Parker 1
Willis Parker
Public Policy 1101-A
Prof. Richard Barke
19 April 2005
Policy Position Paper: Issue 6
I am in agreement with the notion of the United States diligently undertaking a
large-scale research and development program for alternative energy resources in order to
gain energy independence by the year 2030. Of the research that I have done so far on
research for alternative energies like fuel cells and geothermal energy, I have found that
not only have research in these fields shown pertinent progress toward the goal of energy
dependence for the United States, but also it has shown that both these energies are more
economical and far more clean that your average fossil fuel. I also like to iterate the fact
that just being able to explore two separate potential sources of energy mean that the idea
of energy independence is not being looked at from one angle. Research on a broad
range of energy sources means not just an answer to one particular shortage dilemma, but
opens the door to many other problems that face our society today when it comes to
energy. Research on just these two energy sources alone to date has proved to show
more than exceptional results. With a large-scale government research and development
program implemented, the answer of U.S. energy independence can finally be answered.
Taking a look at fuel cells first, stemming from the first water electrolysis
experiments by Schoenbein and Grove in 1834 through 1854, fuels cell have definitely
made there mark on today’s society. As far as fuel cell development goes, one can date
this subject back to the year 1937 when Bauer and Preis were the first conceptualized and
Parker 2
create solid oxide fuel cells. With years to come, research and development due to space
programs (in the 1960s and 1970s), and design tweaks in the 1980s, fuel cells finally
became commercially available in the 1990s. The advantages of fuel cells that are most
intriguing are its high-energy conversion (40-60%) and low emission of greenhouse
gases. With attributes like these, fuel cells have been considered to be the alternative
energy source to reduce oil dependency. Not only does fuel cells produce a sufficient
amount of energy, but it also is far cleaner and requires low maintenance. As for the
present day, it just so happens that the company leading in fuel cell development and
research, Fuel Cell Inc., is based in Danbury, Connecticut. With all the research done
recently within this field, the public now enjoy certain innovations like the hybrid
automobile which also plays a role in energy independence as well. With as much time
and effort that was put into this field alone, the United States, not to mention the entire
world, is now possibly on the brink of not only energy independence for separate
countries, but on the brinks of coming up with an answer to the age old question of what
will mankind look toward for future sources of energy if our natural resources can
possibly be depleted one day. If government research and development was implemented
on a large scale then the possibility of an adequate alternative energy source could finally
be realized.
Although geothermal energy is the newer of the two energy sources that I am
discussing, it also shows the potential of leading the United States towards energy
independence. Starting its research and development in 1971 by DOE (the Department of
Energy), geothermal energy is now making the move to provide energy to the western
United States through electricity and heating. As one can already guess, geothermal
Parker 3
power is both renewable and more cost efficient than crude oil or natural gas. Right now,
geothermal energy is only in its incipient stage, but the DOE has set goals of doubling the
amount of geothermal energy facilities by next year, dropping the cost of production by 5
to 7 cents per kWh by 2007, and to supply at least 7million homes and businesses with
either geothermal electricity or heat by 2010 as reported in its annual fiscal report in
2003. Although the development of this technology is quite astounding in itself, its
almost useless if the DOE cannot find consumers to utilize this energy source. In fact,
the DOE funded $455,000 just for the programs that trained and educated the public as
well as developers on the potential and convenience of geothermal energy. In fact, as for
funding the entire development, research, and education of geothermal energy has cost
the DOE millions of dollars in 2003 alone. If ever that much money is invested into an
idea then it’s obvious that some group (namely the DOE) has high expectations for this
somewhat modern energy supply. In all however, one of the main goal, as I may have
mention earlier for geothermal energy, is to lower the cost of production in order to lower
the cost for consumption. From the looks of things the whole plan of the Department of
Energy was to make this energy widely available so that the U.S. would turn to
geothermal energy as an alternative.
In all, just referring the two sources of energy I previously mention before show
more than adequate possibly of the United States becoming once and for all energy
independent. Within the last century, enough progress has been made to fuel cell and
geothermal technology that both energy sources are on the brink of becoming the world’s
next greatest ideas. I may add, that at least when referring to fuels cells, that all research
and development have been conducted by private companies instead of in conjunction
Parker 4
with the government. If the government were to implement a large scale program for
research and development, then just imagine how much more progress could be made for
a brighter tomorrow. On that same note, just imagine how quickly the maximum
potential and the spread of these possibly perfected technologies can be realized. There’s
no doubt that if the U.S. continues on the path that the nation treads now, but on a larger
scale where more funding can be provided more easily, then the future will have no other
outcome but the lack of energy source dependency. Once the full potential of these two
technologies alone are possibly reach then the research would not necessarily have to
stop there either. More possible energy sources could be further refined as well such
solar panels and cells, hydroelectric power, or even wind-turbine power. The
possibilities are endlessly. Also keep in mind that not only will the research go toward
energy independence, but also towards the ever so pressing issue of producing
environment friendly power and heat. The nation can gain two benefits from one action
that will affect generations to come. Perhaps the only pessimistic view about
implementing this development program however is the fact that government spending
will undoubtedly have to increase. The question then becomes, “How much will the idea
of increased government spending deter the possibility of revolutionary advances in
science that will no doubt promote the common good?” In my honest opinion, I believe
that higher government and the possibility of paying higher taxes for a set period of time
is well worth the outcome of energy independence. After all, once the program has
served its purpose and tax rates return to normal, consumers will be able to indulge in the
benefit of cheaper energy sources. Only good can come from this in the long run. The
Parker 5
only question that remains is, “Will the U.S. be willing to be patient enough to deal with
short term setbacks in order to make energy independency possible?”
Parker 6
Work Cited
FuelCell Energy. 17 September 2004.
FuelCell Energy: Home Danbury, Connecticut. 5 March 2005
<http://www.fce.com/>
Geothermal Energy Research. 8 March 2004. Joel Renner
Geothermal Energy Research – INEEL. 6 March 2005
<http://geothermal.inel.gov/>