COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source
C00011 ENDMK
C⊗;
.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source
. cb THE SOLUTION TO THE ENERGY CRISIS IS TO PRODUCE ENERGY


	America needs to be self-sufficient in energy.  Our standard
of living has declined because we spend so much on foreign oil,
we are increasingly being pushed around by foreign oil sources,
and we are outbidding poor countries for the oil.
If we unleash our technology, we can produce all the energy we
need to survive, and indeed all the energy anyone will want
at prices we can afford.

	These facts have been well known to American scientists,
engineers and businessmen concerned with energy since before
the 1973 energy crisis.  We could be  energy independent
now had American industry been given the green light in 1973.
However, mobilizing America for energy production has been
held hostage to other political and social goals.  Some see the energy
crisis as an opportunity to nationalize the oil industry.  Some
see it as an opportunity to reform our life-style.  Some see
it as an occasion to attack technology.  Some see only the
dangers of production and ignore the poverty and conflict that
arises from economic stagnation.

	Here is an energy program to solve the crisis.

	1. We must stop using oil to produce electricity.  Nuclear
energy and coal can replace all use of oil in the 1980s.  With a
crash program, which may be necessary, we can do it by 1987.

	We need a crash program to complete the reactors that
are presently under construction.  We need to improve safety
along the lines of the Kemeny Commission proposals.  We need
a definite decisions on waste disposal that will meet the
requirements of the California laws that prevent new reactors
until the Federal Government has made decisions about waste
disposal.   It is a scandal that our most populous state
generates 80α% of its electricity from oil.

	We have the necessary information to decide on the
compromises between prosperity and environment required to
convert plants from oil to coal.  We lack only the willingness
to admit that compromise is needed and make decisions.

	We need a breeder reactor development program that
will catch up with the French, British and Russians.  This
is required to avoid a uranium supply problem and to make
use of the enormous reserves of U238 left over from our
nuclear weapons programs.
We need parallel projects to develop alternative reactors
in order to be sure that the best choice will be available.

	2. We must develop our domestic oil resources through
intensified exploration and in methods for getting more of the
oil out of present fields by steam injection, etc.
The fear that someone will make some money is leading
regulators to prevent adoption
of expensive but necessary methods.
However, we must understand that this is only buying time till
we develop longer term sources of supply of fuel for vehicles.

	3. We must encourage production of natural gas by removing
the remaining price disincentives and by exploring the possibility
of deep geopressurized methane.

	4. Even with all incentives, our oil and gas resources
will probably run out in this century and maybe sooner.  In spite
of years of research, no-one can be sure.  Therefore, we must
quickly develop synthetic oil from coal and oil shale.  The South
Africans plan to meet half their oil requirements from coal by
1983 using an American process.  We must plan to meet half our
oil requirements with synthetic oil by 1990.
We should pursue in parallel several oil-from-goal approaches
and both surface and in situ oil shale.

	5. The Government must promptly reach a good compromise between
environmental and economic considerations that will enable
industry to start building plants without further delays.
Information is available to reach this compromise within a deadline
of one year including time required for legislation.
Once we have made the compromise, we must stick to it.

	6. We need a vigorous research program to explore all
reasonable ways of generating energy and conserving it.
Scientists tell us that the increased amount of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere resulting from increased burning of coal and
oil may eventually harm the climate.  In case this turns out to
be true we must explore energy sources that don't involve burning
carbon like electric powered cars and trucks and the use of hydrogen
in place of natural gas and even for vehicles.

	Solar energy may eventually pay off and so may nuclear
fusion.  We should increase our research investment in these
technologies, but we should recognize that many of today's
"demonstration projects" involve designs that can never be
cost-effective.

	Our energy development has been blocked by controversies
over the proper role of Government.  We believe that Government
should let industry do the job without excessive control and
regulation, but it is even more important
goals be set and that the job be done.  To that end, advocates
of different levels of Government involvement must compromise
their differences.

	Important conservation measures have been already taken
by industry, government and consumers.  More can and will be done.
However, there has been an almost total stagnation in efforts
to overcome the obstacles to production, and this is the task
to which the new administration must devote its efforts.