Weather Forecast


Mills Fleet Farm announces it is courting suitors for sale


Government is a negative influence on energy fuel policy

Email Sign up for Breaking News Alerts
opinion Brainerd,MN 56401
Brainerd Dispatch
customer support
Government is a negative influence on energy fuel policy
Brainerd MN 506 James St. / PO Box 974 56401



Government is a negative influence on energy fuel policy

There is perhaps no area of human endeavor more influenced by government policy than the production and use of energy fuel. And the verdict on that influence is negative.

Beginning with President Nixon in 1974 who said, “At the end of this decade, in the year 1980, the United States will not be dependent on any other country for the energy we need,” seven succeeding U.S. presidents have made similar policy pronouncements. All have failed, as our oil imports have grown along with global warming emissions. Government funded renewable energy fuel sources remain trivial contributors to our energy supply.

Despite mandates and subsidies for  corn ethanol motor fuel, 40 percent of the U.S. corn crop now provides just 7 percent of our gasoline supply. Along with federal support of soybeans for bio diesel, we have caused large increases in grain prices, more irrigation and its draw down of aquifers, and excess fertilizer chemistry draining into river systems. 

To mitigate the effects of that food for fuel policy, Congress enacted the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) in 2007. It provided for the production of ethanol fuel from cellulosic non food material such as grasses and the left over stalks and leaves from corn production. EISA required 250 million gallons of cellulose ethanol in 2011 rising to more than 10 billion gallons in 2020. We have never made more than 5 million annual gallons of cellulose ethanol in subsidized research facilities, as there is no practical process for volume production of ethanol from cellulose. Undaunted, Congress recently appropriated $510,000,000 for production plants to make military jet fuel from cellulose and algae. There are  fundament physical limits for that production. 

The history of energy public policy is one of easily passed legislative laws which ignore the laws of nature and physics. Major government support of renewable fuel projects such as wind and solar farms has also had limited success. Wind and solar combined provided about 1 percent of U.S. total energy in 2011.

One of the most important low emission energy sources is nuclear fission as practiced in over 400 worldwide power reactors. They operate night and day, wind or calm, and emit only water vapor. They are one successful example of government policy, coming out of the WWII Manhattan Project, and the ensuing research led by Admiral Rickover which produced naval reactors, from which evolved most of our commercial nuclear power plants. 

More recently, public policy has turned away from nuclear as fears of accidents and radiation dominate, especially in western nations like Germany where the Green Party is ascendant. Recently an electric power exporter, Germany has become an importer as eight nuclear plants are shuttered by government decree.  Germany has spent $10 billion annually to subsidize 1.1 million solar installations, on rooftops and in solar power plants. They produce little power in the short cloudy days of winter. Germany has become an importer of nuclear energy from France and the Czech Republic, and also from Poland, where electric power is produced by burning brown coal.

The attitude of German industry toward current public policy was stated recently by Jurgen Grossmann, the CEO of Germany’s energy utility giant RWE.  He said, “The subsidization of solar energy in Germany was as useful as growing pineapples in Alaska.” 

A reform of energy policy must be with programs which make better use of energy. This includes obvious conservation from more efficient lighting, insulated building, and European style mass transit. 

We will also need more nuclear energy where each finger joint sized uranium fuel pellet has the energy potential of tons of polluting coal. Scores of Westinghouse AP 1000 reactors are under construction in Asia. Nuclear plants have the capacity and availability to replace power from polluting coal.

The development of large new natural gas reserves through horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing can be regulated through uniform national standards. Tens of thousands of those fracking wells operate safely; but the danger to fresh water supplies exists if the wells are not properly cased and managed.

EIA forecasts to 2035 tell us that fossil fuels will dominate energy supplies during that entire period. Much of our need for oil imports can be safely met by the vast oil sands in Alberta, assuming properly constructed pipelines like Keystone XL  are approved. The environmental issues in Alberta are best left to the governments of Alberta and Canada whose people love their lands and waters.

Finally, subsidies for renewables like wind, solar, and range limited electric vehicles should be gradually reduced, and their fate left to the market place. Taxing the public to give money to the wealthy who can afford the purchase of an expensive electric vehicle, or decorate a roof with solar panels, is poor policy.

Public policy shines best in support of new technology and basic energy research, but its glow dims when it tries to force large scale implementation of unproven processes.

ROLF WESTGARD of Deerwood is a professional member, Geological Society of America. He recently taught the class “Peak Oil and Peak Water” for the University of Minnesota Lifelong Learning program.