Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

George Schultz & James Woolsey on plug-in hybrids, cellulose ethanol etc.

Expand Messages
  • Felix Kramer
    http://www.fightingterror.org/newsroom/050610.cfm highly readable EXCERPTS from a policy paper, Oil and Security by the recently reconstituted Committee on
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 15, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      http://www.fightingterror.org/newsroom/050610.cfm
      highly readable EXCERPTS from a policy paper, "Oil and Security" by the
      recently reconstituted "Committee on the Present Danger" -- in particular,
      a very good basic summary of the promise of cellulose ethanol. It is also
      significant that the authors include the often-overlooked light-weighting
      of vehicles (while improving crash-resistance).

      by George P. Shultz and R. James Woolsey
      George P.Shultz is a former Secretary of State and is currently
      Distinguished Fellow at the Hoover Institutiion, Stanford University. R.
      James Woolsey is a former Director of Central Intelligence and is currently
      Vice President of Booz/Allen Hamilton. The two are co-Chairmen of the
      Committee on the Present Danger.

      (With Senate debate of the Energy Bill imminent, this paper is being posted
      at this time. It has been submitted to the CPD board for discussion,
      commentary and membership approval.)

      SUMMARY

      This paper could well be called, "It's the Batteries, Stupid." Four years
      ago, on the eve of 9/11, the need to reduce radically our reliance on oil
      was not clear to many and in any case the path of doing so seemed a long
      and difficult one. Today both assumptions are being undermined by the risks
      of the post-9/11 world and by technological progress in fuel efficiency and
      alternative fuels.

      We spell out below the risks of petroleum dependency, particularly the
      vulnerability of the petroleum infrastructure in the Middle East to
      terrorist attack — a single well-designed attack could send oil to well
      over $100/barrel and devastate the world's economy. That reality, among
      other risks, and the fact that our current transportation infrastructure is
      locked in to oil, should be sufficient to convince any objective observer
      that oil dependence today creates serious and pressing dangers for the US
      and other oil-importing nations.

      We propose in this paper that the government vigorously encourage and
      support at least six technologies: two types of alternative fuels that are
      beginning to come into the market (cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel derived
      from a wide range of waste streams), two types of fuel efficient vehicles
      that are now being sold to the public in some volume (hybrid
      gasoline-electric and modern clean diesels), and one vehicle construction
      technique, the use of manufactured carbon-carbon composites, that is now
      being used for aircraft and racing cars and is quite promising as a way of
      reducing vehicle weight and fuel requirements while improving safety.

      The sixth technology, battery improvement to permit "plug-in" hybrid
      vehicles, will require some development — although nothing like the years
      that will be required for hydrogen fuel cells. It holds, however,
      remarkable promise. Improving batteries to permit them to be given an added
      charge when a hybrid is garaged, ordinarily at night, can substantially
      improve mileage, because it can permit hybrids to use battery power alone
      for the first 10-30 miles. Since a great many trips fall within this range
      this can improve the mileage of a hybrid vehicle from, say, 50 mpg to over
      100 mpg (of oil products). Also, since the average residential electricity
      cost is 8.5 cents/kwh (and in many areas, off-peak nighttime cost is 2-4
      cents/kwh) this means that much of a plug-in hybrid's travel would be on
      the equivalent of 50 cent/gallon gasoline (or, off-peak, on the equivalent
      of 12-25 cent/gallon gasoline).

      A plug-in hybrid averaging 125 mpg, if its fuel tank contains 85 per cent
      cellulosic ethanol, would be obtaining about 500 mpg. If it were
      constructed from carbon composites the mileage could double, and, if it
      were a diesel and powered by biodiesel derived from waste, it would be
      using no oil products at all.

      What are we waiting for?

      PETROLEUM DEPENDENCE: THE DANGERS:
      <snip> 7 factors

      THREE PROPOSED DIRECTIONS FOR POLICY:

      The above considerations suggest that government policies with respect to
      the vehicular transportation market should point in the following directions:

      1. Encourage improved vehicle mileage, using technology now in production.

      Three currently available technologies stand out to improve vehicle mileage.

      Diesels

      First, modern diesel vehicles are coming to be capable of meeting rigorous
      emission standards (such as Tier 2 standards, being introduced into the
      U.S., 2004-08). In this context it is possible without compromising
      environmental standards to take advantage of diesels' substantial mileage
      advantage over gasoline-fueled internal combustion engines.

      Substantial penetration of diesels into the private vehicle market in
      Europe is one major reason why the average fleet mileage of such new
      vehicles is 42 miles per gallon in Europe and only 24 mpg in the US.
      Although the U.S. has, since 1981, increased vehicle weight by 24 per cent
      and horsepower by 93 per cent, it has essentially improved mileage not at
      all in that near-quarter century (even though in the 12 years from 1975 to
      1987 the US improved the mileage of new vehicles from 15 to 26 mpg).

      Hybrid gasoline-electric

      Second, hybrid gasoline-electric vehicles now on the market show
      substantial fuel savings over their conventional counterparts. The National
      Commission on Energy Policy found that for the four hybrids on the market
      in December 2004 that had exact counterpart models with conventional
      gasoline engines, not only were mileage advantages quite significant (10-15
      mpg) for the hybrids, but in each case the horsepower of the hybrid was
      higher than the horsepower of the conventional vehicle. (ETES p. 11) If
      automobile companies wish to market hybrids by emphasizing hotter
      performance rather than fuel conservation they can do so, consistent with
      the facts.

      Light-weight Carbon Composite Construction

      Third, constructing vehicles with inexpensive versions of the carbon fiber
      composites that have been used for years for aircraft construction can
      substantially reduce vehicle weight and increase fuel efficiency while at
      the same time making the vehicle considerably safer than with current
      construction materials. This is set forth thoroughly in the 2004 report of
      the Rocky Mountain Institute's Winning the Oil Endgame ("WTOE").
      Aerodynamic design can have major importance as well. This breaks the
      traditional tie between size and safety. Much lighter vehicles, large or
      small, can be substantially more fuel-efficient and also safer. Such
      composite use has already been used for automotive construction in Formula
      1 race cars and is now being adopted by BMW and other automobile companies.
      The goal is mass-produced vehicles with 80% of the performance of
      hand-layup aerospace composites at 20% of the cost. Such construction is
      expected to approximately double the efficiency of a normal hybrid vehicle
      without materially affecting manufacturing cost. (WTOE 64-66).

      2. Encourage the commercialization of alternative transportation fuels that
      can be available soon, are compatible with existing infrastructure, and can
      be derived from waste or otherwise produced cheaply.

      Biomass ethanol

      The use of ethanol produced from corn in the U.S. and sugar cane in Brazil
      has given birth to the commercialization of an alternative fuel that is
      coming to show substantial promise, particularly as new feedstocks are
      developed. Some six million vehicles in the U.S. and all vehicles in Brazil
      other than those that use solely ethanol are capable of using ethanol in
      mixtures of up to 85 percent ethanol and 15 per cent gasoline (E-85); these
      are called Flexible Fuel Vehicles ("FFV") and require, compared to
      conventional vehicles, only a somewhat different kind of material for the
      fuel line and a differently-programmed computer chip. The cost of
      incorporating this feature in new vehicles is trivial. Also, there are no
      large-scale changes in infrastructure required for ethanol use. It may be
      shipped in tank cars, and mixing it with gasoline is a simple matter.

      Although human beings have been producing ethanol, grain alcohol, from
      sugar and starch for millennia, it is only in recent years that the genetic
      engineering of biocatalysts has made possible such production from the
      hemicellulose and cellulose that constitute the substantial majority of the
      material in most plants. The genetically-engineered material is in the
      biocatalyst only; there is no need for genetically modified plants.
      Typically the organism that is engineered to digest the C5 sugars freed by
      the hydrolization of the hemicellulose also produces the enzymes that
      hydrolyze the cellulose.

      These developments may be compared in importance to the invention of
      thermal and catalytic cracking of petroleum in the first decades of the
      20th century — processes which made it possible to use a very large share
      of petroleum to make gasoline rather than the tiny share that was available
      at the beginning of the century. For example, with such
      genetically-engineered biocatalysts it is not only grains of corn but corn
      cobs and most of the rest of the corn plant that may be used to make ethanol.

      Such biomass, or cellulosic, ethanol is now likely to see commercial
      production begin first in a facility of the Canadian company, Iogen, with
      backing from Shell Oil, at a cost of around $1.30/gallon. The National
      Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates costs will drop to around
      $1.07/gallon over the next five years, and the Energy Commission estimates
      a drop in costs to 67-77 cents/gallon when the process is fully mature
      (ETES p. 75). The most common feedstocks will likely be agricultural
      wastes, such as rice straw, or natural grasses such as switchgrass, a
      variety of prairie grass that is often planted on soil bank land to
      replenish the soil's fertility. There will be decided financial advantages
      in using as feedstocks any wastes which carry a tipping fee (a negative
      cost) to finance disposal: e.g. waste paper, or rice straw, which cannot be
      left in the fields after harvest because of its silicon content.

      Old or misstated data are sometimes cited for the proposition that huge
      amounts of land would have to be introduced into cultivation or taken away
      from food production in order to have such biomass available for cellulosic
      ethanol production. This is incorrect. The National Commission on Energy
      Policy reported in December that, if fleet mileage in the U.S. rises to 40
      mpg -- somewhat below the current European Union fleet average for new
      vehicles of 42 mpg and well below the current Japanese average of 47 mpg —
      then as switchgrass yields improve modestly to around 10 tons/acre it would
      take only 30 million acres of land to produce sufficient cellulosic ethanol
      to fuel half the U.S. passenger fleet. (ETES pp. 76-77). By way of
      calibration, this would essentially eliminate the need for oil imports for
      passenger vehicle fuel and would require only the amount of land now in the
      soil bank (the Conservation Reserve Program ("CRP") on which such
      soil-restoring crops as switchgrass are already being grown. Practically
      speaking, one would probably use for ethanol production only a little over
      half of the soil bank lands and add to this some portion of the plants now
      grown as animal feed crops (for example, on the 70 million acres that now
      grow soybeans for animal feed). In short, the U.S .and many other countries
      should easily find sufficient land available for enough energy crop
      cultivation to make a substantial dent in oil use. (Id.)

      There is also a common and erroneous impression that ethanol generally
      requires as much energy to produce as one obtains from using it and that
      its use does not substantially reduce global warming gas emissions. The
      production and use of ethanol merely recycles in a different way the CO2
      that has been fixed by plants in the photosynthesis process. It does not
      release carbon that would otherwise stay stored underground, as occurs with
      fossil fuel use, but when starch, such as corn, is used for ethanol
      production much energy, including fossil-fuel energy, is consumed in the
      process of fertilizing, plowing, and harvesting. Even starch-based ethanol,
      however, does reduce greenhouse gas emissions by around 30 per cent.
      Because so little energy is required to cultivate crops such as switchgrass
      for cellulosic ethanol production, and because electricity can be
      co-produced using the residues of such cellulosic fuel production,
      reductions in greenhouse gas emissions for celluslosic ethanol when
      compared to gasoline are greater than 100 per cent. The production and use
      of cellulosic ethanol is, in other words, a carbon sink. (ETES p. 73)

      Biodiesel

      The National Commission on Energy Policy pointed out some of the problems
      with most current biodiesel "produced from rapeseed, soybean, and other
      vegetable oils — as well as . . . used cooking oils." It said that these
      are "unlikely to become economic on a large scale" and that they could
      "cause problems when used in blends higher than 20 percent in older diesel
      engines". It added that "waste oil is likely to contain impurities that
      give rise of undesirable emissions." (ETES p. 75)

      The Commission notes, however, that biodiesel is generally "compatible with
      existing distribution infrastructure" and outlines the potential of a newer
      process ("thermal depolymerization") that produces biodiesel without the
      above disadvantages from "animal offal, agricultural residues, municipal
      solid waste, sewage, and old tires". It points to the current use of this
      process at a Conagra turkey processing facility in Carthage, Missouri,
      where a "20 million commercial-scale facility" is beginning to convert
      turkey offal into "a variety of useful products, from fertilizer to
      low-sulfur diesel fuel" at a potential average cost of "about 72 cents per
      gallon." (ETES p. 77)

      Other Alternative Fuels

      Progress has been made in recent years on utilizing not only coal but slag
      from strip mines, via gasification, for conversion into diesel fuel using a
      modern version of the gasified-coal-to-diesel process used in Germany
      during World War II.

      Qatar has begun a large-scale process of converting natural gas to diesel fuel.

      Outside the realm of conventional oil, the tar sands of Alberta and the oil
      shale of the Western U.S. exist in huge deposits, the exploitation of which
      is currently costly and accompanied by major environmental difficulties,
      but both definitely hold promise for a substantial increases in oil supply.

      Plug-in hybrids and battery improvements

      A modification to hybrids could permit them to become "plug-in-hybrids,"
      drawing power from the electricity grid at night and using all electricity
      for short trips. The "vast majority of the most fuel-hungry trips are under
      six miles" and "well within the range" of current (nickel-metal hydride)
      batteries' capacity, according to Huber and Mills (The Bottomless Well,
      2005, p. 84). Other experts, however, emphasize that whether with existing
      battery types (2-5 kwh capacity) or with the emerging (and more capable)
      lithium batteries, it is important that any battery used in a plug-in
      hybrid be capable of taking daily charging without being damaged and be
      capable of powering the vehicle at an adequate speed. By most assessments
      some battery development will be necessary in order for this to be the
      case. Such development should have the highest research and development
      priority because it promises to revolutionize transportation economics and
      to have a dramatic effect on the problems caused by oil dependence.

      With a plug-in hybrid vehicle one has the advantage of an electric car, but
      not the disadvantage. Electric cars cannot be recharged if their batteries
      run down at some spot away from electric power. But since hybrids have
      tanks containing liquid fuel (gasoline and/or ethanol, diesel and/or
      biodiesel) plug-in hybrids have no such disadvantage. Moreover the
      attractiveness to the consumer of being able to use electricity from
      overnight charging for a substantial share of the day's driving is
      stunning. The average residential price of electricity in the US is about
      8.5 cents/kwh, one-quarter the cost of $2/gallon gasoline. So powering
      one's vehicle with electricity purchased at such rates is roughly the
      equivalent of being able to buy gasoline at 50 cents/gallon instead of the
      more than $2/gallon that it presently costs in the U.S. Moreover, many
      utilities sell off-peak power for 2-4 cents/kwh — the equivalent of
      12-to-25-cents/gallon gasoline. (Id. p. 83) Given the burdensome cost
      imposed by current fuel prices on commuters and others who need to drive
      substantial distances, the possibility of powering one's family vehicle
      with fuel that can cost as little as one-twentieth of today's gasoline (in
      the U.S. market) should solve rapidly the question whether there would be
      public interest in and acceptability of plug-in hybrids.

      Although the use of off-peak power for plug-in hybrids should not initially
      require substantial new investments in electricity generation, greater
      reliance on electricity for transportation should lead us to look
      particularly to the security of the electricity grid. In the U.S. the 2002
      report of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine
      ("Making the Nation Safer") emphasized particularly the need to improve the
      security of transformers and of the Supervisory Control and Data
      Acquisition (SCADA) systems in the face of terrorist threats. The National
      Commission on Energy Policy has seconded those concerns. With or without
      the advent of plug-in hybrids, these electricity grid vulnerabilities
      require urgent attention.

      Conclusion

      The dangers from oil dependence in today's world require us both to look to
      ways to reduce demand for oil and to increase supply of transportation fuel
      by methods beyond the increase of oil production.

      The realistic opportunities for reducing demand soon suggest that
      government policies should encourage hybrid gasoline-electric vehicles,
      particularly the battery developments needed to bring plug-in versions
      thereof to the market, and modern diesel technology. The realistic
      opportunities for increasing supply of transportation fuel soon suggest
      that government policies should encourage the commercialization of
      alternative fuels that can be used in the existing infrastructure:
      cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel. Both of these fuels could be introduced
      more quickly and efficiently if they achieve cost advantages from the
      utilization of waste products as feedstocks.

      The effects of these policies are multiplicative. All should be pursued
      since it is impossible to predict which will be fully successful or at what
      pace, even though all are today either beginning commercial production or
      are nearly to that point. The battery development for plug-in hybrids is of
      substantial importance and should for the time being replace the current
      r&d emphasis on automotive hydrogen fuel cells.

      If even one of these technologies is moved promptly into the market, the
      reduction in oil dependence could be substantial. If several begin to be
      successfully introduced into large-scale use, the reduction could be
      stunning. For example, a 50-mpg hybrid gasoline/electric vehicle, on the
      road today, if constructed from carbon composites would achieve around 100
      mpg. If it were to operate on 85 percent cellulosic ethanol or a similar
      proportion of biodiesel fuel, it would be achieving hundreds of miles per
      gallon of petroleum-derived fuel. If it were a plug-in version operating on
      upgraded lithium batteries so that 20-30 mile trips could be undertaken on
      its overnight charge before it began utilizing liquid fuel at all, it could
      be obtaining in the range of 1000 mpg (of petroleum).

      A range of important objectives — economic, geopolitical, environmental —
      would be served by our embarking on such a path. Of greatest importance, we
      would be substantially more secure.

      -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
      Felix Kramer fkramer@...
      Founder California Cars Initiative
      http://www.calcars.org
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
      -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.