The Trouble with Boone is

Boone’s wrong. We can’t substitute wind and gas for foreign oil, at least not for the bulk of it. I’m surprised his plan hasn’t gotten more critical analysis but aside from questions about his financial stake in it I can’t find much. He’s right about one thing. We are about to make massive investments in wind whether it makes sense or not. But wind comes with some serious drawbacks that haven’t been seriously addressed, including that it is unreliable, costs too much, and will require enough new transmission right of way to generate serious political opposition. The Department of Energy goal of generating 20% of our electricity from wind by 2030 may be achievable but it is pretty ambitious.

Natural gas has its problems too, especially as a major substitute for the liquid fuels we derive from petroleum today. For one thing we are already using all of it we can lay our hands on. Any more will require us to either import it or generate it synthetically. DOE expects a staggering 900 of the next 1000 US power plants to be powered by gas. The idea that we can also divert large quantities to transportation uses is preposterous. Even if we could we would be talking about another massive investment in infrastructure. As with wind, the current distribution system isn’t set up for it.

Besides, there are better alternatives, including coal in the near term, shale oil, and ultimately algae culture. They all have their environmental detractors but reasonable objections can be overcome at tolerable costs. All can produce gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, and heating oil more cleanly than today’s processes. Those fuels are the most important uses of petroleum. All can use existing delivery infrastructure and power existing engines without modification. And all are available domestically in ample supply. The suggestion that we can’t drill our way out of this makes sense only if we restrict ourselves to petroleum and even there we have enough untapped capacity to make a difference.

The environmental worm seems to have turned, driven into remission by last summer’s $4 gasoline. Since then congress has allowed long standing restrictions on off shore drilling to expire along with prohibitions on shale oil extraction. Al Gore is in the news saying there is no such thing as clean coal and advocating civil disobedience to prevent its development but he’s on the wrong side of that argument. Both presidential candidates are for it. China and India will each use coal-to-liquid technology whether we do or not. One of the beauties of current methodology is it works with low grade coal which includes most of India’s. It can also help clean up mountains of slag and coal residue left over from a century and a half of mining in America’s Appalachia. The $700 billion credit market rescue package congress passed two weeks ago included hefty new subsidies for both coal and shale oil despite objections from the environmental lobby. You can bet more is coming. Self proclaimed greens have only themselves to blame for what I see as a sea change in public opinion. They cheered while gasoline prices soared and real people suffered. Now we are staring at an impending global recession that may rival anything we can remember. Some buzzards are coming home to roost.

Mr. Pickens will win his gamble on wind only because of government subsidies. Those won’t be entirely wasted but we’d be better off spending the money elsewhere. As for gas, he may make some more money there too but it will be because of the mad rush to gas for power generation we’ve experienced over the past few years, not from new uses. He’d better not wait too long. We appear to be finally ready to make real progress toward energy independence. Wind and gas will have real but minor roles to play.