General policies
Creation of a Federal Energy System
General Policies
For the proper implementation of any energy plan as well as for any specific policy measure a set of overarching
strategies must be defined to form a framework for the change that is needed to reach our end goal of a more well
established (and better working) energy sector. To this effect several policy measures will be discussed in the
following section.
Policy 1: Federal Energy System
With the need for more clean, reliable, and more efficiently distributed energy, it makes sense to task an agency to
help guide and push forward this movement towards a more diverse energy portfolio. To this extent, the Federal
Energy System (or FES) will act as an agency dedicated to the advancement of all of the primary sources of energy
including coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, hydropower, wind, solar, biofuels, hydrogen, and geothermal. The Federal
Energy Collective and contributing energy reservoirs will look and act similarly to the Federal Reserve in that it is
not funded through tax-payers and therefore partially divorced from any current political struggles (or agendas)1.
Also, the FES will be structured very similarly to the Federal Reserve2 as follows:
□
Federal Energy Collective (FEC):
- Consisting of 5 Governors, each serving 10 year terms (staggered every two years); they are each
appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the Senate.
- The Chairman of this Board of Governors is appointed by the president of the United States for a term
of 4 years.
- The Vice Chairman of this Board of Governors is appointed by the president of the United States for a
term of 4 years.
- Role 1: Maintain and/or adapt the short, medium, and long term plans (and policy measures).
- Role 2: Adaptation of the Carbon Tax (increase or decrease) to meet the current and future energy
plans and needs of the FES.
- Role 3: Consider monetary distributions of the Collective Energy Fund.
- Role 4: Consider comprehensive energy education program initiatives (in collaboration with the U.S.
Department of Education).
- Obligation: Report to the Speaker of the House annually on the state of energy in the nation and justify
measures undertaken to keep on plan.
□
Energy Source Reservoir (ESR):
- 10 separate reservoirs with one linked to each of the aforementioned primary energy sources.
- Each reservoir consists of a President and a 12 person Board.
- The President is nominated by the ESR board and approved by the FEC for a term of 4 years.
- The Board consists of 12 members with 3 member groups representing each of the following areas:
source of energy; technology for efficiency (Research and Development or R&D); environmental effects,
impacts, and policies; and infrastructure. A director for each of each ESR board is elected every year.
- The 3 member groups within each board are nominated by (1) Board of Governors, (2) Energy Source
Members (to represent firm interests), and (3) Energy Source Members (to represent the
people/consumers of energy) to serve 4 year terms. All of these members must be approved by the
FEC.
- Role 1: Determine state of affairs on specific energy source and consider policy measures needed to
coincide with overall energy plan.
1
"Why we Hate the Oil Companies", John Hoffmeister.
2
http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/frseries/frseri4.htm
-
Role 2: Make recommendations (policy measures, funding, R&D needs, etc.) to the FEC based on each
member group area.
Role 3: Create a data repository for each bank’s specific energy source including up-to-date data,
research articles, and other necessary information.
Role 4: Develop an education plan for the specific ESR energy source.
Obligation: Report to the Board of Governors (FEC) quarterly.
□
Energy Source Member (ESM):
- Consists of firms and companies that supply (produce, refine, etc.) or distribute energy.
- Source Members must pay an annual fee to become members within this grouping and will therefore be
able to have their voices heard.
- Fees would be determined based on generation or distribution capacities and would allocate 1 vote to
the company (or firm) to use when making decisions in regards to their ESR.
- This fee cannot be passed down to the consumer and must be paid directly from the ESM.
- Failure by any firm to join this group could result in potential closure of operations.
- Role 1: Track emissions and energy expenditures to be collected and used by the ESRs.
- Role 2: Make recommendations to ESRs in regards to subsidies, research and development funds, and
any other necessary policy measures.
- Obligation: Provide quarterly reports on emissions, energy usage, current R&D, and other vital
information (requested by the FEC or ESR).
□
Federal World Energy Market Committee (FWEMC):
- Consists of 9 members including the 5 Governors and 4 of the Energy Source Bank Presidents.
- The 4 members of the ESB will always include the Oil Source President with the remaining 3 positions
taken by 3 out of the remaining 9 ESB Presidents. These 3 positions will be rotated every two years so
as to allow for fair representation of all energy sources.
- The FWEMC reserves the right to form a leadership structure as it sees fit to address the world energy
picture.
- Role 1: Assess the world energy market and consider world trends in use and costs of each energy
source.
- Role 2: Consider domestic (and non-domestic) policy measures that are needed to maintain the United
States current and future energy plans.
- Role 3: Advise the President of the United States on the state of affairs for energy around the world.
- Obligation: Compile ESR reports to address energy source state of affairs to be discussed at least
quarterly (if not more frequently).
□
Collective Energy Fund (CEF):
- Consists of Researchers, Economists, and Administrative Staff.
- Provides the initial foundation for the Federal Energy System.
- Role 1: Collection of Carbon Taxes.
- Role 2: Collection of ESM fees.
- Role 3: Distribution of R&D funds as determined by Board of Governors.
- Role 4: Monitor current R&D expenditures.
- Role 5: Distribution of subsidies as determined by Board of Governors.
- Obligation: Monitor and report the financials quarterly to the Board of Governors (FEC).
This policy measure does not hold much sway in the short term aspect of this energy plan, but still provides a good
foundation for the development of the full system in the medium and long term. First, the Collective Energy Fund
will be established and staffed with a set of economists, researchers, and other administrative staff. During this
period of time, this group will be tasked with determining (and reporting) the sources of all energy taxes,
subsidies, and initiatives. Second, the CEF will start absorbing these funds and implementing the initial stages of
the Carbon Tax (mentioned in the later). Third, this group will bridge gaps and form relationships with current
energy agencies including the United States Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, and other
departments/organizations (on the federal, state, and local levels). The absorption of subsidy funds as well as the
initial carbon taxes will help in filling out the staff in this department so as to adequately address the needs
determined by the initial energy plan.
Third, the carbon tax’s impact, environmental and economic, will be monitored over the short term and
recommendations will be made as to what necessary changes will be required to meet the energy goals outlined for
the medium term. Fourth, energy source members will be approached with rate schemes (and given time tables to
comply) that take into account the medium and long term energy plan strategies. As mentioned above, these rates
will be based on plant or firm capacities (refining, supplying, distributing, etc.). Finally, an unbiased review panel
within the CEF will examine potential FEC and ESR candidates and provide a report to both the President of the
United States and Energy Source Members on the qualifications of these experts within the energy field;
recommendations will be made as to how to staff both the FEC or the ESR. Within the short term, these initial steps
will ease us (as a country) towards the full implementation of the new energy system.
The Federal Energy System starts to take charge of our energy future within the medium term; thus helping us to
tackle many of the energy problems that we have experienced over the last several decades. First, the FEC will be
established so as to match the definitions mentioned above. Initially, two candidates will be appointed by the
President of the United States to represent this group with a new member added every two years until the 5
member board is filled. The FEC will be tasked with considering the current and future energy plans, determining
the effects of each policy measure (or fund request) proposed through each ESR, and adapt the carbon tax so as to
maintain the energy plan today and in the future. Second, the ESR will be established based on the strategy
highlighted in the above bullets. The previously engaged Energy Source Members will have a role in selecting 8
members of the board with the 4 remaining positions selected by the Governors. Each ESR will be tasked with
determining the needs for their energy source during this time and make an initial report to the Board of
Governors (FEC) concerning policy, subsidy, and tax recommendations. Also, each ESR will be tasked to develop an
educational program so as to inform the youth of our nation as to the benefits, trade-offs, and impacts of each
energy source (unbiased). This task will be headed by a small group within each ESR as defined below (education).
Third, each ESM will be required to continuously collect data and report this to their corresponding ESR. Fourth,
the Federal World Energy Market Committee will begin operations as soon as the Board of Governors is filled. The
FWEMC will be tasked with determining the state of affairs in the world energy market and making domestic (and
non-domestic) policy adjustments so as to match the aims of the FEC. Finally, the CEF will take on more roles
during this point in time. The CEF will be tasked with the collection of newly reallocated subsidies, newly formed
taxes, and ESM fees. Also, this department will be in charge of distributing approved R&D funds, technological
improvement funds, infrastructure funds, and approved subsidies to the appropriate parties. The medium term
and long term strategies for the Federal Energy System are very similar and therefore will be similarly tasked.
The Federal Energy System, in the long term, will act as a guiding light that leads the way towards an even more
well developed energy portfolio for our nation. The tasks and aims of each department within the FES will follow
what was mentioned in the medium term with a few slight exceptions. To keep this federal system in check,
Congress and the President will hold the right to propose any changes in this federal agency that they deem as
necessary for the advancement of the energy interests of the nation (similarly to what is currently done in the
Federal Reserve Systems). Each department within the FES will be tasked so as to maintain the roles highlighted
above and therefore maintain the energy plan as defined by the FEC.
The aforementioned education program will have several components aimed at informing the nation as to the
many sources (and forms) of energy currently available. The first measure proposed would include the
development of 1-hour lesson plans for each energy source specifically designed for each grade level from
Kindergarten through Twelfth Grade. Staff members within the ESR, specifically hired for their experience in the
education arena, will design these lesson plans so as to inform without leading too much into the energy source
biases. The lesson plans will be sent to first the FEC then the Department of Education for approval. A quid pro quo
incentive policy will be offered to the nation’s school districts where a monetary compensation will be offered for
districts willing to implement these ten 1-hour lessons into their curriculum. In addition to the lesson plans offered
for students from K-12, a scholarship program will be created to motivate high school graduates (and bachelor
level graduates) to pursue degrees in energy (i.e., nuclear engineering, petroleum engineering, energy education,
and so on). Scholarship applications will be submitted to each of the ESRs based on the interest of the applicant.
Each ESR will assess the application and make a series of recommendations to the Board of Governors. The FEC
will then approve or dismiss any of the recommendations for scholarship recipients. The scholarship fund will be
monitored and distributed by the CEF. The final education measure, which has been mentioned throughout this
section, takes the form of the data repositories created through each ESR. Each repository will consist of unbiased
data (collected in collaboration with the Energy Information Administration), research articles in the related field,
and additional educational resources for people of all ages. This education program will start with the
implementation of the FEC and ESR and will help to better inform our nation as to the importance of energy.
SWOT:
Strengths: Multiple Funding Sources (Carbon Taxes, Subsidies, Membership fees); Federal Agency that can adjust
the energy plan without going through the current bureaucratic mess that is the energy system (numerous
departments and agencies with different interests).
Weaknesses: Initially will prove difficult to collect taxes, subsidies, and fees; Initially difficult to understand the
limitations of the each individual and the agency as a whole (testing their muscles);
Opportunity: Provide a more comprehensive energy plan for the nation with one agency working towards this
end instead of many; Form relationships with current industries/agencies/departments; Form relationships with
labor unions and create jobs for infrastructure projects.
Threats: Other departments/organizations will not like their loss of power; Firms (or companies) will not like to
be forced into a cohesive unit and charged a fee;
Sensitivity Analysis: the increase of fees to the firms will increase their overall costs and reduce their profit
margins (the actual value for the fee imposed by the Federal Energy System will consider this);
Enablers and Derailers:
Enablers: massive blackouts (in the nation), spiked prices in energy sources and limited availability of the
resources; Possible War; Energy Prone President or congressional body.
Derailers: Big business; federal, state, and local agencies/branches failing to cede power to the Federal Energy
System.
Carbon Tax
As a measure to both provide a source of income for the agency named above and to ultimately reduce
emissions, a carbon tax system will be considered in the short, medium, and long term. This system will charge
varying rates based on a firm’s or resident’s emissions. These emissions are primarily created through power
plants based on the energy required to meet the customers demand. These fees will most likely be absorbed by the
consumers in the form of a slight increase in energy and product prices. Through the implementation of this tax,
we should see a significant decrease in consumption of the “dirtier” sources of energy (coal and oil) due to the
increased price handed down to the consumer. This reduction in consumption of fossil fuels will directly reduce
the nation’s emissions rate. This tax will be able to help fund R&D projects through the Federal Energy System as
defined earlier. Each ESR will determine the need for R&D funds and then provide their recommendations to the
FEC. These R&D funds will be used so as to improve the efficiencies and reduce the environmental impact for each
source of energy. Several of these technological advancements include the improvement of combustion engines,
the improvement of power plants, the improvement in mining (or drilling) practices, and the improvement of
energy capture technologies. These funds will also be used to help reinvest into certain forms of proven technology
that are vital towards the improvement of current plants including Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) and
coal gasification. The FEC will also have the right to change the Carbon Tax rate at any time if it deems it necessary
to maintain the current or future energy plan; this change must be approved by Congress and justifiable to the
ERCs and ESMs.
The idea of a Carbon Tax is nothing new in this country and has been implemented in differing forms in
several states around the country. The residents of Boulder, Colorado passed a carbon tax in 2006, called the
Climate Action Plan Tax, that set a slight fee for residential, commercial, and industrial electricity customers based
on their kilowatt hour usage; these rates currently range from $0.0049 /kWh (for residential customers) to
$0.0003 /kWh and provided approximately $1.8 million in 20103. These funds were placed in an account that will
be used by the city to improve its residents range of energy choices in the future. In 2010, Montgomery County
within Maryland passed a direct carbon tax of $5/ton CO2 for any permanent structure producing over one million
tons of CO2 a year or the single coal power plant in the county4. This plant was forced to pay the fee (without
increasing the residents’ electricity costs) thus prompting the plant to file a suit against the county; the courts
found this tax to be punitive in nature forcing the county to repeal the tax and pay back the previously collected
taxes to coal plant that was wronged5. The decision to place the entire burden of the carbon tax on the plant was ill
advised and is one of the pitfalls that will be avoided when considering the implementation of our energy plan.
These two examples provide key points that will be addressed within this plan’s specific carbon tax.
Within the short term (over the next 10 years), the Carbon Tax should be the lowest and least constraining
for energy suppliers and in turn the consumers who will be stuck with increased electricity and oil costs. A study
done through the Brookings Institute, in collaboration with the World Resources Institute, states the impact of a
$15/ton CO2 tax based on the current cost of the fuel source, the increased cost of the fuel source, and the elasticity
of consumer demand based on the implemented carbon tax6. Another study performed by the U.S. Climate Task
Force looks at other Carbon Tax rates and claims that a fee of $22/ton CO2 in the short term and $41/ton CO2 in the
medium term can reduce the nations energy demand (by as much as 7% in 2030) and reduce emissions rates (by
as much as 30% in 2030); thus helping to stabilize the atmospheric CO2 concentration to around 450-550 ppm by
20507. By implementing a Carbon Tax of $15/ton CO2, assessed to energy producers (and suppliers) in the short
term, we hope to control the demand for coal and thus reduce the consumption of traditional fossil fuels. Due to the
variability of the market and the uncertainties of subsidies for differing fuel types, the Collective Energy Fund will
closely monitor the economic and environmental effects of this carbon tax rate. Based on results determined by the
Brookings Institute study, as seen in Table X6, we can make some assumptions as to the potential benefit of this
proposed policy. Due to the relatively slight increase in prices since 2005 (approximately $3 per short ton of coal
and $10 per bbl of oil) current results will not vary by that great of a margin.
Table X
Considering a more current CO2 emission rate (2009) of approximately 5.505 giga tons of CO2h in the combined
sectors of industry, transportation, electricity generation, residential, and commercial will provide information as
to the economic benefit of this tax; the breakdown of specific emissions can be seen in the below, Figure X8.
Considering the fossil fuel emissions for these sectors along with the proposed $15/ton CO2 tax and its subsequent
reduction in emissions (and consumption) to approximately 4.8 giga tons of CO2, we could acquire a fund of nearly
$72 Billion that can be used to towards furthering the goals of the FEC. This Carbon Tax, as mentioned before, will
also help to decrease our nations reliance on coal and other fossil fuels. By making the prices of the traditional
3
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7698&Itemid=2844
4
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20100525/maryland-county-carbon-tax-law-could-set-example-rest-country
http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/Apps/Council/PressRelease/PR_details.asp?PrID=7738
5
6
7
http://pdf.wri.org/Brookings-WRI_GreenTaxSwap.pdf
http://www.sonecon.com/docs/studies/CarbonTaxReport-RobertShapiro-2008.pdf
8
http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads11/US-GHG-Inventory-2011-Complete_Report.pdf
hydrocarbon based energy sources more comparable to those of the renewable energy sources, we could hope to
see a better diversification of our energy portfolio in the near future.
Figure X: CO2 Emissions by Sector and Fossil Fuel Source
Looking into the medium term (2022-2037) for this carbon tax, we would hope to see a decrease in the use of the
both coal and oil and therefore a more diversified energy portfolio. Within the medium term, the increase in costs
of the traditional energy sources will cause renewable energy sources to become more affordable (and in most
cases substitutable). However, the traditional energy source prices will also decrease from their short term states
due to their incremental increases in efficiency and emission control systems. The short term tax system will
provide much needed funds to improve R&D and cause many plants (and firms) to consider more environmentally
friendly practices that reduce their CO2 emissions as well as consumption of a particular energy source. A
subsequent increase in the Carbon Tax to $30/ton CO2 during this period will maintain the Collective Energy
Fund’s budget and provide additional motivation for the continued strive towards more energy efficient and
environmentally friendly technologies. The Federal Energy Collective reserves the right to modify this rate based
on information obtained through studies performed in the short term through the Collective Energy Fund; thus
allowing the Federal Energy System to follow the current (or modified) energy plan.
In the long term (2038-2062), the Carbon Tax will be increased even further to a rate of $45/ton CO2; this will help
to reduce the CO2 atmospheric concentration to a value within the range specified by the U.S. Climate Task Force6.
The increased carbon tax rate will again help to maintain the Collective Energy Fund’s budget and provide
additional motivation for the continued strive towards more energy efficient and environmentally friendly
technologies. The Federal Energy Collective reserves the right to modify this rate based on information obtained
through studies performed in the medium term through the Federal Energy Collective and Federal World Energy
Market Committee. With the help of a carbon tax, we can see a reduction in emissions, reduction in consumption of
traditional carbon based energy sources, and increase in revenue to the Federal Energy System that will be used to
improve the state of energy within our nation currently and in the near future.
SWOT:
Strengths: Massive backing source for the Collective Energy Fund; Controlled and modified through the
dedicated Federal Energy Agency without going through the current bureaucratic mess that is the energy system
(numerous departments and agencies with different interests); reduces CO2 emissions and provides a framework
for other emission taxes in the future.
Weaknesses: Initially will prove difficult to collect these taxes; will be difficult to determine tax rates to match
energy plan guidelines; initially difficult to understand the where this fund will best be utilized agency as a whole
(testing their muscles)
Opportunity: Provide an actual plan that is geared towards the reduction of CO2 emissions and the reduction in
consumption of fossil fuels; Form relationships with current industries/agencies/departments; Provides a
framework for other CO2 taxes and other emission taxes here and in the rest of the world.
Threats: Firms (or companies) will not like to being forced into this tax (may lose customers; customers will not
like the energy rate hike (of as much as double for coal).
Sensitivity Analysis: the increase of costs to the consumers will reduce their demand (of fossil fuel sources)
throughout all stages of this energy plan and therefore increase demand of other fuel sources
Enablers and Derailers:
Enablers: Implementation of stricter regulation on emissions; change in president or congress that sees the need
for more environmental stewardship; breakthroughs in efficient and more environmentally friendly high carbon
content fuel sources.
Derailers: Big business (why should we have to do this when other countries have not forced this on their
population); Unrest by the lower income bracket who have less to spend on additional energy costs (I don’t care
about the environment, I care about not freezing tonight).
“Smart Grid” energy infrastructure
Our current national energy infrastructure is out dated and becoming a liability. The current infrastructure was
implemented over 40 years ago and is deteriorating rapidly and more American citizens are experiencing
blackouts, brown outs, and other power shortages. As power outages increase more deaths will occur due to
“exposure” to the climate (i.e. heat waves, blizzards, etc). Also the current grid is inefficient, does not allow
consumers the choice, and American currently pays its electricity bills passively (The Smart Grid: An Introduction).
America is going to have to implement new infrastructure to satisfy the increasing demand over the next forty
years (The Smart Grid: An Introduction). Also American is currently experiencing an economic recession put many
out of a job and looking for work. This economic recession could be used to boost the nation’s economy, decrease
unemployment, and also help secure energy for the U.S. by implementing a smart grid.
The creation of a nationwide smart grid could potentially pull America out of its current economic struggles
and meet its ever increasing energy demands well into the future. Implementing an infrastructure such as this
would be a great investment for America and to pay for such an expenditure the Recovery Act passed to help pull
this nation out of its economic crises could be used to employ workers needed to build the grid (Wired for Progress
2.0). With the use of the Recovery Act would offset a lot of the consumer’s costs to create such a grid (Recovery
Act). The frame work would have to be implemented such as computer systems and metering systems required
analyzing the data collected from the grid to determine the best course way to deliver and save energy. This
process could begin in urban centers along the coasts of the U.S., where population is greatest (i.e. most energy
consumption) and spread across the nation much like the continental railroad. The locations immediately
receiving the implementation of the new grid would experience a slight increase amount on their energy bill. But,
after their grid is operational they will pay a lower cost for energy then they currently do.
As the smart grid concept begins to catch on around the nation, as well as begin to be implemented; further
investors could be obtained to help pay the costs of the new infrastructure. Such an investor could be the
Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense (Wired 2.0). Energy is vital to any economies
well being and every military needs production lines to create the supplies and weaponry needed to defend our
nation. Energy security is vital for the protection of America to allow it to operate and also to create a more
resilient defense that does not rely on foreign fossil fuels.
Enablers
- The U.S. government will be the greatest enabler during the short term period by providing loans and
grants through the Recovery Act.
- Consumers could potentially be enablers, once educated on the smart grid and the energy savings it
would provide in the long term. Also, some of these consumers could potentially work on the grid,
providing them a job.
- The U.S. economy would be boost by the increased spending of the government (who is providing jobs).
- U.S. Military realizes the necessity of energy security and invests in energy security through the
implementation of the smart grid.
Derailers
- Utility companies might see the decentralization of energy harmful to their business. The grid could be
seen as a threat to job security.
-
Consumers could be unwilling to pay for increased energy prices to implement the needed
infrastructure. Also concerns over “big brother” monitoring consumption rates.
Over all costs may derail the entire project. This could be on a consumer level or a governmental one.
The government might invest in a different project that they feel is “better” for the nation.
NIMBY, some individuals will not want transmission lines and other power producers around their
homes.
Embracing electric vehicles
Since the increasing use of electric vehicles would affect the demand on multiple energy sources, the discussion of
policies regarding electric vehicles must be done as an overall consideration of its impact on multiple energy
sources. In addition, the use of electric vehicles has the potential to be a bridge into the adoption of a smart grid, as
electricity demands will change dramatically while the country moves towards greater adoption of electric
vehicles. Both of these considerations must be made outside of the discussion of individual energy sources.
For this plan, the focus will be on smaller-sized, private cars for converting to battery power. Converting large size
vehicles such as buses or semi-trucks is too expensive to consider for now. The smaller batteries needed for small
cars is a much more reasonable and realistic possibility. In fact, the increasing adoption of electric cars is already
in motion, the proposed policies will simply guide the process. As oil subsidies are gradually repealed, a substitute
for oil will be increasingly necessary. By guiding the process of infrastructure change .
Short term
Oil
Intro
Virtually all projections of future energy demand forecast dramatic increases in the demand for oil
products due to continually increasing demand in developed countries and compounded by rapidly growing
demand by extremely populous developing countries, such as China and India. Oil consumption is also increasing
more rapidly in most oil-exporting countries than it is for the rest of the globe as a whole (Hallock et al., 2004, pg.
1674), creating the possibility that these countries will substantially decrease their oil exports in the future.
Continued political instability in high oil-producing countries with low oil demand—such as Suadi Arabia—may
create further challenges in conventional oil output and export ability. Despite even the most radical conservation
efforts and the development of more efficient technologies within the United States, demand will continue to grow
enormously, which will cause the global price of oil to skyrocket.
Source: EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2011, page 23
Looking at oil supply, a grave picture is painted considering what a large percentage of American energy is
produced from petroleum—37%, according to the U.S. EIA (Annual Energy Outlook 2011). Although 70,000 oil
fields exist around the globe, roughly 500 of them represent two-thirds of cumulative oil supply. Most of these
large fields are relatively old, with many past peak production and most expected to reach peak production within
the next decade. New fields with similar capacity are not expected to exist (Sorrell, Speirs, Bentley, Brandt, &
Miller, 2009, pg. vii).
As field production declines, the oil industry must continually branch out to new sources just to keep
production at current levels. The rate of decline for current oil fields past peak production is at least 4% per year,
which a global average of at least 6.5% per year. These numbers suggest that an additional 3 mb/d of new oil
production capacity much be added annually just to maintain current production levels! For a better
understanding of how massive an undertaking this is, this is equivalent to a new Saudi Arabia (with the same
production and export levels) coming into existence every three years (Sorrell, Speirs, Bentley, Brandt, & Miller,
2009, pg. viii).
Oil field decline rates are trending upwards as we deplete the large, primary producing fields, shifting
production towards smaller, newer, and offshore fields. According to the UK Energy Research Centre, “more than
two-thirds of current crude oil production capacity may need to be replaced by 2030, simply to prevent production
from falling. At best, this is likely to prove extremely challenging” (Sorrell, Speirs, Bentley, Brandt, & Miller, 2009,
pg. viii).
Beyond mere physical supply, four other factors are hugely important regarding oil futures:
1. Remaining resources are typically more expensive to locate, extract, transport, and/or refine than
current supplies
2. Extraction of remaining resources will have increasingly severe environmental consequences
3. Compared with conventional oil, exploitation of non-conventional oil sources is typically more
energy-intensive at all stages of production, leading to decreasing levels of net energy available for
societal consumption
4. Remaining resource rates of production are estimated to be relatively low due to physical
properties and location of the resource, as well as the high cost of investment
This last point is crucial: although economists like to talk about supply versus demand, it is much more
pertinent and realistic to instead consider rates of production versus demand, since the barriers listed above
impact whether or not existing supplies can actually be harnessed into usable energy for America’s enormously
consumptive habits (Sorrell, Speirs, Bentley, Brandt, & Miller, 2009, pg. viii).
For these reasons, we propose gradually reducing oil subsidies, tax credits, and other fiscal measures
which benefit oil producers until they have been completely eliminated in the long term. This is the smartest
option because it will encourage development of other energy sectors and it will discourage unnecessary oil
consumption. It would be wise to work towards adapting to these transitions before global oil markets force the
United States to do so. Reducing subsidies and tax breaks for the oil industry will encourage Americans to make
choices that will secure a better energy future, rather than waiting for unavoidable supply and demand issues in
the global oil market to force such changes at an unknown future date, with little preparation.
Furthermore, it makes little sense that the federal government subsidizes oil production because this
encourages consumption and development in the field beyond that which is created by market forces. Subsidizing
and providing other financial incentives to oil producers allows them to charge consumers less for the product
than it is truly worth, which is completely unnecessary given high global demand and finite supplies of oil. By
gradually eliminating these subsidies, the proposed policies will return American oil markets to a laissez-faire
state.
Along with the other G-20 countries, the United States already agreed to “phase out and rationalize” fossil
fuel subsidies at the Pittsburgh Summit in September of 2009 in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Allaire
& Brown, 2009, p. 1).
According to a 2009 study by Resources For the Future, the monies spent on oil and gas tax preferences
would equal $31.48 billion over a ten-year period (Allaire & Brown, 2009, p. 2). We propose to shift these funds
away from expenditures favoring oil and gas and instead towards the Collective Energy Fund, where it will be used
to fund R&D for technologies for efficiency within the transportation sector, R&D for more environmentally
sustainable Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) projects, and public transportation projects in densely populated urban
areas.
Gaining future energy security will require work beyond our federal policy proposals. We highly
recommend policies at the state level regarding sustainable urbanism, energy efficiency within built structures,
increasing our human resources devoted to the energy sector, and increasing American educational focus upon
energy as an important subject.
Sustainable urbanism involves planning and designing a city’s layout in order to reduce automobile
dependence and enable citizens to more readily access their daily needs. Beneficial measures would be to change
zoning laws to allow mixed-used communities, increase urban population densities, and develop more and better
forms of public transportation. These measures would hugely reduce dependence upon automobiles, causing an
equally large reduction in oil demand.
Specifically regarding public transportation, we recommend implementing rail-based systems because of
the huge gains possible due to their increased energy efficiency.
Source: Salter, Dhar, & Newman, 2011, p. 14
Salter, Dhar, and Newman’s results from a study of 84 different international cities (Table 2.8 above) shows
that urban rail systems use about half of the amount of energy per passenger kilometer than that employed by
buses and are, on average, 4.6 times more energy efficient than the average car. For a more concrete example, they
compare 1995 Barcelona, Spain, to 1995 Atlanta, Georgia; two cities with similar levels of per capita wealth. Within
Barcelona, public transit constituted 35% of the average citizen’s motorized transport and the average person used
eight giga-joules (GJ) of fuel for transportation within 1995. In contrast, public transit made up a mere 1% of
motorized transport for the average Atlanta resident, who used an average of 103 GJ of fuel for transportation
within the same year (2011, pg. 14-15). That’s more than 12 times more energy that Atlanta residents put towards
motorized transport, with the vast majority of this energy coming from gasoline.
Even in the most public-transit-oriented city in America, New York, public transit only accounts for 9% of
the average citizen’s motorized transportation (Salter, Dhar, & Newman, 2011, pg. 15). Increasing public transit,
and specifically rail systems, has the potential to drastically reduce energy consumption within the transportation
sector, offering increased energy security for the United States in the future. For more information regarding
specific strategies to improve transport services, please see page 25 and beyond within Technologies for Climate
Change Mitigation: Transportation sector from the TNA Guidebook series.
We also encourage states to implement and regularly update aggressive energy efficiency building codes in
further efforts towards reducing energy demand. By implementing and enforcing regulations regarding wall
thickness, windows, insulation, and other physical features which increase structural tightness, actors on the state
level can reduce energy demand greatly. Because these features go largely unchanged through a structure’s
lifetime, the greatest benefits can be reaped by implementing and enforcing these changes sooner rather than later.
While LEED certification is a step in the right direction, fine-tuning needs to be done to ensure that the energy
efficiency of buildings is more correlated with the building level of certification. Studies have found 18%-39%
reductions in energy usage by floor area compared to conventional buildings, but have also found that a similar
proportion of LEED certified buildings use more energy by floor area than conventional buildings (Newsham,
Mancini, & Birt, 2009, p. 1; Diamond, 2007).
Although this report largely focuses on physical energy supply, technologies, and policy, the human
resource aspect of the American energy sector is facing potential crisis as well. Within the next ten years, almost
50% of those working within U.S. energy industries will be eligible for retirement. This is troubling because of the
drastically reduced amount of students who have been going into petrochemical fields. Within the last 25 years,
college enrollment for petroleum engineering and geoscience majors has dropped by almost 75% (National
Petroleum Council, 2007, p. 25). We suggest that states offer more energy-related field scholarships, increase
student and immigration quotas for trained energy-field professionals, and increase their financial support of
academic energy programs and initiatives.
Because of the monumental importance of energy supply and infrastructure to our economy and our way of life, it
is disgraceful how little the average American comprehends of United States energy demands, infrastructure, and
how these relate to the global energy market. As suggested by Hallock et al. (2004),
Energy, including especially its basic nature, sources and relation to economic and environmental issues has to
re-enter our university curricula as a discipline as basic, widely taught and worthy of study as biology,
economics or geology. We need to critically examine the appropriateness of using neoclassical models to make
judgments about future oil supply and the role of markets. Economics was once, and should be again, as much a
biophysical science as it is a social science; constructing a reasonable biophysical economic approach would be
of great utility (pg. 1694).
i) Short Term Policy Recommendations
(1) Repeal the investment tax credit for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) projects
(2) Levy an excise tax on oil and gas produced offshore and within the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)
(3) Repeal credit for production from marginal wells
(4) Repeal deduction for tertiary injectants9
(5) Shift the federal monies that would have otherwise been spent on the policies above to be
dispersed within the Federal Energy Collective and spent on R&D for technologies for efficiency
within personal transportation and on R&D for more environmentally sustainable EOR methods
ii) Supply
The U.S. received 49% of its crude oil and petroleum products from the Western Hemisphere in 2010, with 25%
coming from Canada alone. About 18% of crude oil and petroleum product imports came from Persian Gulf
countries.
Top Sources of Net Crude Oil and Petroleum Product Imports:
 Canada (25%)
 Saudi Arabia (12%)
 Nigeria (11%)
 Venezuela (10%)
 Mexico (9%)
(U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2011a, “How dependent are we on foreign oil?”)
9
For a detailed explanation of these policies as they currently stand, please see Department of the
Treasury, 2009, p. 59-64
The EIA’s 2011 Annual Energy Outlook report estimated that 69.3 billion barrels of undiscovered crude oil
is technically recoverable offshore from the United States in the Reference case; this estimate jumps to 144 billion
barrels in the High OCS Resource case (Conti, 2011, pg. 36). As market forces push oil producers to explore these
options in the future, levying an excise tax on OCS and other offshore drilling will provide substantial R&D funds to
explore further efficiency gains using technology as well as providing R&D towards more sustainable EOR projects.
The EIA estimates that domestic offshore oil production will increase in the short term as the United States
expands its domestic production capacity and harnesses newly available technologies that will make previously
inaccessible wells technically recoverable.
Source: EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2011, page 37
According to the EIA’s Medium-term Oil & Gas Market report, global demand was 89.3 million barrels per day
(mb/d) in 2011 and will increase by 7.2 mb/d to 95.26 million barrels per day in 2016, averaging an increase of 1.2
mb/d of additional global demand each year. China alone is estimated to constitute 41% of the total demand
growth and non-OECD countries in Asia and the Middle East will constitute an estimated 53% of demand growth.
Global OECD demand will decrease by 1.5 mb/d due to higher prices (U.S. Energy Information Administration,
2011b, pg. 16).
iii) Technologies for efficiency
It can take over two decades for a newly commercialized technology to be broadly applied in the vehicle
fleet market. This fact, coupled with under 8% annual fleet turnover on average (Borenstein, 2008, pg. 16) means
that most technologies for efficiency would not have a serious effect on oil markets and demand until the medium
term.
As public transit—particularly via rail—increases due to our state-level recommendations, regenerative
braking can increase energy efficiency by 15-17%, as well as reducing CO2 emissions (Ford, 2007). Conventional
electric train braking systems dissipate the kinetic energy used to stop the train as heat. Regenerative braking, on
the other hand, reverses the current in the electric motors, slowing down the train. The reversed engine motors act
as generators, generating electricity to be returned to the power distribution system. A current drawback of this
technology is that the electricity generated must be simultaneously drawn to another source. This issue would be
combated by the increased frequency of rail travel, as recommended. Regenerative braking systems reduce wear
and tear on mechanical brakes and offer energy savings and reductions in CO2 emissions. Freight trains have
reported a 5% reduction in CO2 emissions, full stop service commuter trains have reported an 8-17% reduction in
CO2 emissions, and dense suburban network rail lines have reported up to 30% CO2 emission reduction using this
technology (“Regenerative braking in trains,” 2011).
The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) amended the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(EPCA) by mandating that the model year (MY) 2011-2020 CAFE standards be set sufficiently high to ensure that
the industry-wide average of all new passenger cars and light trucks, combined, is not less than 35 miles per gallon
by MY 2020 (Department of Transportation, 2009, pg. 2).
The Department of Transportation made the following projections on the industry-wide level of average fuel
economy and average tailpipe emissions for passenger cars and for light trucks if automobile manufacturers meet
the “optimized” CAFÉ standards set forth by this legislation:
Source: Department of Transportation, 2009, pg. 23
iv) Environmental protection
(1) Repealing the investment tax for EOR projects could potentially reduce the amount of EOR projects,
decreasing the harmful production of brine at these sites.
(2) From 2011 to 2015, the optimized CAFÉ standards of the Energy Independence and Security Act
will:
(a) Save an estimated 54.7 billion gallons of fuel
(b) Reduce CO2 tailpipe emissions by 521 million metric tons over the lifetime of the vehicles10
v) Infrastructure
10
Compared to fuel consumption and CO2 emissions that would occur if the standards remained at
the adjusted baseline, MY 2010
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, 2008
According to data gathered by the National Petroleum News Survey (above), the 164,292 gas stations
within the U.S. in 2007 was a dramatic reduction from 1994, when there were over 200,000 in the country.
Some believe that this reduction is due to the small profit margins available from gasoline retail, although this
does not explain why the number of businesses was declining during the 1990s, a time of general economic
prosperity. If this trend continues, it could serve to support our policy initiatives as reducing availability of
gasoline suppliers will work to raise prices, shifting demand to other energy sectors.
Coal
Supply:
Looking into the supply of coal currently and in the near future shows that we have an ample supply of this
energy source. As of 2009, coal production was at a level of 1,072.8 million short tons with total U.S. coal
consumption at 1,000.4 million short tons11. By looking at coal reserves, one can see how much of this energy
supply is available currently and potentially in the future. Figure I, seen below, shows the amount of coal still
recoverable in active mines and in recoverable mines12. Therefore, it can be seen that we have still have 17.5 billion
short tons of reserves in active mines and an additional 243.1 billion short tons. The Energy Information
Administration (EIA) claims “that U.S. coal consumption will increase at about 1.1% per year for the period 20092035. If that growth rate continues into the future, U.S. recoverable coal reserves would be exhausted in about 119
years if no new reserves are added” (Annual Energy Outlook, April 2011)13. Considering the steady decrease in coal
(over the short, medium, and long terms), that we have proposed to set forth through the implementation of
Carbon Taxes, we will should not see any major increases in coal consumption. Therefore, even assuming the
growth rate as described by the EIA, we still will have ample stores of recoverable resources over next century; this
still leaves the identified (but currently not mineable) and undiscovered coal reserves for future generations. The
coal that is not being used due to the reduction in U.S. consumption may be able to be traded to other countries or
used later in the future.
11
http://38.96.246.204/cneaf/coal/page/special/feature.html
http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=coal_reserves
13
http://www.anga.us/media/210391/annual%20energy%20outlook%202011.pdf
12
Figure I
Technology for Efficiency:
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
In the immediate future, or short term, we can see a one major technology source able to be tapped for
improved efficiency. In an electrical grid study performed by ABB, one of the largest engineering firms in the world
and a leader in field of power, the group finds that “the efficiency of generation [for coal plants] varies widely with
the technology used… only about 30-35% of the energy in the coal ends up as electricity on the other end of the
generator… and the latest coal technology, known as integrated gasification combined cycle or IGCC, is capable of
efficiency levels above 60%”14. As mentioned by this group, one way in which to improve the low 30-35%
efficiency of a coal plant is by the use of a technology known as gasification (or IGCC). According to the Department
of Energy, coal gasification is the process by which “coal is typically exposed to steam and carefully controlled
amounts of air or oxygen under high temperatures and pressures… produc[ing] a mixture of carbon monoxide,
hydrogen and other gaseous compounds”15; the entire process can be seen in the figure below (Figure II)16.
Additionally, the use of an IGCC plant over a traditional coal plant provides an overall reduction the levels of sulfur
oxides (SOx) and nitrous oxides (NOx) emitted5. As many of the older factories are reaching the end of their lives,
newer plants must be added to ensure the continued energy demand. With the implimentation of the Carbon Tax,
as mentioned in the general policies section of the report, newer plants will need to take advantage of gasification
technologies to remain competitive.
Figure II
14http://www04.abb.com/global/seitp/seitp202.nsf/c71c66c1f02e6575c125711f004660e6/64cee3203250d1b7c12572c8003b2b48/$FIL
E/Energy+efficiency+in+the+power+grid.pdf
15
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/gasification/index.html
16 http://www.clean-energy.us/projects/eastman_power_magazine.htm
Environmental Management of our Land, Air, and Water:
Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS)
One form of technology stands to provide significant reductions in many of the one of the key contaminents
emitted by a typical coal power plant. The inclusion of a carbon capture and sequestration system an existing or
new coal plant can reduce CO2 emissions by over 85%17. The International Energy Agency (IEA) describes CCS as “a
3-step process including CO2 capture from power plants, industrial sources, and natural gas wells with high CO2
content; transportation (usually via pipelines) to the storage site; and geological storage in deep saline formations,
depleted oil/gas fields, unmineable coal seams, and enhanced oil or gas recovery (EOR or EGR) sites”7; Figure III
below shows an example of a power plant with CCS technologies7. CCS provides drastic reductions in CO2
emissions, but at a fairly steep price to the plant ranging from $30 to 90/ton of CO2 thus causing an increase of
between 2 and 3 cents/kWh in electricity cost7. “Assuming reasonable technology advances, projected CCS cost by
2030 is around $25/tCO2, with [an] impact on electricity cost of 1-2 cents/kWh.”7 The following table (Table I)
shows the initial investment cost required for current and future CCS technologies7. The Federal Energy System
will be able to help move more coal plants, in the medium and long term, towards CCS technlogy and therefore
provide a safer and cleaner coal for the future.
Figure III
Table I
17
http://www.iea.org/techno/essentials1.pdf
Air
Other Environmental effects include exposure to mercury, SOx emissions, NOx emissions, and other GHG
emissions. By implementing both a CCS and an IGCC system into a power plant, we can help to reduce the
effects of several of these other major contaminants.
CHRIS GINO WILL ADD MORE INFORMATION IN HERE ON SPECIFIC EPA STANDARDS AND ANY
POSSIBLE VALUES ON REDUCTIONS.
Water
Water is impacted through both the mining of the coal and the eventual combustion of this coal:
Mercury from Coal Plants.
Affect on Groundwater
Acid Mine Drainage (Discuss Cause, Effect, and Treatment)
Underground Coal Mining Techniques to Abate Water Pollution (EPA, 1970)
CHRIS GINO WILL ADD MORE INFORMATION IN HERE ON SPECIFIC EPA STANDARDS AND ANY
POSSIBLE REDUCTIONS.
Land
Destruction of wildlife and land is very prevalent in coal mining:
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (Discuss this further)
Topsoil Erosion
Coal Seem Fires
Flyash Spills
Acid Rain (SO2)
CHRIS GINO WILL ADD MORE INFORMATION IN HERE ON SPECIFIC EPA STANDARDS AND ANY
POSSIBLE REDUCTIONS.
Infrastructure:
-
Newer and improved plants (aging infrastructure, Figure IV18) using CCS and IGCC. Discuss permits needed
and legal framework needed for this.
Improvement of the grid (transmission lines and other features of the smart grid).
Education system set in place by the Federal Energy System to inform the nation on the benefits and
impacts of coal.
CHRIS GINO WILL ADD MORE INFORMATION IN HERE FOR SPECIFICS ON EACH PORTION OF
INFRASTRUCTURE.
18
www.netl.doe.gov/coal/refshelf/ncp.pdf
Figure IV
Natural Gas

Supply
Natural gas is a fuel source that will be increasingly used in the future to help meet the needs for energy in the
United States. At the current time (2011) natural gas fuel accounts for 24% of the electricity generation and 1% of
the transportation fuel. Proven natural gas reserves have been increasing steadily for the past decade. These
reserves amount to 272.5 quadrillion cubic feet total nationwide. Over the same period of time the Federal
Offshore proven reserves have steadily decreased and as of 2009 the reserves equate to 12.6 quadrillion cubic feet.
The Federal Reserves are located off the coast of California and the Gulf of Mexico. Throughout the nation there are
493,100 producing wells which have increase every year for the past decade. In addition to the conventional
natural gas reserves the United States also has both Shale Gas and Coalbed Methane proven reserves which
amount to 60.9 quadrillion cubic feet and 18.5 quadrillion cubic feet in 2009 respectively. The discovery of both of
these sources is relatively resent Shale Gas reserves and coalbed methane has increased slightly since the U.S.
Energy Information Administration (EIA) began tracking withdrawals. When discussing the natural gas supply it is
also important to understand how much is consumed. In 2010 total consumption in the United States equated to
24 quadrillion cubic feet. With the growing population and the general need for more energy the total
consumption of this source has been on the steady incline since the mid-1980s. Of that total 7.3 quadrillion cubic
feet was used to produce electricity in 2010. Natural gas used for electricity production is expected to increase
into the future. Natural gas is also used as a transportation fuel in vehicles as well as in commercial trucks and
public transportation vehicles. The amount of natural gas that is used in the transportation sector has increased
every year since 1997 and as of 2010 vehicle consumption of natural gas was 32.9 trillion cubic feet.
In order to meet the goals set by this Energy Plan the supply of natural gas must be increased to ensure a
stable form of energy. With an increase in technology and innovation more natural gas reserves can be found and
sources that have been found but not extracted because they were not economically feasible could be extracted.
Through the discovery and extraction of new natural gas sources energy security could be closer to a reality.
Currently congressional and presidential restrictions on drilling for oil and natural gas exist in 85% of the Outer
Continental Shelf. Regulations have also been imposed inland limiting the amount of drilling that can occur. In the
short term the natural gas supply is projected to increase 25 trillion cubic feet per year. This estimate includes net
imports. The majority of the natural gas supply is expected to be generated from shale gas sources which are
extracted with hydraulic fracturing. All natural gas sources are projected to decrease slightly into the future while
shale gas will increase dramatically. By 2021 natural gas production is expected to increase to approximately 23
trillion cubic feet. This is an increase of 2.04 trillion cubic feet over the 2009 level. Consumption will increase to
approximately 25 trillion cubic feet over the base year of 2009. By lifting some of these restrictions the natural gas
supply can be increased significantly. Fracking should also contribute to natural gas supply because the supplies
are expected to increase dramatically into the future according to the EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2011.
Fracking and shale gas has been deemed safe and has increased the amount of proven reserves in states
like Pennsylvania, New York, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana. A significant amount of shale gas exists in
the Marcellus shale gas Formation in New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. Current estimates differ but all
agree that the amount is significant. Hydraulic Fracturing is a proven technology process by which a fluid is
injected (99% water, sand, and fracking fluid) into wells to free the oil and gas trapped in rock formations beneath
the Earth’s surface. Fracking has been used in over 1 million wells within the United States for over 60 years.
Through this process over 7 billion barrels of oil and over 600 trillion cubic feet of natural gas have been extracted.
Fracking practices must adhere to both federal and state laws and there have been no instances of contamination
of drinking water sources. Fracking is conducted thousands of feet below groundwater sources. To ensure that
fracking can continue the removal of trade secrets for fracking fluids will allow regulators to know the exact
contents to guarantee that it is safe. There have been instances where gas migration has occurred, which was the
result of poor well construction or problems with the concrete and steel casings around the well bore. The
National Petroleum Council estimates that 60 to 80 percent of all domestically drilled wells in the next 10 years
will remain active due to hydraulic fracturing practices.
Source: ProPublica, http://www.propublica.org/special/hydraulic-fracturing-national

Tech for efficiency
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) or Cogeneration is a technology that captures the excess waste heat and uses
it to heat or cool surrounding buildings or structures. The excess heat can also drive additional steam turbine (low
grade heat) producing additional electricity. The efficiency of the system is typically within the range of 60-75%
efficient compared to the efficiency of conventional generation (coal) of 30-49% efficient. CHP in the United States
accounts for 8 percent of power production, although the nation is the world leader in total installed capacity, with
84,707 MW operating in 2003. As in Germany, most of U.S. CHP capacity is in industry. More than 85 percent of
U.S. capacity is large-scale-over 50 MW-and almost 65 percent is over 100 MW. The United States has the potential
to produce between 110,000 and 150,000 MW of electricity with CHP systems.
Source http://www.epa.gov/chp/basic/efficiency.html
Encourage the permitting and construction of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Plants. ITCs encourage the
development of CHP through the reduction of initial costs which are capital intensive. There is currently a 10
percent ITC for CHP plants at the Federal level through the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008. ITCs
would incentivize investors to fund CHP plants to increase the overall amount that are developed throughout the
country. Providing greater incentive would encourage businesses and utility companies to invest in smaller
distributed type CHP plants that could utilize the excess waste heat for heating and cooling of the surrounding
buildings or towns. Currently federal regulations limit the system size of CHP plants up to 50 MW with an
efficiency of over 60% in order to receive the ITC. By increasing the federal limit of 50 MW to be more compatible
with larger scale electricity generation plants (typical coal power plant has an 800 MW generating capacity which
is 1/16 of the CHP maximum) utility companies could utilize a technology that is dramatically more efficient than
traditional sources. Increasing the ITC level over time will encourage utility companies to utilize CHP technology
which provides greater efficiency as well as other heating and cooling opportunities.
Increasing the Production Tax Credits (PTCs) will encourage the development of new CHP plants for
electricity generation. PTCs are performance-based credits for electricity generation output. This would
encourage sustained performance by providing utilities a KWh tax credit. The credit amount would depend on the
size of the CHP system. At the federal level a 1.1 cents/kWh tax credit exists for CHP type electricity generation
systems. By increasing the credit level utilities would be incentivized to increase the efficiency of the electricity
generation as well as sustain the performance over the life of the system to gain a larger credit per kWh.
In the short term it will be important to start to invest in technologies that can be used to generate
electricity more efficiently. This Energy Plan suggests two different methods for encouraging the development of
Combined Heat and Power which are the ITCs and PTCs. Both of these incentives would increase the amount of
government support over time to meet the goals set by this plan.
o
ITCs should increase from 10% to 12% of expenditures in the short term. The maximum electrical
output limit set by this policy should also be increased from 50 MW to 80 MW. Through this
increase larger CHP electricity plants could be constructed which would meet more of the needs of
many areas throughout the country.
o
PTCs should increase from 1.1 cents/kWh to 1.5 cents/kWh in the short term to make CHP more
competitive with other forms of renewable energy.
Compressed Natural Gas used for transportation. Natural gas vehicles represent a growing segment of
the transportation sector. According to the Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition, the use of natural gas for vehicles
doubled between 2003 and 2009. Over 110,000 natural gas vehicles are currently on US roads. A large portion of
those vehicles are transit buses, which account for nearly 62 percent of all natural gas vehicles.
http://www.naturalgas.org/environment/naturalgas.asp
The section of the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions (NATGAS) Act that
addresses natural gas vehicles should be repealed. This act subsidizes the production, use, and purchase of natural
gas vehicles (NGVs). It was designed to promote transportation fuel competition and reduce foreign oil
dependence and greenhouse gas emissions. Instead of doing what it was designed to do the act transfers a portion
of the actual costs of using and producing natural gas vehicles to taxpayers. This gives natural gas vehicles an
unfair price advantage over other technologies and does not increase market competition. Competition in the
market will be the best solution to increase the availability of NGVs by allowing consumers to choose the cheapest
product or fuel.
o

Begin to repeal the NATGAS act to encourage increased market competition to allow consumers to
choose the cheapest alternative.
Environmental protection
Natural gas is the cleanest burning fossil fuel which is mostly comprised of methane a greenhouse gas. It is
cleaner because when it is burned it releases 30% less carbon dioxide than oil and 45% less than coal. Since
natural gas is so clean burning it does not contribute to smog because it emits low levels of nitrogen oxides as well
as virtually no particulate matter. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) vehicles that run on
compressed natural gas could reduce the carbon monoxide emissions 90-97% when compared to traditional
engines. Carbon dioxide emissions would be reduced by 25%, nitrogen oxide emissions by 35-60%, and other nonmethane hydrocarbon emissions by 50-75%.
In the electricity generation industry natural gas is a
good alternative to the other traditional fuels (coal and oil). Its use will dramatically reduce the amount of harmful
emissions that are released into the atmosphere by the industry. The traditional coal-fired power plant need to use
scrubbers to reduce the sulfur dioxide emissions that lead to the creation of thousands of tons of harmful sludge.
Power plants that use natural gas as the fuel source have no need for scrubbers because low levels of sulfur
dioxides are emitted that do not lead to the creation of sludge.
http://www.naturalgas.org/environment/naturalgas.asp
Due to the cleanliness of natural gas emissions when compared to other traditional sources of energy it will
become important to utilize this source over the others to reduce the amount of harmful emissions that are
released into the atmosphere.

Infrastructure
Throughout the nation there are currently more than 210 natural gas pipeline systems which consist of a total
of 305,000 miles of pipe both interstate and intrastate for the transmissions of the fuel. Within the pipeline system
there are more than 11,000 delivery points, 5,000 receipt points, and 1,400 interconnection points that provide for
the transfer of natural gas throughout the country. In various places throughout the U.S there are 49 locations
where natural gas can be imported or exported through the pipeline system.
Source EIA Natural Gas
http://www.eia.gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/analysis_publications/ngpipeline/index.html
The pipeline system throughout the country is aging and it is becoming increasingly important update and
modernize the infrastructure to ensure the safety of humans and the environment. Most pipeline systems in the
United States are privately owned and are regulated by the Federal Government. It will be in the best interest of
these companies and the government to require the modernization of the entire system at the cost of the each
pipeline company. The U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will oversee these system improvements.
Begin to require the pipeline companies to update the system. The pipeline system throughout the country
is aging and it is becoming increasingly important update and modernize the infrastructure to ensure the safety of
humans and the environment. Most pipeline systems in the United States are privately owned and are regulated by
the Federal Government. It will be in the best interest of these companies and the government to require the
modernization of the entire system at the cost of the each pipeline company. The U.S. Department of
Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) will oversee these system improvements. This updating and modernization will
take considerable time and investment but it is necessary.
Nuclear
 Reopen dialogue in the federal government with regards to reprocessing nuclear waste.
Reprocessing nuclear waste would simplify the need to find waste sites, however there are safety concerns
involved with creating large quantities of plutonium. There are arguments for and against both sides, and this is
something that needs to be discussed again in tandem with finding an acceptable storage facility.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/us.html
 Continue research into possible geologic storage of nuclear waste.
Assuming reprocessing of nuclear waste is not considered, one of the country’s foremost priorities must be finding
geologic sites to safely store nuclear waste, since nuclear waste storage facilities are nearing capacity. Though the
amount of nuclear waste is a small fraction compared to other energy sources’ waste, it is radioactive for such long
term that it must be dealt with more effectively even than other waste.

The NRC will continue relicensing plants that are still deemed safe to operate, while simultaneously continuing
to approve uprating proposals (replacements of major reactor components).
Rather than lose all the current nuclear power as plants come to the end of their initial life, the NRC will continue to
relicense plants that are still safe to operate. Part of this process involves uprating the plants, which involves
replacing major reactor components. Given major issues with public acceptance of constructing new plants,
updating old plants with new components can extend the life of the plant while also making it more efficient.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf17.html
http://www.eia.gov/nuclear/
http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/aeo_2010analysispapers/nuclear_power.html

Incentivize the construction of new plants (generation IV) in the place of old plants and standardize these
plants.
Generation IV plants are more efficient and safe. As a result they would have less waste and be more likely to be
accepted by the public. Incentivize the construction of these new plants in place of old plants by providing tax
credits and a 20% investment to developers by the U.S..
In addition, these new plants should all be identical under management of the NRC. Making them identical would
make them cheaper to build overall and it would mean that safety issues could be handled faster, because one fix
could be applied to all the plants, rather than having to be adapted to each individual plant.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html
1. Supply
The power behind nuclear power comes from uranium, which should not pose any issue in the time
frame of this plan. It is known that, at present consumption, there is enough uranium to last for about 80
years. This is known uranium, but further exploration would undoubtedly yield more deposits as uranium
is a fairly common mineral. In addition, reprocessing nuclear waste would provide an even greater supply.
(http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/default.aspx?id=438&terms=uranium%20supply)
2. Technology for Efficiency
Replacing major components in reactors as they age will, in addition to making them safer, make
them more efficient. Also, newer plants that are being developed are more efficient. Lastly, the
reprocessing of waste would also generate more electricity per unit of uranium.
3. Environmental Protection
There are relatively few environmental concerns in regards to nuclear power, however those that
do exist are major roadblocks to the advancement of nuclear power. For one, the threat of some failure in
the plant and the subsequent disaster that would ensue is hard to not be considered by the public.
Whether it is a rational fear or not, in regards to every day risk, is inconsequential, because fear of such a
disaster is really the only thing preventing nuclear power from expanding. These policies call for the NRC
to continue critically monitoring nuclear plants, assuring their safety, and only relicensing those plants that
are safe.
The other major issue is dealing with nuclear waste. However, this waste has been dealt with and
contained so effectively that, unlike other forms of energy, it has not impacted the environment at all. The
issue is that there must be a place to safely store it for as long as it remains radioactive. With a concerted
effort to locate more potential geologic storage sites that are less politically charged than Yucca Mountain,
it is likely a solution will be found for containing the waste, within the time span of this plan.
4. Infrastructure
In the short term, no major changes will occur in regards to infrastructure. Should new plants be
constructed, necessary step will need to be taken, but they will be made within the existing infrastructure.
Hydro power

Continue modernizing existing hydropower.
“One of the best opportunities we have to increase our supply of clean energy is by bringing our hydropower
systems into the 21st Century. With this investment, we can create jobs, help our environment and give more
renewable power to our economy without building a single dam.”
-Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Nov. 4, 2009
Modernizing existing hydropower facilities could potentially double hydropower’s contribution to the U.S.
energy portfolio. The Department of Energy began the process already in 2009 by awarding $30.6 million to
modernizing seven existing hydropower facilities. These projects include upgrading turbines and other equipment
and expanding the capacity and lifespan of existing facilities. The seven projects alone will increase electric
generation by an estimated 187 GWh per year and considering that in 2009, the current hydropower facilities
produced about 273 GWh, the potential to increase generation simply by modernizing is substantial. In addition,
modernization projects quickly provide jobs to local communities.
http://hydro.org/tech-and-policy/developing-hydro/modernizing/

Make the tax credit policy for hydropower on par with other renewable energies.
Currently, under the Federal Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit (PTC), hydropower only receives
half the value compared to other renewable energies. In addition, hydropower pumped storage is not included in
the Federal Renewable Energy Investment Tax Credit (ITC). The ITC provides tax credit for equipment or property
that is eligible to receive the PTC. Investors can currently choose either the PTC or the ITC. Amending the
renewable energy tax credit policies to be more inclusive of hydropower technologies would undoubtedly increase
interest in hydropower investments.
http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=renewable_home#tab3
http://hydro.org/tech-and-policy/policy-priorities/

Make the process of obtaining a license for minimal impact hydropower projects simpler and more efficient.
For minimal impact hydropower projects, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission should create an
expedited licensing process. Minimal impact hydropower projects would include small hydro, converting existing
non-powered dams, and closed-loop pumped storage. The process of obtaining a license for all of these projects
from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission can be long and complicated. However, FERC has begun to take
some minor steps to easing the process. For instance, in regards to small hydro, such things as improving outreach
to developers, as well as signing a memorandum of understanding with Colorado to simplify the procedures for
small hydro projects in the state, have already spurred interest in small hydro. This can all be done at no cost to
the government.
http://hydro.org/tech-and-policy/developing-hydro/small-hydro/
http://hydro.org/tech-and-policy/policy-priorities/
1. Supply
The amount of electricity produced by hydropower varies substantially from year to year as it is
dependent on water availability. This could be a major issue in the future if water scarcity is a problem.
You can see from the table below that, while other renewables have been growing steadily over time,
hydropower varies greatly from year to year.
Without addressing policies regarding water consumption, supply of water cannot be altered. However,
there are ways to obtain more electricity from less water, as discussed in the next section, and as mentioned in
the policy recommendations above.
2. Technology for Efficiency
Many of the existing hydropower facilities today are very old, some as old as 100 years. The technology
exists to modernize existing facilities, such as replacing turbines, resulting in substantial increases in
capacity. These short-term policies immediately address this and place modernizing existing facilities as
one of the first and easiest things to do.
3. Environmental Protection
Dams of any sort, though especially large ones, wreak havoc on existing ecosystems, with
potentially far-reaching effects. These policies do not call for the construction of any more dams to prevent
this ecosystem degradation from continuing, but there is no prohibition against building them should the
need arise. Other than that, hydropower is one of the cleanest ways to get electricity. Besides equipment
production and maintenance, there is no waste. In addition, nontraditional forms of hydropower, such as
small hydro and pumped storage, are called “minimal impact” simply for the reason that they would not
have nearly as large of an environmental impact as traditional hydro.
4. Infrastructure
As stated earlier, the infrastructure for hydropower is extremely dated. These policies would
modernize existing traditional facilities, while promoting the growth of minimal impact methods. This
process would necessitate a change in infrastructure, especially for the minimal impact, to work. However,
as these policies for the short-term most immediately address modernization, infrastructure changes
would not be too substantial.
Biofuels
Supply:
“According to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), daily ethanol production in 2010
averaged nearly 863,000 barrels/day (b/d)… represent[ing] 13.23 billion gallons of production… 2009 ethanol
production was 10.75 billion gallons.”19 This increasing trend compared with ethanol subsidies can be seen in
Figure V below20. The Energy Independence and Security Act (December 2007) prompted this gradual increase
with a target production value of 36 billion gallons of ethanol by the year 202221. This mandate sets forth a clear
increase in ethanol production based on four categories defined as biomass-based diesel, cellulosic biofuels,
advanced biofuels (non corn starch ethanol), and renewable biofuels.11 An abundant supply of biofuels in the short
19
http://cornandsoybeandigest.com/energy/2010-annual-ethanol-production-was-1323-billion-gallons
http://www.economist.com/node/18867278
21
http://www.ethanolrfa.org/page/-/Sarah%20Dunham%20NEC%20Presentation.pdf?nocdn=1\
20
term is readily available. This short-term increase in biofuel production will prompt the development of newer and
more advanced technologies (and plants), thus benefiting the medium and long term ethanol energy supply. By the
medium and long term, the Federal Energy System will be working to help the ethanol industry with R&D funding,
plant technological improvements, and any other funds that are justified by both the ESRs and the FEC.
Figure V
Technology for Efficiency:
Cellulosic Ethanol
Discuss the potential and cost of this technology. Discuss plants that have started this process.
CHRIS GINO WILL ADD MORE INFORMATION IN HERE ON SPECIFIC INITIATIVES GEARED TOWARDS THIS
TECHNOLOGY.
Ethanol from Algae (Types)
 Sargassum
 Glacilaria
 Prymnesium parvum
 Euglena gracilis
Discuss the potential and cost of this technology. Discuss how this source is advancing.
CHRIS GINO WILL ADD MORE INFORMATION IN HERE ON SPECIFIC INITIATIVES GEARED TOWARDS THIS
TECHNOLOGY.
Environmental Management of our Land, Air, and Water:
Environmental problems are outlined (with some solutions) within a publication of Ethanol Across America
(Environmental Impacts of Ethanol Production)22. This article is slightly biased, but addresses many of the
common concerns with ethanol production.
22
http://www.wicornpro.org/library_pdfs/09CFDC-003_IssueBrief.pdf
CHRIS GINO WILL ADD MORE INFORMATION IN HERE ON SPECIFIC EPA STANDARDS AND ANY POSSIBLE
REDUCTIONS ALSO CONSIDERING ALGAE AND CELLULOSIC ETHANOL.
Infrastructure:
-
Newer and improved plants dealing in the production of ethanol from cellulosic materials. Discuss permits
needed and legal framework needed for this.
Improvement of the transportation sector (improved vehicle fleet efficiency).
Education system set in place by the Federal Energy System to inform the nation on the benefits and
impacts of ethanol.
Ethanol Policy Measures:
Policy 1:
A reduction in Ethanol Subsidies from 45 cents (currently) to 30 cents (short term) to 15 cents (medium term) and
finally to 0 cents (long term). This slight reduction of subsidies over this period of time will provide additional
funds to the Federal Energy System and therefore will be able to help in the advancement of R&D, funding of plant
improvements, and other infrastructure projects.
Solar


Maintain incentives already being provided at the state level. These include rebates, tax breaks, tax credits,
etc. For more information visit:
http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/index.cfm?EE=1&RE=1&SPV=0&ST=0&technology=all_solar&sh=1.
Maintain tax and rebate incentives associated with solar power implementation for homeowners. Also,
creating incentives for multi family structures to implement
1) Supply:
Currently there are ~ 36 commercial solar power plants in the U.S. (http://solarpower.com/US-solarpower-plants/). The majority of these commercial sites are located in the South West region, which makes
the most geographical sense. The majority of solar is localized production on private property. These
include businesses, schools, and residential uses. Solar can only be harnessed while the sun is up and
cannot be saved for use during peak hours (could be at night).
2) Tech for efficiency:
There is a current study in HCPV (High concentration Photovoltaic) which is obtaining 32-40% effeminacy
in controlled environments (Citation needed). But as of now, solar does not provide the same energy
output as traditional fuels. Solar cannot be stored in its current applications, and is either used or
redistributed back into the grid. Development and implementation of hydrogen fuel cell storage is
currently being experimented with to provide a viable storage method to use solar energy during the night.
This would increase solar power’s consistency.
3) Environmental protection:
Solar is very water intensive. Ironically solar is most popular in the South West were water can be scarce
and needed for other aspects of life for the population. This raises the question does fresh water have to be
used to operate and maintain solar panels?
Another environmental problem is the pollution created during manufacturing and installation of solar
panels. These would include the minerals mined and transported
CO2 emissions created during manufacturing, installation, and shipment
4) Infrastructure :
The current infrastructure does not allow solar to be stored for later use, causing it to be inconsistent.
Wind

Supply
Wind has great potential throughout the United States. In 2010 the United States had 38 GW of installed wind
capacity, which consisted of 2.3% of the total electricity generation according to the EIA. The total electricity
generation has increased from 1999 to present at an exponential rate to 34,296 MW. In the Great Plains, along the
Colorado Rockies, other mountain ranges, and off-shore have the greatest wind potential. The supply of wind
energy is intermittent; this means that it does not blow all the time making it an energy source that has to be used
in combination with other sources.
In the short term wind energy collection could dramatically increase. According to the EIA electricity
generation from wind has increased every year since 1999. In the time between 2006 and 2007 wind generation
increased 49.3%, between 2007 and 2008 it increased 29.6%, and between 2008 and 2009 it increased 60.7%. To
increase the increased development to wind throughout the country this Energy Plan suggests making the
Production Tax Credits easier to use as well as increase and use Feed-In Tariffs to encourage future wind
development.
The current state of the way that PTCs are issued is complex and it makes it difficult for projects of various
sizes to obtain the credits. Developers wishing to construct wind turbines must owe federal taxes on the income
from the wind project itself or from “passive income”. This means the income from a rental property, limited
partnership or other business that is not actively involved. An example is “for a two MW project, an investor must
owe $125,000 in federal taxes on income from the wind project itself”. To fix this problem tax credits could be
taken against wages and business income or by providing direct producer payments for on-site electricity
generation. The tax credit rate is currently 2.2 cents per kilowatt hour for the first 10 years of operation and
accelerated depreciation which allows assets to be written off in 5 rather than 20 years. The Environmental Law
and Policy Center (ELPC) states that the combination of both benefits if fully utilized could account for over 60% of
the total financial return on a wind project. The ELPC also states that the PTC alone would be equal to $47,000$55,000 (after tax) per installed MW which is nearly 40% of the total cost of the project using a net present value
calculation. Through making this system easier to use more individuals and wind developers will be able to take
advantage of the tax credit ultimately resulting in increased wind electricity generation. Tax credits or other
incentives are necessary for wind project developments increase the financial return and make them economically
feasible.
o
PTCs should increase from 2.2 cents/kWh to 2.5 cents/kWh for a 10 year contract to make wind
electricity generation more competitive with other sources. This incentive could be used at the
localized scale for small wind developments.
Feed-in tariffs have been used successfully in Germany, Denmark, Spain and 15 other European countries
for the development of wind projects. A feed-in tariff is a policy that focused on energy supply to encourage the
development of renewable power generation. Utilities would be required to purchase the electricity from
renewable energy generation. A contract would be established for the utilities to purchase the full output of the
renewable energy produced for an assured period of time which is typically 15-20 years. The contract also
typically guarantees assured access to the electrical grid. These tariffs would allow utility companies and states to
meet some of their Renewable Portfolio Standards goals where renewable electricity is generated. Investors would
be encouraged to invest in wind electricity projects if they can be assured that the capital costs will be recovered.
To maximize the potential for feed-in tariffs project size should not be restricted and the program should not be
limited or capped at a certain predetermined level. Without size limitations distributed wind generation could be
developed in the areas that have maximum wind potential which would dramatically increase the installed wind
electricity generation throughout the country.
o

Feed-In Tariffs should increase in the short term. Start to increase the feed-in tariffs allowed in the
nation to encourage large utility companies to develop large scale wind farms that need to meet
Renewable Portfolio Standards.
Tech for efficiency
Wind turbine technology is improving at a dramatic rate which will lead to greater improvements in energy
efficiency and cost reductions. This will allow for the increased development of wind turbines at all scales.

Environmental protection
Wildlife loss is an important issue that can be addressed through proper siting of wind turbines and large scale
wind farms. The American Bird Conservancy suggests that the expected impact on terrestrial habitat will amount
to nearly 20,000 square miles and almost 4,000 square miles of marine habitat by the year 2030 from large scale
wind farms. Before any construction begins through research must be conducted to ensure that the proposed site
is suitable for wind turbines. Information that should be considered in this research includes but is not limited to
migratory patterns, key nesting areas, flight paths for endangered or declining species, and breeding areas.
Wildlife loss will always occur at some level and cannot be eliminated completely.

Infrastructure
Through the standardization of interconnection methods costs will be reduced and connection to the grid will
be made easier. 37 states have interconnection standards which differ slightly making it difficult and costly to
connect to the electrical grid. Net metering will allow wind electricity generators to sell surplus power back to the
grid for a retail rate determined by the utilities. This is in use in at least 40 states and the District of Colombia.
Only 11 of these states allow power to be sold back from installations larger than 1 MW (smaller than most utility
scale wind turbines).
o
Through the standardization of interconnection and net metering in the short term costs and
connection will be made easier. This process will take time because throughout the nation there
are at least 37 states that have slightly different interconnection standards which increases the
costs. It will also be important to increase net metering throughout the electrical grid. This would
allow surplus electricity generated from wind to be sold back into the grid. In the short term
updates to the interconnection infrastructure and net metering should begin.
Hydrogen
Policies:
-
Change the public perception of hydrogen, as well as educate on the increased safety.
Encourage big businesses to transition their supply trucks to hydrogen fuel cells. This could be
implemented through the DOT (Department of Transportation) by providing tax credits for companies
participating in the program. The program would require the businesses to gradually convert 10% of
their fleet by 2050. To maintain the tax credits each company will have to meet each check point goal
-
such as by 2025 2% of the fleet must be running on hydrogen fuel cells and by 2035 they must reach
6% of the fleet. The ultimate goal will be to achieve hydrogen fuel cells for 10% of the fleet. DOT
mission statement http://www.dot.gov/stratplan2011/index.htm#mission.
Locating fueling stations for hydrogen fuel cells for these tracker trailers would follow the same pattern
as used currently. By implementing 1-2 hydrogen fueling stations at these truck stops. Also with a
joint effort to set strict routes for hydrogen fuel cell will lower cost of infrastructure by reducing the
amount needed to be implemented.
1) Supply
Hydrogen is currently in low supply, most likely due to its high cost and preserved fear surrounding its
safety. Hydrogen has great potential to become an alternative fuel source for vehicles, more specifically
supply trucks. Hydrogen could be the perfect storage method of renewable energy.
2) Tech for efficiency
-Currently personal vehicles get around 70 mpg, if technology. Majority of hydrogen is in the exploratory
phase, both in transportation and storage of renewable energy.
3) Environmental Protection
Hydrogen produces zero harmful emissions, and produces pure water after the energy is abstracted.
Another byproduct of using hydrogen is the heat created.
Development and manufacturing of fuel cell technology causes pollution as well as building and implementing
the necessary infrastructure.
4) Infrastructure
There is currently no infrastructure in place to accommodate hydrogen fuel cells.
SWOT in the short term

Oil
Strengths:
o Increased energy security
o Decreased greenhouse gas emissions (from reduced consumption due to price increase)
o Decrease the unnecessary subsidization of oil companies
o Creation of jobs creating new smart grid infrastructure, public transit, and R&D for new energy
efficiency technologies
o Takes advantage of timing; many energy producing facilities are reaching the end of their lifespan,
now that we must rebuild them we should do so as to make them environmentally friendly and
more efficient
Weaknesses:
o Will anger oil companies, which in turn will have politicians backed by the oil companies against it
as well (difficulty passing policies)
o Changing city zoning and residential policies will be difficult politically
o Will anger American people to experience raised gas prices
o Will be targeted as part of the “hippie” or “green” fad and will thus be undermined politically and in
the public eye
o Will make American oil less competitive globally (3rd largest oil producer globally)
Opportunities:
o To lead the globe in “green” technology / reduction in emissions
 Savings when the carbon tax is put into place
o To once again let the market rule our economy, returning to America’s laissez-faire roots
o Reduce international trade deficit (strengthen US currency)
Threats
o Oil companies backing politicians will refuse to support politicians
o American public anger over rising gas prices might cause politicians to back down

Nuclear
Strengths: The plan deals immediately with the most pressing issues concerning nuclear: relicensing plants and
properly storing waste.
Weaknesses: There is no method for dealing with public acceptance of nuclear power. In the short term, it is
unlikely that any new plants will be built, but it will be hard to deal with public perception of nuclear power in the
future.
Opportunities:
Threats:
 Natural Gas
Strengths:
o Increased energy security
o Decreased imports
o Decreased greenhouse gas emissions
o Creation of new jobs in the design and construction of CHP power plant and infrastructure
improvements
o Increase energy supply to lower the cost of the fuel source
o Increased access to foreign markets to allow the United States to obtain energy from the cheapest
source
o Repeal of the NATGAS Act to allow more competition for NGVs
Weaknesses:
o Will increase taxation on the American people to fund the increases in PTCs and ITCs.
Opportunities:
o Will increase market competition which will allow consumers to choose the cheapest fuel for their
needs.
o With the increase of natural gas use it will decrease the need for other fuel sources which will
ultimately reduce greenhouse gas emissions
o The creation of jobs for the development of new electricity generating plants and through the
modernization of the pipeline infrastructure
Threats:

Wind
Strengths:
o Increased energy security
o Decreased greenhouse gas emissions because wind for electricity generation does not create any
direct emissions.
o Creation of jobs in the construction of the wind turbines at a large scale
Weaknesses:
o Wind is intermittent
o Cannot be used for base load electricity generation
o Individuals will still take issue with the construction of wind turbines because they feel that they
are unsightly and noisy. This is the issue of Not In My Backyard (NIMBY)
o Wind turbines are a threat to birds and bats
Opportunities:
o Can generate clean fossil fuel free electricity
o PTCs and Feed-in Tariffs will encourage the development of wind in all areas of the country through
incentives
Threats:

Hydro
Strengths:
The system is already in place for modernizing hydropower facilities. This is something that can continue to be
done with minimal changes to the current system but with a major impact on hydro capacity.
Simplifying the process for obtaining a license for minimal impact hydropower projects would be at no cost to the
government.
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Threats:
When considering tax credits for hydro, some will argue that hydro is not considered a renewable energy and thus,
does not need the same support in tax incentives that other renewables do.
The funding may not exist to make good on these tax credits and modernizing projects.
Sensitivity in the short term
Enablers/derailers in the short term

Solar
Enablers
- The Federal and local government will continue to be enablers of solar power through subsidizes and
grants awarded to citizens who implement solar panels on to their structures.
- Increasing incentives for individuals to install solar panels through tax credits or breaks.
- Banks providing green loans.
Universities and other businesses will continue creating a “greener” energy portfolio by increasing
their energy production from solar power (i.e. ASU).
- Energy consumers will continue to use the opportunities provided by the US government, and to lower
their energy costs by installing solar panels.
Derailers
- The lack of energy production currently provided from solar panels will deter from increased
implementation.
- Government could remove the subsidies and tax breaks accompanying solar energy. This would
increase the costs and make it uneconomical for anyone to switch from cheaper traditional fossil fuels.
- If solar powers subsidizes are removed than the cost to implement solar power will become a derailer.
- The water required to operate and maintain a solar panel.

Hydrogen
Enablers
- The Federal government is going to be a key enabler to implement a hydrogen transportation and
associated infrastructure. This is due to the high cost of fuel cells and other storage devises.
- Education is important to convince and demonstrate the safety of hydrogen.
Derailers
- Hydrogen will be costly both in implementing fuel cell technology as well as the infrastructure needed
to support a fleet of hydrogen vehicles.
- NIMBY of hydrogen storage and fueling stations.
Medium term
Oil
vi) Policy Recommendations
(1) Repeal expensing of intangible drilling costs
(2) Repeal passive loss exception for working interests in oil and gas properties
(3) Repeal percentage depletion with respect to oil and gas properties23
(4) Shift the federal monies that would have otherwise been spent on the policies above to be
dispersed within the Federal Energy Collective and spent on R&D for technologies for efficiency
within personal transportation and on R&D for more environmentally sustainable EOR methods
vii) Supply
Source: EIA Annual Energy outlook 2011, page 60
Non-OCED nations account for 84% of growth in world energy use! As energy demand grows exponentially in
developing countries, oil prices will rise substantially. This will cause increased efforts towards producing oil
domestically,
23
For a detailed explanation of these policies as they currently stand, please see Department of the
Treasury, 2009, p. 62-66
Source: EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2011, page 37
The EIA estimates that 2021 domestic offshore oil production will be about 2 million barrels a day, but slowly
declining to about 1.5 mb/d in 2027. Unless there are very large amounts of undiscovered oil reserves (High OCS
Resource case), offshore oil production is estimated to remain near to or slightly below current levels in the
medium term (Conti, 2011, pg. 37). Future offshore production may be further hindered by increased
environmental regulation regarding offshore oil drilling.
viii) Technologies for efficiency
Within the medium term, it is reasonable to expect that new technologies for efficiency can begin to be
broadly applied in the vehicle fleet market. The following are technologies which may increase personal
transportation engine efficiency, reducing oil consumption and emissions.
Variable Valve Timing, or, Variable Valve Actuation
Describes any machination that alters the shape/timing of the valve lift within an internal combustion
engine. Specifically, the lift, duration, or timing of the intake and/or exhaust valves can be altered in various
combinations while the engine is operating. Altering these aspects of the valve event can significantly increase
engine performance by allowing the engine to actively optimize the combustion process during engine operation.
For variable valve timing to be effective, specialized software algorithms must be developed to optimize the
process.
 5% fuel efficiency improvement24
 Can reroute exhaust back into cylinders, improving combustion efficiency
 Reduced emissions
Homogenous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI)
Within HCCI, the fuel-air mixture is homogeneous, meaning it is uniform. Adding the reinducted exhaust
both dilutes and increases the temperature of this air-fuel mixture before compression. The process also allows for
a uniform combustion without the need of a spark, at a lower compression than normally required for diesel
engines, reducing engine wear and tear.
Inside typical internal combustion engines, there is a large temperature difference between portions of the
air-fuel mixture that have been ignited and portions that are still not burned. The homogeneous fuel-air mixture
24
Source: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/tech_engine_more.shtml
and reinducted exhaust work together to eliminate this temperature gradient during the auto-ignition, which
decreases the overall combustion temperature. Decreasing the combustion temperature is a key step in
dramatically reducing nitrogen oxides.
Engines employing HCCI will use sensors to monitor an engine's performance using sensors, allowing the valve
timing event to be continually monitored during engine operation to allow for efficiency optimization.
 15%-20% fuel efficiency improvement
 Nearly eliminates nitrogen oxide emissions and particulate matter emissions
 Reduces emissions of CO2 and unburned hydrocarbons
(Purdue University, 2007)
Cylinder Deactivation
Also called multiple displacement, displacement on demand (DOD), and variable cylinder management
This technology deactivates some of the engine's cylinders when they are not needed. This temporarily turns a
8- or 6-cylinder engine into a 4- or 3-cylinder engine. This technology is not used on 4-cylinder engines since it
would cause a noticeable decrease in engine smoothness.

7.5% fuel efficiency improvement25
ix) Environmental protection
Dramatically decreasing oil consumption in the transportation sector and switching to other forms of
energy will reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. More efficient, cleaner-burning
engines will produce substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from personal transportation vehicles,
compared with current levels of emissions.
After about a decade of R&D funds for more sustainable EOR projects, it is possible that reduced-emissions and
cost effective methods of EOR may have been developed. Because of the carbon taxation policy, these projects will
only be undertaken if they produce reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
Decreasing oil consumption in the transportation sector, as well as more efficient, cleaner-burning engine
technologies will produce marked reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from personal transportation vehicles.
Coal
Chris Gino will complete in the future
Natural Gas

Supply
In order to meet the goals set by this Energy Plan the supply of natural gas must be increased to ensure a stable
form of energy. With an increase in technology and innovation more natural gas reserves can be found and sources
that have been found but not extracted because they were not economically feasible could be extracted. Through
the discovery and extraction of new natural gas sources energy security could be closer to a reality. Currently
congressional and presidential restrictions on drilling for oil and natural gas exist in 85% of the Outer Continental
Shelf. In the medium term it will be important to continue to lift drilling regulations to ensure that the natural gas
supply can continue to increase to help meet the energy needs of the country. Regulations have also been imposed
inland limiting the amount of drilling that can occur. In the medium term the natural gas supply is projected to
increase 28 trillion cubic feet per year. This estimate includes net imports but by this year net imports are
expected to on be 1% of the total supply. The majority of the natural gas supply is expected to be generated from
shale gas sources which will be 48% of the total supply extracted with hydraulic fracturing. All natural gas sources
are projected to decrease slightly into the future while shale gas will increase dramatically. By 2037 natural gas
production is expected to increase to approximately 28 trillion cubic feet. This is an increase of 7.04 trillion cubic
25
Source: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/tech_engine_more.shtml
feet over the 2009 level. Consumption will increase to approximately 27 trillion cubic feet over the base year of
2009. By lifting some of these restrictions the natural gas supply can be increased significantly. Fracking should
also contribute to natural gas supply because the supplies are expected to increase dramatically into the future
according to the EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2011.

Tech for efficiency
In the medium term it will be important to continue to invest in technologies that can be used to generate
electricity more efficiently. This Energy Plan suggests two different methods for encouraging the development of
Combined Heat and Power which are the ITCs and PTCs. Both of these incentives would increase the amount of
government support over time to meet the goals set by this plan.
ITCs should increase from 12% to 16% of expenditures in the medium term. The maximum electrical output
limit set by this policy should also be increased from 80 MW to 110 MW. Through this increase larger CHP
electricity plants could be constructed which would meet more of the needs of many areas throughout the country.
This incentive would also make CHP more competitive with other renewable energy sources.
PTCs should increase from 1.5 cents/kWh to 2.0 cents/kWh in the medium term to make CHP more
competitive with other forms of renewable energy.
The repeal of the NATGAS act should continue which would encourage increased market competition to allow
consumers to choose the cheapest alternative.

Environmental protection
Natural gas is the cleanest burning fossil fuel. Its use should be encouraged over other traditional sources
which would reduce the harmful emissions.

Infrastructure
Continue to require the pipeline companies to update the system. The pipeline system throughout the country
is aging and it is becoming increasingly important update and modernize the infrastructure to ensure the safety of
humans and the environment. Most pipeline systems in the United States are privately owned and are regulated by
the Federal Government. It will be in the best interest of these companies and the government to require the
modernization of the entire system at the cost of the each pipeline company. The U.S. Department of
Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) will oversee these system improvements. This updating and modernization will
take considerable time and investment but it is necessary.
Nuclear
 Allocate more research and development funding into Small Nuclear Power Plants.
Small nuclear is simpler than standard nuclear, and it could provide electricity to smaller, off-grid communities.
Since it is simpler, it is also considered to be safer than larger plants. Many of the safety measures used for larger
plants are not necessary for smaller plants.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf33.html

Begin planning for decommissioning of plants in 2030 that have already been relicensed. (Do not relicense
again unless safe and absolutely necessary).
This plan depends heavily on the transition from old plants to the construction of newer plants and small nuclear.
That being said, for safety reasons, there will not be a “double” relicensing of plants. This means that around 2030,
the country needs to be ready to transition to other, newer, nuclear plants, or other forms of energy.
http://www.eia.gov/nuclear/
http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/aeo_2010analysispapers/nuclear_power.html
1. Supply
Supply issues are much the same in the medium term as in the short term. Uranium supply should not pose
an issue so long as uranium mining is allowed. These policies directed at the medium term will have no
effect on supply.
2. Technology for Efficiency
Since it is the intent of these policies to shift nuclear power production to newer plants, these plants will be
more efficient, creating less waste.
3. Environmental Protection
Again, the same issues with regards to safety and disposal of nuclear waste will persist in the medium term,
however, the gradual decrease of the use of older plants will make these issues less problematic. In
addition, by this time, sites for geologic storage should already have been located and utilized.
4. Infrastructure
Some infrastructure changes would be required to utilize small nuclear power, but it would not be anything
unfamiliar as it would involve simply constructing the facility and connecting it to the grid.
Decommissioning plants, however, may have substantial impacts on infrastructure. If sufficient power is
not produced by new plants, electricity production will have to shift to some other form of energy. On the
other hand, if new plants are able to provide at least the same amount of electricity as their predecessors,
other than construction of new plants, infrastructure changes will not be too drastic.
Hydro power

Convert existing nonpowered dams to powered dams.
The United States has 80,000 dams, yet only 3% of these dams are powered and producing electricity.
Converting existing nonpowered dams to powered dams is a project that is necessary and beneficial to the nation.
By 2025, converting existing dams could provide 1.4 million U.S. jobs (that cannot be outsourced) and provide an
additional 10,000 MW of power.
http://hydro.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Converting4.pdf

Increase pumped storage capacity.
Pumped storage provides a way to even out the variable supply of other renewable energies. Currently, the
U.S. has about 20 GW of pumped storage capacity. Already, developers today have proposed an additional 31 GW.
Pumped storage is a minimal impact, closed-loop system that could potentially play a major role now and
especially in the future as more and more variable renewable energies come on line. Construction of pumped
storage facilities is very capital intensive and requires a long development timeline, disqualifying it from incentives
that are designed for projects with a shorter lead time. In order to help spur additional construction of pumped
storage facilities, the federal government should provide a 20% investment tax credit for all energy storage
technologies, including pumped storage.
http://hydro.org/tech-and-policy/developing-hydro/pumped-storage/
http://hydro.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Pumped-storage5.pdf
1. Supply
As stated before, the supply of water year to year causes major variations in output of hydropower.
However, these medium-term policies directly address this challenge by promoting methods that increase
efficiency and decrease variability in electricity supply.
2. Technology for Efficiency
The policies in this section are specifically aimed at technology for efficiency. There are tens of
thousands of dams that could be made more efficient by being converted to powered dams. In addition,
increasing pumped storage capacity, especially closed loop, would help greatly with issues regarding the
variability of other renewables.
3. Environmental Protection
As mentioned before, the methods promoted by these policies are considered to be minimal impact.
Utilizing these resources would have little to no effect on the existing environment. Granted building the
dams in the first place likely had a major impact on the environment, however that is in the past, and
working with the existing infrastructure will not be nearly as damaging, if at all damaging.
4. Infrastructure
Though converting dams and increasing pumped storage capacity would require some minor
changes in infrastructure, these policies in particular are already working with existing infrastructure,
rather than creating a whole new system or building new dams. Converting dams would require some
work, installing the proper equipment and connecting the newly powered dam to the grid, but the dam is
already in place, making this a simpler and more efficient change. In short, the implementation of these
two methods would require only minor changes in infrastructure.
Biofuels
Chris Gino will complete in the future
Solar
1) Supply:
Will remain about the same as the short term, but with less commercial production and an increase in
decentralized production of solar power.
2) Tech for efficiency:
New tech of efficiency will be implemented as R/D to increase the amount of energy capture with solar
power. Improvements in technology and cost of hydrogen storage to increase the consistency of solar
energy. Reduced amount of water need for concentrated Photovoltaic.
3) Environmental protection:
Water will still be a concern for solar energy production. As well as the manufacturing pollution associated
with the production of solar panels.
4) Infrastructure:
The infrastructure will remain largely the same. Portions of the south west region may begin to have
access to a ‘smarter grid,’ increasing the amount of energy that can be sold back into the grid.
Wind

Supply
In the medium term wind energy collection would continue to dramatically increase. According to the EIA
electricity generation from wind has increased every year since 1999. In the time between 2006 and 2007 wind
generation increased 49.3%, between 2007 and 2008 it increased 29.6%, and between 2008 and 2009 it increased
60.7%. To increase the increased development to wind throughout the country this Energy Plan suggests making
the Production Tax Credits easier to use as well as increase and use Feed-In Tariffs to encourage future wind
development.
PTCs should increase from 2.5 cents/kWh to 2.8 cents/kWh for a 10 year contract to make wind electricity
generation more competitive with other sources. This incentive could be used at the localized scale for small wind
developments.
Feed-In Tariffs should increase in the medium term. Continue to increase the feed-in tariffs allowed in the
nation to encourage large utility companies to develop large scale wind farms that need to meet Renewable
Portfolio Standards.

Tech for efficiency
Wind turbine technology is improving at a dramatic rate which will lead to greater improvements in energy
efficiency and cost reductions. This will allow for the increased development of wind turbines at all scales.

Environmental protection
Wildlife loss is a major issue impacting wind turbines for electricity generation. Proper siting should be
researched to ensure that the mitigation of wildlife loss can occur. In the medium term mitigation techniques
should continue to ensure that the proposed sites for wind generation can be developed in locations that are
outside major migratory areas and flight paths. Wildlife loss will always occur at some level and cannot be
eliminated completely.

Infrastructure
Through the standardization of interconnection and net metering in the short term costs and connection will
be made easier. This process will take time because throughout the nation there are at least 37 states that have
slightly different interconnection standards which increases the costs. It will also be important to increase net
metering throughout the electrical grid. This would allow surplus electricity generated from wind to be sold back
into the grid. In the medium term updates to the interconnection infrastructure and net metering should continue.
By the medium term net metering technology should allow surplus electricity from installations larger than 1 MW
to be sold back to the grid and utility companies to help reduce the need for electricity to be generated from
traditional fuel sources.
Hydrogen
1) Supply
There will be no significant increase in supply of hydrogen. A few fueling stations may be implemented
along a designated route tailor made for hydrogen fuel cell tracker trailers.
Increased use of hydrogen storage associated with renewable energies.
2) Tech for efficiency
As production and improvement in technology will cause the cost of hydrogen fuel cells/storage. Small
scale building applications (EERE), such as storing renewable energy.
3) Environmental Protection
Remains the same as the short term time period.
4) Infrastructure
A very slight increase in infrastructure located along designated truck routes to accommodate hydrogen
tracker trailers.
SWOT in the medium term

Oil
Strengths:
o Increased energy security
o Decreasing imports from hostile political enemies
o Decreased greenhouse gas emissions (from efficiency gains/reduced consumption)
o Decrease the federal subsidization of oil, which has such high demand that it doesn’t rationally need
such support
o Creation of jobs creating new smart grid infrastructure, public transit, and R&D for new energy
efficiency technologies
o Takes advantage of timing; many energy producing facilities are reaching the end of their lifespan,
now that we must rebuild them we should do so as to make them environmentally friendly and
more efficient
Weaknesses:
o Will anger oil companies, which in turn will have politicians backed by the oil companies against it
as well (difficulty passing policies)
o Changing city zoning and residential policies will be difficult politically
o Will anger American people to experience raised gas prices
o Will be targeted as part of the “hippie” or “green” fad and will thus be undermined politically and in
the public eye
o Will make American oil less competitive globally (3rd largest oil producer globally)
Opportunities:
o To lead the globe in “green” technology / reduction in emissions
 Savings due to carbon taxation
o To escape future political dealings with openly hostile nations
o To once again let the market rule our economy, returning to America’s laissez-faire roots
o Reduce international trade deficit (strengthen US currency)
Threats
o Oil companies backing politicians will refuse to support politicians
o American public anger over rising gas prices might cause politicians to back down

Natural Gas
Strengths:
o Increased energy security
o Decreased imports
o Decreased greenhouse gas emissions
o Creation of new jobs in the design and construction of CHP power plant and infrastructure
improvements
o Increase energy supply to lower the cost of the fuel source
o Increased access to foreign markets to allow the United States to obtain energy from the cheapest
source
o Repeal of the NATGAS Act to allow more competition for NGVs
Weaknesses:
o Will increase taxation on the American people to fund the increases in PTCs and ITCs.
Opportunities:
o Will increase market competition which will allow consumers to choose the cheapest fuel for their
needs.
o With the increase of natural gas use it will decrease the need for other fuel sources which will
ultimately reduce greenhouse gas emissions
o The creation of jobs for the development of new electricity generating plants and through the
modernization of the pipeline infrastructure
Threats:

Wind
Strengths:
o Increased energy security
o Decreased greenhouse gas emissions because wind for electricity generation does not create any
direct emissions.
o Creation of jobs in the construction of the wind turbines at a large scale
Weaknesses:
o Wind is intermittent
o Cannot be used for base load electricity generation
o Individuals will still take issue with the construction of wind turbines because they feel that they
are unsightly and noisy. This is the issue of Not In My Backyard (NIMBY)
o Wind turbines are a threat to birds and bats
Opportunities:
o Can generate clean fossil fuel free electricity
o PTCs and Feed-in Tariffs will encourage the development of wind in all areas of the country through
incentives
Threats:

Hydro
Strengths:
The technology already exists for both converting nonpowered dams to powered dams and increasing pumped
storage capacity. It is simply a matter of installation. In addition, infrastructure changes would be minimal, given
that the dams that are being converted are already built.
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Possible improvements in technology over time may serve to make this process more effective and potentially
cheaper to install.
Threats:
Sensitivity in the medium term
Enablers/derailers in the medium term

Solar
Enablers
- The government offsetting costs of solar will still be required in making solar energy production
economically competitive (i.e. subsidizes, tax breaks, tax credits).
- Consumers will continue to implement solar power on their structures.
- Banks providing green loans.
Derailers
- Cost is still potentially high without subsidizes.
- The water required to operate and maintain a solar panel.

Hydrogen
Enablers
- Increased incentives provided by the government are needed to make the cost of hydrogen economical.
- Education will still play a major role in change public perception of hydrogen.
Derailers
- High cost will continue to deter increased implementation of hydrogen as an energy source/storage.
- NIMBY
Long term
Oil
x) Policy Recommendations
(1) Repeal domestic manufacturing deduction for oil and gas production
(2) Increase the amortization period for geological and geophysical costs to seven years for
independent producers26
(3) Shift the federal monies that would have otherwise been spent on the policies above to be
dispersed by the Collective Energy Fund and spent on R&D for technologies for efficiency within
personal transportation and on R&D for more environmentally sustainable EOR methods
xi) Supply
The following charts show projections of possible long term oil demand and production based on differing levels of
peak oil and with differing rates of annual growth.
26
For a detailed explanation of these policies as they currently stand, please see Department of the
Treasury, 2009, p. 68-69
Promote Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) from existing domestic reservoirs using environmentally
sustainable methods found due to R&D in that field. A 2007 report from the National Petroleum Council estimated
that there is between 90 and 200 billion barrels of recoverable oil in the United States using EOR (National
Petroleum Council, 2007, p. 19). Increasing domestic supply will be critical at this point, if not sooner, as global oil
reserves quickly diminish.
xii) Technologies for efficiency
Within the long term, we can expect that technology changes will be more radical, switching to entirely
different types of personal automobile engines. The following are two new types of engines which could potentially
increase fuel efficiency by up to 50%:
Opposed-Piston Opposed-Cylinder (OPOC) engines
Ecomotors has developed a modular configuration with each module consisting of two cylinders. Within each
cylinder are two pistons that are linked to a common crankshaft. The pairs of pistons oscillate back and forth with
a common combustion chamber between them. The OPOC engine operates on a two-stroke cycle, with each piston
exposing only the intake or exhaust ports, allowing better management of which ports are open by timing each
piston. The use of two pistons per cylinder allows the pistons to move only half the distance for the same
compression ratio so that the engine can run twice as fast.
 High power density
 Fuel efficiency improvements of 50% over current spark-ignition engines
 Can run on gasoline, diesel, or biofuels
 Electronically controlled clutches allow individual module shut down to reduce fuel consumption during
light loads
Wankel rotary design engine
 Very high power density
o 1.3-liter two-rotor design used in the Mazda RX-8 generates up to 238hp
 Suited for use within extended range electric vehicles (ER-EV), like the Chevrolet Volt
 Compact dimensions of engine
 Vibration-free operation = easier charge-sustaining operation27
xiii) Environmental protection
Dramatically decreasing oil consumption in the transportation sector and switching to other forms of energy
will reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. More efficient, cleaner-burning engines will
produce huge reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from personal transportation vehicles, compared with
current levels of emissions. In example, OPOC engine technologies currently project fuel efficiency improvements
of 50%; after 30 years of development, these technologies will surely offer even more advances in fuel efficiency,
reducing the harmful pollutants produced by fuel consumption.
Coal
Chris Gino will complete in the future
Natural Gas
4 Mores

Supply
In order to meet the goals set by this Energy Plan the supply of natural gas must be increased to ensure a stable
form of energy. With an increase in technology and innovation more natural gas reserves can be found and sources
that have been found but not extracted because they were not economically feasible could be extracted. Through
Technology information was pulled from Sam Abuelsamid’s Popular Mechanics article, 5 Ways to Redesign
the Internal Combustion Engine
27
the discovery and extraction of new natural gas sources energy security could be closer to a reality. Currently
congressional and presidential restrictions on drilling for oil and natural gas exist in 85% of the Outer Continental
Shelf. In the long term it will be important to continue to lift drilling regulations to ensure that the natural gas
supply can continue to increase to help meet the energy needs of the country. Regulations have also been imposed
inland limiting the amount of drilling that can occur. By 2062 a large portion of the drilling regulations must be
lifted both offshore and inland. Drilling and extraction technology should allow drilling companies to drill with
minimal impacts on the environment. By lifting some of these restrictions the natural gas supply can be increased
significantly. Drilling regulations should only be lifted if it can be assured that drilling and extracting practices are
safe and only impose a small negative impact on the environment. Fracking should also contribute to natural gas
supply because the supplies are expected to increase dramatically into the future according to the EIA Annual
Energy Outlook 2011.

Tech for efficiency
In the long term it will be important to continue to invest in technologies that can be used to generate
electricity more efficiently. This Energy Plan suggests two different methods for encouraging the development of
Combined Heat and Power which are the ITCs and PTCs. Both of these incentives would increase the amount of
government support over time to meet the goals set by this plan.
ITCs should increase from 16% to 20% of expenditures in the long term. The maximum electrical output limit
set by this policy should also be increased from 110 MW to 250 MW. Through this increase larger CHP electricity
plants could be constructed which would meet more of the needs of many areas throughout the country. This
incentive would also make CHP more competitive with other renewable energy sources.
PTCs should increase from 2.0 cents/kWh to 2.5 cents/kWh in the long term to make CHP more competitive
with other forms of renewable energy.
The repeal of the NATGAS act should be completed which would encourage increased market competition to
allow consumers to choose the cheapest alternative. This will be the best way for NGVs to compete in the market.

Environmental protection
Natural gas is the cleanest burning fossil fuel. Its use should be encouraged over other traditional sources
which would reduce the harmful emissions.

Infrastructure
Continue to require the pipeline companies to update the system. The pipeline system throughout the country
is aging and it is becoming increasingly important update and modernize the infrastructure to ensure the safety of
humans and the environment. Most pipeline systems in the United States are privately owned and are regulated by
the Federal Government. It will be in the best interest of these companies and the government to require the
modernization of the entire system at the cost of the each pipeline company. The U.S. Department of
Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) will oversee these system improvements. This updating and modernization will
take considerable time and investment but it is necessary. The complete update of the system is unlikely to happen
by the end of the scope of this Energy Plan. Companies will need to continue to make updates into the next 100
years.
Nuclear

All third generation and below plants are decommissioned. Nuclear power should primarily be sourced from
fourth generation, or higher, plants and small nuclear plants.
1. Supply
2. Technology for Efficiency
3. Environmental Protection
4. Infrastructure
Hydro power
 Continue research and development of marine/hydrokinetic power. Implement once technology is ready.
Energy experts have estimated that the US has a wave potential of 90 GW. However, wave and tidal power
technology development is still in its infancy and needs a lot more research and development. This research could
be conducted by the National Laboratories and by public and private institutions. Since so much is still unknown
about marine and hydrokinetic power, no plan can currently be made for implementation. However, it still
represents a major potential for electricity supply for coastal cities and must be paid attention to.
http://hydro.org/tech-and-policy/technology/marine-and-hydrokinetic/
1. Supply
Unlike other forms of hydropower, marine and tidal power is not dependent on fresh water supply and
movement. So long as humans exist, the ocean will likely exist as well. In addition, the sheer volume of
water and movement of waves has the potential to make this a major supply of electricity in the future.
2. Technology for Efficiency
Marine power is not necessarily technology for efficiency, but it does make use of a previously untapped
source of power.
3. Environmental Protection
There are inevitably some concerns regarding the impact on marine life that the construction of marine
power facilities would have. However, as the implementation of this technology is likely still quite far off,
so long as precautions and considerations are made for this issue, it should not be a major roadblock.
4. Infrastructure
Implementing and constructing this technology would require some fairly substantial infrastructure
changes. Once the facilities were built on the ocean, they would then have to be connected to the grid for
them to be of any use. Both stages would take time and effort. In addition, there may potentially be effects
on people who utilize the ocean, such as fishermen, where they may have to adapt to the presence of these
facilities. It is hard to predict exactly what this may be so far into the future, but it is certainly something to
be aware of.
Biofuels
Chris Gino will complete in the future
Solar
1) Supply:
Solar energy will be greatly increased in the South western region of the country providing a larger portion of
its energy consumption. Increased in localized production of energy but at the cost of decentralizing solar energy
production. The increase in supply is dependent on the increased technology created for efficiency as well as the
implementation of a better grid (smart grid).
2) Tech for efficiency:
Improvements in absorption rates making solar panels as efficient as fossil fuels.
a. Increased Use of HCPV (decrease in both start up costs and water use)
b. Increased improvements in storage
3) Environmental protection:
Water consumption will continue to be a problem for solar energy production.
a. CO2 emissions from transportation will be reduced greatly due to shift in fuels/transportation
methods
b. Pollution reduced during manufacturing and installation
4) Infrastructure:
Solar is now implemented into a smarter grid allowing it to send extra energy down the grid. Also the
improvements in hydrogen storage allow energy captured during the day to be used when the sun is not
shining.
Wind

Supply
In the Long term wind energy collection would continue to dramatically increase. According to the EIA
electricity generation from wind has increased every year since 1999. In the time between 2006 and 2007 wind
generation increased 49.3%, between 2007 and 2008 it increased 29.6%, and between 2008 and 2009 it increased
60.7%. To increase the increased development to wind throughout the country this Energy Plan suggests making
the Production Tax Credits easier to use as well as increase and use Feed-In Tariffs to encourage future wind
development.
PTCs should increase from 2.8 cents/kWh to 3.0 cents/kWh for a 10 year contract to make wind electricity
generation more competitive with other sources. This incentive could be used at the localized scale for small wind
developments.
Feed-In Tariffs should increase in the long term. Continue to increase the feed-in tariffs allowed in the nation
to encourage large utility companies to develop large scale wind farms that need to meet Renewable Portfolio
Standards.

Tech for efficiency
Wind turbine technology is improving at a dramatic rate which will lead to greater improvements in energy
efficiency and cost reductions. This will allow for the increased development of wind turbines at all scales.

Environmental protection
Wildlife loss is a major issue impacting wind turbines for electricity generation. Proper siting should be
researched to ensure that the mitigation of wildlife loss can occur. In the long term mitigation techniques should
continue to ensure that the proposed sites for wind generation can be developed in locations that are outside
major migratory areas and flight paths. Wildlife loss will always occur at some level and cannot be eliminated
completely.

Infrastructure
Through the standardization of interconnection and net metering in the short term costs and connection will
be made easier. This process will take time because throughout the nation there are at least 37 states that have
slightly different interconnection standards which increases the costs. It will also be important to increase net
metering throughout the electrical grid. This would allow surplus electricity generated from wind to be sold back
into the grid. In the long term updates to the interconnection infrastructure and net metering should continue. By
the long term net metering technology should allow surplus electricity from installations larger than 1 MW to be
sold back to the grid and utility companies to help reduce the need for electricity to be generated from traditional
fuel sources.
Hydrogen
1) Supply
Supply will see an increased implementation of infrastructure at truck stops, to accommodate the growing
number of hydrogen tracker trailers.
2) Tech for efficiency
Technology improvements as well as production methods will continue to drive the price of hydrogen
down.
3) Environmental Protection
Remains the same as the last two sections.
4) Infrastructure
Hydrogen infrastructure will now begin exploring spreading from designated routes to other key highways to
increase its availability.
Geothermal
i) Supply
The United States is the world’s leading producer of geothermal energy, producing an average of 15 billion
kilowatt hours of power annually. This is comparable to the energy produced by 25 million barrels of oil, or, 6
million short tons of coal, although this represents less than one percent of the American energy supply (Kagel,
Bates, & Gawell, 2007, pg. i).
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimated that geothermal energy sources within 13 Western states have the
potential to produce anywhere between 8,000 and 73,000 mega-watts (MW), with a mean estimate of 33,000 MW
(Union of Concerned Scientists, 2009).
The Geothermal Energy Association estimates that the 132 national projects in the U.S. could provide up to
6,400 MW (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2009).
ii) Technologies for efficiency
Geothermal energy is most commonly captured using naturally-occurring “hydrothermal convection”
systems. In these systems, cool water enters Earth’s crust, becomes heated, and escapes as steam, which is used to
power electric generators. Geothermal plants can more effectively capture this energy by drilling holes into
underground rock formations.
Three types of geothermal power plants:
Dry steam power plant: steam goes directly through the turbine, then into a condenser (condensed into water) and
injected back into the earth
Flash steam power plant: very hot water is depressurized ("flashed") into steam which can then be used to drive
the turbine
Binary cycle power plant: hot water is passed through a heat exchanger, where it heats a second liquid—such as
isobutane—in a closed loop. The isobutane boils at a lower temperature than water, so it is more easily converted
into steam to run the turbine
Enhanced Geothermal Systems. Although geothermal heat is produced under virtually every part of the planet,
the conditions which force heated water to come to the surface are found in less than one-tenth of the globe’s land
area. Enhanced geothermal systems, also called “hot dry rock,” are a technological feat which can allow humans to
capture the heat produced by the earth in dry areas. First, high-pressure water is pumped through the dry rock
deep below the earth’s surface, which breaks them up. More water is then pumped through the broken rocks. This
water heats up from the geothermal heat, returns to the surface as steam, and powers one of the three geothermal
power plants shown above. Afterwards, the water is pumped back down to the newly created reservoir so that the
cycle can be repeated indefinitely to obtain geothermal energy from dry areas (Union of Concerned Scientists,
2009).
iii) Environmental protection
Geothermal energy production only produces about one-sixth of the typical carbon dioxide emissions as a
natural gas power plant produces. A case study found that a coal plant employing scrubbers and other emissions
control technologies emits 24 times more carbon dioxide, 10,837 times more sulfur dioxide, and 3,865 times more
nitrous oxides per megawatt hour than a geothermal steam power plant (Kagel, Bates, & Gawell, 2007, pg. i)!
Binary cycle plants produce virtually no emissions whatsoever. Geothermal energy does not depend on the
burning of finite supplies of fossil fuels, and is available year-round, regardless of weather conditions (“Geothermal
energy: Tapping the Earth’s heat,” 2011).
Environmental concerns include hydrogen sulfide emissions and the disposal of some geothermal fluids,
which may contain small amounts of toxic chemicals and materials (“Geothermal energy: Tapping the Earth’s heat,”
2011).
Hydrogen sulfide pollution is typically abated by being converted into elemental sulfur. Over 99.9% of
current hydrogen sulfide produced is typically converted, which can then be used as a non-hazardous soil
amendment and for fertilizer. Since 1976, hydrogen sulfide emissions have declined from 1,900 lbs/hour to 200
lbs/hour or less, even though geothermal energy production has increased by over 400% in this time frame (Kagel,
Bates, & Gawell, 2007, pg. ii).
Mercury can be produced at some geothermal energy production sites, but current abatement technology
reduces emissions by 90% or more. Two facilities at The Geysers in California are considered the highest mercury
emitters in the U.S., but even these facilities release such small amounts that they pass the strict California
regulations regarding emissions (Kagel, Bates, & Gawell, 2007, pg. ii).
Although water consumption is often an environmental concern for many energy sources, geothermal plants use
five gallons of freshwater per megawatt hour of power produced, while binary cycle power plants require no fresh
water input. For comparison, natural gas facilities require 361 gallons of water per megawatt hour of power
produced (Kagel, Bates, & Gawell, 2007, pg. ii).
SWOT in the long term


Oil
Oil
Strengths:
o Increased energy security
o Decreasing imports from hostile political enemies
o Decreased greenhouse gas emissions (from efficiency gains/reduced consumption)
o Eliminate the irrational subsidization of oil
o (increased transit) will allow a greater portion of Americans to have more job opportunities,
increasing economic output
o Creation of jobs creating new smart grid infrastructure, public transit, and R&D for new energy
efficiency technologies
Weaknesses:
o Will anger oil companies, which in turn will have politicians backed by the oil companies against it
as well (difficulty passing policies)
o Changing city zoning and residential policies will be difficult politically
o Will anger American people to experience raised gas prices
o Will be targeted as part of the “hippie” or “green” fad and will thus be undermined politically and in
the public eye
o Will make American oil less competitive globally (3rd largest oil producer globally)
Opportunities:
o To lead the globe in “green” technology / reduction in emissions
 Huge savings within the carbon taxation system due to decreased consumption and
increased efficiency
o To escape future political dealings with openly hostile nations
o To once again let the market rule our economy, returning to America’s laissez-faire roots
o (city planning) To increase the economic output of cities
o (city planning) To increase feelings of community and happiness
o Reduce international trade deficit (strengthen US currency)
Threats
o Oil companies backing politicians will refuse to support politicians
o American public anger over rising gas prices might cause politicians to back down

Natural Gas
Strengths:
o Increased energy security
o Decreased imports
o Decreased greenhouse gas emissions
o Creation of new jobs in the design and construction of CHP power plant and infrastructure
improvements
o Increase energy supply to lower the cost of the fuel source
o Increased access to foreign markets to allow the United States to obtain energy from the cheapest
source
o Repeal of the NATGAS Act to allow more competition for NGVs
Weaknesses:
o Will increase taxation on the American people to fund the increases in PTCs and ITCs.
Opportunities:
o Will increase market competition which will allow consumers to choose the cheapest fuel for their
needs.
o With the increase of natural gas use it will decrease the need for other fuel sources which will
ultimately reduce greenhouse gas emissions
The creation of jobs for the development of new electricity generating plants and through the
modernization of the pipeline infrastructure
Threats:
o

Wind
Strengths:
o Increased energy security
o Decreased greenhouse gas emissions because wind for electricity generation does not create any
direct emissions.
o Creation of jobs in the construction of the wind turbines at a large scale
Weaknesses:
o Wind is intermittent
o Cannot be used for base load electricity generation
o Individuals will still take issue with the construction of wind turbines because they feel that they
are unsightly and noisy. This is the issue of Not In My Backyard (NIMBY)
o Wind turbines are a threat to birds and bats
Opportunities:
o Can generate clean fossil fuel free electricity
o PTCs and Feed-in Tariffs will encourage the development of wind in all areas of the country through
incentives
Threats:

Hydro
Strengths:
The potential energy to be gained from marine power is incredibly high.
The plan allows for time and money to be taken for further research and development of possible technologies for
capturing marine power.
Weaknesses:
The technology to capture marine energy effectively does not yet exist in a marketable form.
Opportunities:
Threats:
Possible negative impacts on the marine ecosystem once marine power is implemented could be a major road
block to the success and wide-scale usage of marine power.
Sensitivity in the long term
Enablers/derailers in the long term

Solar
Enablers
- Reduced cost of solar panels.
Derailers
- Water consumption can deter increased implementation of solar energy.

Hydrogen
Enablers
The government will continue to be an important enabler to allow growth of infrastructure needed to
supply fuel demands to a growing hydrogen tracker trailer fleet.
Derailers
- The high cost of implementing infrastructure needed to supply hydrogen.
- And possibly still NIMBY
-
Works Cited
Allaire, M., & Brown, S. (2009). Eliminating subsidies for fossil fuel production: Implications for U.S. oil and natural
gas markets. Resources For the Future. Retrieved from http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-IB-0910.pdf
Borenstein, S. (2008). Cost, conflict and climate: U.S. challenges in the world oil market. Center for the Study of
Energy Markets. Retrieved from http://www.ucei.berkeley.edu/PDF/csemwp177.pdf
Conti, J. J. (2011). Annual energy outlook 2011 [DOE/EIA-0383(2011)]. U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Retrieved from http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2011).pdf
Department of Transportation. (2009). Final ruling on 2009 memorandum on CAFE standards for model years 2011
and beyond (RIN 2127-AK29). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Retrieved from
http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/Rulemaking/Rules/Associated
Files/CAFE_Updated_Final_Rule_MY2011.pdf
Department of the Treasury (2009). General explanations of the administration’s fiscal year 2010 revenue proposals.
Department of the Treasury. Retrieved from http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/taxpolicy/Documents/grnbk09.pdf
Diamond, R. (2007). Measuring the energy performance of LEED-certified federal buildings. [PowerPoint
presentation]. Retrieved from http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/iswg_diamond_ctp_leed.pdf
Ford, R. (2007). Regenerative braking boosts green credentials. Railway Gazette. Retrieved from
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/news/single-view/view/regenerative-braking-boosts-greencredentials.html
“Geothermal energy: Tapping the Earth’s heat.” (2011). National Geographic. Retrieved from
http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/geothermal-profile/
Hallock, J. L., Tharakan, P. J., Hall, C. A., Jefferson, M., & Wu, W. (2004). Forecasting the limits to the availability and
diversity of global conventional oil supply. Energy, 29(11), 1673-1696. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2004.04.043
Kagel, A., Bates, D., & Gawell, K. (2007). A guide to geothermal energy and the environment. Geothermal Energy
Association. Retrieved from http://www.geo-energy.org/reports/Environmental%20Guide.pdf
National Petroleum Council (2007). Hard truths: Facing the hard truths about energy. Retrieved from
http://www.npchardtruthsreport.org/
Newsham, G.R., Mancini, S., & Birt, B. (2009). Do LEED-certified buildings save energy? Yes, but… Energy and
Buildings, 41(8), 897-905. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.03.014. Retrieved from http://www.nrccnrc.gc.ca/obj/irc/doc/pubs/nrcc51142.pdf
Purdue University (2007, May 10). Radical Engine Redesign Would Reduce Pollution, Oil Consumption.
ScienceDaily. Retrieved November 13, 2011, from
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070510093248.htm
Regenerative braking in trains. (2011). ClimateTechWiki. Retrieved from
http://climatetechwiki.org/technology/regenerative_braking_in_trains
Salter, R., Dhar, S., Newman, P. (2011). Technologies for climate change mitigation: Transportation sector. United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Risø Centre on Energy, Climate and Sustainable Development.
ISBN: 978-87-550-3901-8. Retrieved from http://techaction.org/Guidebooks/TNAhandbook_Transport.pdf
Sorrell, S., Speirs, J., Bentley, R., Brandt, A., & Miller, R. (2009). Global oil depletion: An assessment of the evidence
for a near-term peak in global oil production. UK Energy Research Centre [1-903144-0-35]. Retrieved from
http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/support/Global%20Oil%20Depletion
U.S. Department of Energy. (2008, Dec 08). Fact #548: December 8, 2008. Number of Gasoline Stations
Continues to Decline in 2007. Retrieved from
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/facts/2008_fotw548.html
U.S. Energy Information Administration (2011a). How dependent are we on foreign oil? Energy In Brief, U.S. Energy
Information Administration. Retrieved from
http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/energy_in_brief/foreign_oil_dependence.cfm?featureclicked=3
U.S. Energy Information Administration (2011b). Medium-term oil & gas markets. U.S. Energy Information
Administration. Retrieved from http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/mtogm2011SUM.pdf
Union of Concerned Scientists (2009). How geothermal energy works. Retrieved from
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/technology_and_impacts/energy_technologies/how-geothermalenergy-works.html