid->lubrication oil->minor->other petrochemicals oil->minor->fractions (butane,propane) oil->miniscule->heating (coal and ethanol replace heating oil) oil->miniscule->gasoline (natural gas replaces gasoline) oil->miniscule->styrofoam (foamed corn replaces styrofoam)
natural gas->major->motor fuel natural gas->mid->fractions natural gas->minor->electric power generation (during the transition, but eliminated later: it is inefficient to use natural gas to produce electricity to produce heat when natural gas can produce heat directly) natural gas->miniscule->heating (electricity replaces natural gas. If the domestic supply is adequate, some natural gas will continue to be used for heating)
coal->major->heating (coal dust / ethanol mix replaces heating oil) coal->mid->electric power generation coal->minor->fractions (gas, gasoline, diesel, petrochemicals)
hydro->exclusive->electric power generation nuke->major->electric power generation nuke->minor->synthetic gas and fuels production
electricity<-major<-natural gas (a few more natural gas plants) electricity<-mid<-coal (fewer coal plants) electricity<-mid<-nuke (at least 20 more 5000MW *safely located* nuke plants) electricity<-minor<-hydro (one ot two more hydro plants) electricity<-minor<-ethanol (a few more ethanol plants) electricity<-miniscule<-solar (for now but in the distant future, to mid and then to major: see pyrex2.htm) electricity<-miniscule<-geothermal (the jury is still out)
The way it is arranged now leaves the United States dependent upon oil imports. The way it needs to be arranged eliminates the need for foreign oil imports.
This rearrangement does not hurt domestic coal, oil and gas producers.
In fact, domestic production of oil and coal increases, and domestic production
of natural gas significantly increases. The production and use of ethanol
also significantly increases.
Every engine powered machine or transportation device in existence, save one, can be modified to run on natural gas. The exception is the jet aircraft. If the USA only allowed the use of oil for lubrication and for jet engines, and no other use, we would have enough domestic oil for lubrication and jet engine fuel for millions of years. This is not to say that this should be done; only that it could.
The point is that with just natural gas, nuclear,
geothermal and hydropower, and domestic oil reserves, the USA could be
entirely energy independent. I have personally made three important technological
contributions in this field: large scale solar power production, geothermal
power production, and reducing the costs of pumping oil and natural gas.
Follow the links further below for more detailed information.
Let us suppose that the Congress is composed entirely of criminals, whose only desire is to make as much money as possible for themselves and their friends. I am not saying that I know this to be true, I only want to use it as a premise to test a theory.
If this were true, and it wasn't a foreign problem, then there would have to be agreement with what follows: that not everything can be a racket.
It is a basic premise of a free market or free enterprise that for such a system to exist and operate successfully, it relies on there always being some item which is free or inexpensive. This is the very foundation of free enterprise. In the past it has been iron ore, oil, gold, silver, even agriculture to some degree; the existence of something or things that one can mine or harvest, and sell at a profit, or modify and then sell at a profit.
Unfortunately, there exists no item which is free or inexpensive anymore, and unlike the past, there are tens of thousands as many people who exist now that all want such an item. Supply has diminished to near non-existence, and demand has multiplied exponentially over 100 years ago, or considerable since 30 or 50 years ago. Once this foundation is destroyed, the structure built on top of it falls.
Perhaps it was an oversight, but it is one which can be corrected. There must exist at least one item which is free or inexpensive, to support the rest of the economy. It is tempting to make as much money as possible wherever possible, but the government is supposed to hold security above all other concerns. There is enough money to be made elsewhere, with an almost unlimited number of enterprises available to profit from, but at least one enterprise must be left alone, and regulated so that it remains free or inexpensive.
This enterprise must be electricity. Since it's invention
100 years ago, electricity has slowly but surely put people out of work.
Fuel does the same thing but to a very small degree as compared to electricity.
What fuel can do, horses could do, and man could ride to work on a horse
if he had to. Electricity eliminates labor far more impressively; one robot
in an automobile factory puts 50 people out of work.
Like I said, if all else fails, spread the word around, and elect me President as a write in candidate. I wouldn’t take any bullshit off of those foreign lamers, and if something happened to me, I seriously doubt that the female B-52 pilot would either. I’d have to authorize the building of 25 new B-52s, as one of my first acts, just to remind those lamers of who my running mate was. The lamers would probably have to send spies into the White House, just to try and avoid the dreaded PMS weeks. After all, she did fly a B-52 loaded with nukes, willing to use them at the slightest command. Of course, I hear that those ‘failed missions to Mars’ were just a cover to attach rockets and guidance systems on a few asteroids, so I suppose we don’t even need the nukes anymore. If the foreign lamers earned a visit from the "Mr. Rock", I’d treat them to it.
Read the enclosed excerpts regarding U.S. energy policy. That ought to really start you wondering where the government is coming from. Think about it. The oil companies had enough power in the Federal Government to set the price of natural gas, while avoiding such restrictions being placed upon them. This nearly bankrupted many of the natural gas companies, and did bankrupt many of them. With that much power over the government, why didn’t they take over electrical power generation and natural gas? They took over coal, and own more than 90 percent of coal lands in the U.S.. Antitrust laws? Those laws didn’t prevent that transfer of coal ownership. History clearly shows that in most cases of the application of those laws, the result is not the prevention of a monopoly, but the creation or preservation of a monopoly. Surely the government would consider national economic security more important than antitrust laws to begin with. Instead, they allow huge imports of foreign oil.
The facts about nuclear power have never been voiced in the media. Instead, it has been promoted in the media as some kind of hideous horror, best avoided at all costs. Read "The War Against the Atom" sometime. It is one of the cleanest and safest methods of power generation available to man. So is natural gas. Yet the ‘environmentalists’ protest against both, and the media provides plenty of coverage. Realistically, they should have supported both. Why don’t you hear about them rising up against coal, oil, or gasoline? Or promoting geothermal? If someone proposes a new hydroelectric project, the ‘environmentalists’ flock there like harpies to protest, and the media always gives plenty of coverage. We can assume that they find coal, oil, and gasoline to be preferable to clean methods of generating electricity.
As I write this, the ‘environmentalists’, this time namely Greenpeace, are agitating in Great Britain and elsewhere in Europe against imports of genetically enhanced American crops, as usual with no shortage of media coverage. The track record of the environmentalists would seem to indicate that their main goal is to cause as much economic damage to the United States as possible.
Detroit is currently making and offering cars that run on natural gas, and has been for some time now. You can buy a Ford Crown Victoria or Aerostar that runs on natural gas, or a large selection of other makes and models, right up to the huge natural gas engines made by Caterpillar and others. Where are the environmentalists and their associated media hype? The only thing keeping these vehicles from becoming established is the lack of refueling stations. If no gas stations exist to refuel the vehicles, there isn’t much point in buying one. A Federal law based on antitrust regulations is the obvious solution, requiring any station that sells gasoline to also offer natural gas, but you won’t see the environmentalists having a cow about the lack of action. You will see the relevant facts though, if you look in the right places, like the fact that records prove the Rockefeller Foundation (big oil) has bankrolled many of the "environmentalist’s" activities.
The point is, with that much power to control government and the media, why didn’t big oil take over electrical power generation and natural gas? This would have prevented the need to ever import a drop of foreign oil or liquefied natural gas. I think there are two different reasons. I suspect that some criminal elements in the government want to prevent the economy from ever becoming truly healthy, for the sole reason that if you actually had free time, not continually occupied with both parents having to work, you might become an activist, and interfere with them in some way. The other reason would be foreigners attempting to destroy the United States, making good use of the greed for money and power of those criminal government fools.
The facts show we never needed to import a single drop of foreign oil. The facts show that if someone tells you that we want to use up the foreigner's scarce resources, before we use up all of our own, they are filling you full of bullshit. We have no shortage of domestic resources except crude oil. If our cars ran on natural gas, and electricity heated our homes, we wouldn't even have an oil shortage. The facts show that we have 1000 years of natural gas, 300 years worth of coal, unlimited nuclear, solar, hydroelectric, and geothermal reserves, and further that Biomass technology is more than capable of replacing drilled natural gas when it runs out in 1000 years.
Only three years ago you heard on the news that it was getting to the point where the United States Federal tax intake would soon not be enough to pay the interest on the national debt, but now the President is saying we should have it paid off in five years. You hear that there is no inflation, but explain the stock market. Four years ago it broke 2000 for the first time in history. It took 80 years for it to do this, but now, four years later, it is up over 10,000. This looks more like runaway inflation than low inflation to me. I presume that the next step is to implement ‘investing’ Social Security funds in the stock markets as has been proposed. The government and the media saying that there is no or low inflation is obviously outright bullshit, and it ought to make you wonder about the validity of any statement either might make. The price increases in technology (except computers), housing, fuel, and almost everything else say otherwise. Interestingly enough, what logically ought to be the strongest sector of our economy, the farm economy, has suffered greatly, and the price increases in food, especially non-processed food, have stayed low, not keeping pace with price increases in general. Crops prices have actually fallen.
We had to close hundreds of U. S. Defense bases because of this economic damage. It’s almost enough to make you feel naked. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to hear some day that our ‘government intelligence’ and our nukes had been nullified in some way, and see foreigners come streaming over the pole by the millions in arctic capable tanks, maybe having nuked us or used chemical weapons first. I presume that the government will try to impose more stringent gun control first, to make this easier for the foreigners. Read the enclosed theory as to whether AIDS is some kind of a scam. If someone hadn’t pointed the possibility out, almost all of us might be dead now, the few survivors still believing that it had been a mutated airborne strain of AIDS, rather than the chemical weapons attack it had actually been. Maybe the Germans, still pissed off about our royally kicking their butts back in World War II, put the Arabs up to it.
Don’t think that couldn't be imagined or implemented. The facts prove that man hasn't ‘evolved beyond that’. In the news, the actions of criminals and the details of recent foreign wars prove that Neanderthal man is alive and well, just waiting for the opportunity to pull his bullshit. It isn’t paranoia, it is acknowledgment of fact.
I personally wonder about the justification of sending immense amounts of free foreign ‘aid’ to Israel, supposedly to protect our ‘vital’ oil interests in the Middle East. If there was a legitimate investigation into national energy policy and the use of lie detectors were allowed, there isn’t too much doubt that at least a few people would hang for treason.
As this is being written, the price of gasoline has risen to more than $1.50 per gallon. With the available facts, the government should have taken action to end oil imports when the price first exceeded 70 cents a gallon 30 years ago. But even at $1.50 a gallon, the government still does not take corrective action. People get told on the news about how great the economy is, but the fact is there is little security or depth to the economy. When foreigners dictate U.S. energy policy, they also dictate the state of U.S. economic health. I suppose you would get told that it is some legitimate attempt to ‘control the economy’. Ignoring the fact that the Federal government's Constitutional basis for ‘controlling the economy’ is weak at best, we've seen the results of the government's policies in the reduction of high paying jobs and the decimation of national security.
Look at pensions for example. These have been rapidly becoming a thing of the past over the last 30 years. Obviously, most people ignore what has happened to the stock market over the last ten years, and would probably be surprised how fast their 401K plans can be wiped out of existence. There are impressive numbers there, but little substance. I suppose you would be told that the U.S. still enjoys the lowest energy prices in the world. I would suspect that to be outright bullshit. If gasoline costs $5 a gallon in Japan, remember that a steak costs $50 there.
Foreign leeches have been sucking at the bleeding wound of our national energy policy for 30 years now, and the only way it is likely to end legally is for the Party to get started and put an end to it. Considering how ignorant most U.S. citizens are of the facts related to energy, I wouldn't put much faith in someone using illegal means to fix the problem. I wouldn't put too much faith in the Federal government fixing it either. They have known the facts related to energy for 30 years, and they are the ones who decided to pursue this unpatriotic and destructive action in the first place. Read the enclosed Party materials on national energy policy. Considering what Nixon did regarding the Russians, one wonders if he wasn't the first of many foreign plants that made it into the White House and elsewhere in the U.S. government. The theory agrees with the facts.
Look at the current Republican presidential election campaign. Obviously, Americans have been programmed into some kind of defeatist passive submission, or George Bush could never have posed a serious contention for election. Remember the savings and loan scandal? It used to be that any politician had to have a completely spotless background in order to stand any chance of being elected. Now I don't know anything about George Bush, Jr., but it is common knowledge that 18 billion dollars disappeared in the Savings and Loan scandal, and the Bush family name turns up as being involved in it. You may recall that 18 billion dollars disappeared into thin air, and the taxpayers had to pay to replace it. Only a few million dollars were ever recovered, and 19 people were given slap on the wrist penalties consisting mainly of stays at Federal luxury prisons.
If you have a defensive weapon but potential attackers know from experience that you either won’t use it or you don't realize that you possess it, you can be certain you will be attacked. A small group of attackers usually doesn’t overpower a large army, but obviously, there are exceptions.
The real question is, do you want to be known to foreigners as an American or a slave?
Required reading: Article: Wall Street Journal "1,001 Years of Natural Gas"
Books: "Energy Future: Study by the Harvard Business School", "Passive Solar Design", "The Business End of Government" "The War Against the Atom" "Energy: The Created Crisis"
These references show a disturbing pattern regarding
national energy policy and other issues.
During these improvements, the DOD would also begin constructing a fair number of nuke plants in one of the remote areas the government has already chosen for the permanent storage of nuclear waste. Suffice it to say, an oil embargo would hurt OPEC far worse than it would hurt us.
I have forgotten more than most people will ever know about energy and energy policy, and there are no errors in any of the facts I can produce to back up what I have to say about it.
My plan doesn’t even really hurt the Arabs. If they don't have the brains to follow the potential of Pyrex terraforming in their desert, perhaps we can send over a few technicians, maybe even an engineer. We Americans, we do this kind of thing, so we are used to it.
This page will detail a plan to restore the United State's energy independence, and the economic and security damage that has occurred as a result. These plans damage no one in the USA. The production of each of domestic coal, oil and natural gas increases considerably.
This plan can be implemented in a single year, without
causing damage and suffering to the public.