Barking up the Wrong Tree

Today I received an email update from my Representative, Lee Terry. Evidently he has been collaborating with some other reps to introduce some legislation promoting hydrogen fuel. While I have not read the material I already know that it is a huge waste of time, as hydrogen fuel is a colossally stupid idea.

I am glad that he is pushing alternative fuels for the purpose of energy independence, but he needs to understand that we as a society simply consume far too much energy to start with. Pushing alternative fuels in this society is like proposing a bucket brigade to save the Titanic. Even if you manage heroic performance levels, it simply isn't going to help until you fix the basic problem.

Here is the email I sent back.

Representative Lee Terry wrote:

>This week, I was pleased to join three of my colleagues in the House of >Representatives in introducing bipartisan legislation to promote the widespread >adoption of hydrogen fuel cell technology.
>
>I am pleased to continue working with these Republican and Democratic colleagues >as we blaze the way toward U.S. energy independence.

Mr. Terry,

I appreciate your continued efforts to promote alternative fuels. However, as should be evident from the material provided by Mr. Bartlett over the past few years (most recently this January), there is no fuel or combination of fuels that can give us energy independence as long as we as a society refuse to acknowledge that we frivolously consume vast quantities of fuel. If you were not present for Mr. Bartlett's presentations, I urge you to take a few minutes to read the transcripts available from his website:

http://bartlett.house.gov/uploadedfiles/SpclOrderJanuary17-18.pdf

Simply put, our lifestyles waste so much energy that we can never hope to rely enough on renewable fuels to make a difference.

I believe that your efforts would be much more effective if you promoted strong efforts to decrease energy consumption.

One approach is to require increases the fuel economy of the classes of vehicles that consume the greatest quantities of fuels (SUVs and light trucks). For example, GM is now offering what they call 'weak hybrid' trucks:

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/adv_tech/100_news/hybrid_110205.html

I know that this is a well-known and challenging approach, but it is also very important. Removing inefficient vehicles from the market while still providing products people want to buy is a very effective tool.

Another, arguably more important, option would be more comprehensive efforts to educate people about energy consumption and the non-monetary costs of over-consumption. I was pleased to see a television commercial raising awareness (the EnergyHog.org commercial made in association with the ASE and Ad Council), but much more ought to be done on this front. People often do already recognize some of the absurdities of their energy usage (driving short distances, leaving lights on, etc) but they often shrug off these things as amusing because they do not understand why the problem extends beyond their personal budget. They need to understand that the monetary cost of their home consuming 45kWh per day instead of 10kWh is not at all the point. The economic power to shrug off massive resource waste is definitely a blessing, but it is in no way a justification.

Thanks for your time, I hope that you appreciate the magnitude of the problem and therefore the imperative we have to spend our effort in the ways that maximize the return on that effort. Promoting hydrogen is not one of these ways.

Generally I receive responses to the letters I write to representatives, and generally they respond to the issues I mention, though they are always very terse and noncomittal. I'd like to corner one of these guys some day and find out how much they really know about energy.

Hopefully Mr. Terry will read Bartlett's material (as should you, gentalreader) and see the truth, that finding ways to feed America's addiction to energy is the road to destruction.