Consumer Energy Report is now Energy Trends Insider -- Read More »

By Robert Rapier on Jan 5, 2008 with 1 response

Update on Book Publication

Nate Hagens at The Oil Drum just wrote a review of a paper by Professor Charles Hall, who like Nate and myself also contributed a chapter to the renewable energy book that will be published later in the year. Many have written to ask about the book, and I haven’t said anything, as I wasn’t sure how much was public information. Nate made most of it public in his post:

At $100 Oil – What Can the Scientist Say to the Investor?

Nate wrote:

This paper, along with 16 others (including 2 by contributors), will be part of an upcoming book edited by Professor David Pimentel, “Renewable Energy Systems: Environmental and Energetic Issues“. (I’ll provide links when published). The paper by Professor Hall et al. is a thoughtful preliminary treatise on the impact that projected lower net energy for petroleum might have on the economy and investments.

So, there you have the title and publisher. Later on, Nate lists the Table of Contents:


Authors and Titles of Chapters

1) David Pimentel, College of Agriculture, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York: RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS; BENEFITS AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS
2) Tad Patzek, College of Engineering, University of California (Berkeley): CAN THE EARTH DELIVER THE BIOMASS-FOR-FUEL WE DEMAND?
3) David Swenson, Department of Economics, Iowa State University: A REVIEW OF THE ECONOMIC RISKS AND REWARDS OF ETHANOL PRODUCTION
4) Doug Koplow, Earth Track, Inc., Cambridge, MA and Ronald Steenblik, Research Director, Global Subsidies Initiative International Institute for Sustainable Development, Geneva: SUBSIDIES FOR ETHANOL PRODUCTION IN THE UNITED STATES
5) Charles Hall, Department of Environmental and Forest Biology, College of Forestry and Environmental Science, State University of New York, Syracuse, NY: PEAK OIL, EROI, INVESTMENTS AND THE ECONOMY IN AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE
6) Andrew Ferguson, Optimum Population Trust, Manchester, England: WIND POWER: BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS
7) Robert Rapier, [RR comment: affiliation deleted], Aberdeen, Scotland: RENEWABLE DIESEL
8) Mario Giampietro, International Nutrition Institute, Rome, Italy, K. Mayumi, Tokushima University, Japan: COMPLEX SYSTEM THINKING IN RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS
9) Marcelo E. Dias de Oliveira, The Brazilian Alcohol Programme, Brazil: SUGARCANE AND ETHANOL PRODUCTION AND CARBON DIOXIDE BALANCES
11) Edwin Kessler, Department of Meteorology, University of Oklahoma, Norman: OUR FOOD AND FUEL FUTURE
12) Nathan Hagens, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, Kenneth Mulder, Green Mountain college: A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY: NET ENERGY, LIEBIGS LAW AND MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS
13) Robert M. Boddey, Embrapa-Agrobiologia, Rio de Janeiro, BR: ETHANOL PRODUCTION IN BRAZIL
14) Roger Samson, Resource Efficient Agricultural Production Canada (REAP-Canada): CELLULOSICS FOR THERMAL ENERGY
15) Maurizio Paoletti, Department of Biology, University of Padova, Italy, Tiziano Gomiero, (please provide affiliation and location): ORGANIC AGRICULTURE AND ENERGY CONSERVATION
16) Sergio Ulgiati, Department of Chemistry, Sienna University, Italy: BIODIESEL PRODUCTION IN ITALY: BENEFITS AND COSTS
17) Kenan Unlu, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA: CURRENT RESEARCH ON NUCLEAR ENERGY

I deleted my affiliation, because I have indicated I won’t publicly divulge that here. Nate did divulge it, which is fine as it is out in the public domain anyway. But I deleted it here, because as I have indicated before I don’t discuss the identity of my employer here.

I will provide another update when the book has actually been published, and will provide some extended excerpts from my paper. I think my paper was definitely balanced and objective (and easily readable even for someone who doesn’t know anything about these issues). In fact, Professor Pimentel thought I was too generous on several of my arguments, and was the person who pointed me to the toxicity issue that caused the Australian government to ban jatropha. Up to that point, I hadn’t really come up with anything negative on jatropha.

But in the paper I was pretty upbeat on 2nd generation renewable diesels, and first generation renewable diesels that can be produced at low cost by hobbyists. But I did clearly lay out pros and cons.

  1. By ian on January 6, 2011 at 8:22 am

    Very Briefly, The Venus Project is an organization that proposes a feasible plan of action for social change; one that works toward a peaceful and sustainable global civilization. It outlines an alternative to strive toward where human rights are not only paper proclamations but also a way of life.

    The Venus Project presents a vision not of what the future will be, but what it can be if we apply what we already know in order to achieve a sustainable new world civilization. It calls for a straightforward redesign of our culture in which the age-old problems of war, poverty, hunger, debt, and unnecessary human suffering are viewed not only as avoidable, but as totally unacceptable. Anything less will result in a continuation of the same catalog of problems found in today’s world.

    The Venus Project presents an alternative vision for a sustainable world civilization unlike any political, economic or social system that has gone before. It envisions a time in the near future when money, politics, self and national-interest have been phased out. Although this vision may seem idealistic, it is based upon years of study and experimental research. It spans the gambit from education, transportation, clean sources of energy to total city systems.

    Many people believe what is needed is a higher sense of ethical standards and the enactment of international laws and treaties to assure a sustainable global society. Even if the most ethical people in the world were elected to political office, without sufficient resources we would still have many of the same problems we have today. As long as a few nations control most of the world’s resources and profit is the bottom line, the same cycle of events will prevail.

    As global challenges and scientific information proliferate, nations and people face common threats that transcend national boundaries. Overpopulation, energy shortages, global warming, environmental pollution, water scarcity, economic catastrophe, the spread of uncontrollable disease, and the technological displacement of people by machines threaten each of us. Although many people are dedicated to alleviating those conditions, our social and environmental problems will remain insurmountable as long as a few powerful nations and financial interests maintain control of and consume most of the world’s resources and the monetary system prevails.

    If we really wish to put an end to our ongoing international and social problems, we must declare Earth and all of its resources the common heritage of all of the world’s people.

    Earth is abundant and has plentiful resources. Our practice of rationing resources through monetary control is no longer relevant and is counter-productive to our survival. Today we have highly advanced technologies, but our social and economic system has not kept up with our technological capabilities. We could easily create a world of abundance for all, free of servitude and debt based on the carrying capacity of Earth resources. With the intelligent and humane application of science and technology, the people of the earth can guide and shape the future together while protecting the environment. We don’t have enough money to accomplish these ends but we do have more than enough resources. This is why we advocate a Resource-Based Economy.

Register or log in now to save your comments and get priority moderation!