Alternative fuel ideas are being batted around throughout the United States and the rest of the world that is dependent upon fossil fuels.  The exception to that statement is that there are a few countries – mainly in the Middle East – that are sitting pretty atop most of the oil being produced.

The state of Pennsylvania has created a $5.3 million annual grant program to help accelerate the production and use of biofuels. The biofuels would be produced in the state and diminish the use of and dependence upon foreign oil.

“Pennsylvania’s alternative energy industry continues to grow through the development and deployment of a new generation of power sources and fuels and smart energy policies,” said acting Environmental Protection Secretary John Hanger about Pennsylvania’s Alternative Fuels Incentive Grant Program. “Alternative fuels made from Pennsylvania’s crops are cleaner and invest millions of dollars into our economy by supporting our rural, agriculture-based communities.”

Since July, developers of fuel in Pennsylvania are required to put a percentage of ethanol or biodiesel into every gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel, respectively.  The governor of Pennsylvania, Ed. Rendell, put the legislation in force to encourage production of alternative fuels in the state.  The legislation allows for up to 10% of ethanol every gallon of gasoline and 20% of biodiesel in every gallon of diesel fuel.
 
The legislation which is called the Alternative Fuels Incentive Grant Program, will give 75 cents per gallon to eligible applicants, with a cap of $1.9 million annually per single producer. Up to $5.3 million annually will be available under the program through fiscal year 2010-2011.

Eligibility for the monthly incentives for producing alternative fuel, is dependent on applicants  producing and selling 25,000 gallons or more per month of qualified biomass-based diesel in Pennsylvania for transportation or home heating purposes.

Applications are available from DEP and will initially cover reimbursement requests for biodiesel produced and sold in Pennsylvania from July 1 through Sept. 30.  Applications must be postmarked or received by Nov. 14.   You can find information at www.depwe.state.pa.us, keyword: Alternative Fuels.

It’s no secret.  We’re in a fuel crunch reminiscent of the 1970’s.  The difference is that since we didn’t do some of the things to follow up after the 70’s and 80’s, the crunch is bigger and there are many more cars and other vehicles involved.  To top that, since we are in the midst of just about the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, the fuel situation is simply one of the critical issues we are facing.

Lawmakers and automakers have begun talking about how working together might help everyone and everything out of the entire mess.  It is essential that since the country did not take the warnings of the 70’s and 80’s seriously and begin to make changes, the time to make those changes is now.

People cannot afford fuel at current prices.  In addition, the United States uses 25% of the world’s fuel, but only controls about 3%, not a good combination.  The environment is also being affected by fossil fuels and autoworkers are losing jobs because all of a sudden, there is no fuel for gas-guzzling SUV’s so nobody is buying.  It’s like dominos, or, as the President said recently, “a house of cards.”

What if the lawmakers in their power to help bail everybody else out – including other countries (even ones who have attacked this country) started really helping the automakers make the changes necessary to control the fuel crisis?  For instance, subsidies or tax incentives for producing hybrids and other cars that are more fuel efficient and do not depend on fossil fuels to run, could help failing automakers stay in business.  This help could also keep thousands of autoworkers from losing jobs and possibly create thousands of additional jobs, strengthening the economy.

At the other end of the spectrum, creating incentives and making it easier for individuals to get car loans with lower interest rates (without being careless or ridiculous), would help wean people out of their fossil fuel cars and into alternatives that would be good for the environment and the economy, as well as the fuel crisis.  Helping people convert cars to be able to use ethanol if possible could also be another way to approach the situation.

These are but a few small ideas from a few individuals among the millions who are hurting from the fuel crisis and the economic crisis we are all currently dealing with.  Maybe they would be workable ideas.  Maybe not.  But working together to save jobs, put money into the economy, find and use alternatives for fossil fuel and help the environment at the same time can’t be all bad.

Recently there have been reports about various projects working to turn otherwise unusable products into energy sources.  Many of the reports have involved one or two companies who are working on ways to do this overseas with promising results.

There is now a report out regarding a U.S. company that is using municipal solid waste to convert to fuel.  Sustainable Power Corporation, located in Baytown, Texas has announced that it tested Municipal Solid Waste in its reactors and the results have been excellent.  The company was able to produce biofuels by using this process, and achieved an added bonus.  They exceeded their projections as to what they would be able to accomplish by the process they are using.  The process also exceeded the results that the company had achieved when using other sources of fuel.

There were three trial studies performed, with a yield of over 19 pounds of biofuels produced for every 25 pounds of waste used.  This is an exceptional yield, leaving very little waste compared to other methods of fuel production.

There is a truly innovative and exciting benefit to what Sustainable Power Corporation has achieved.  The three-fold benefit is that in this one type of fuel production will help alleviate the petroleum shortage, create sustainable and environmentally friendly fuel and manage waste products by using them for fuel rather than adding to existing landfills or other waste depositories.  Another plus for the company and all involved is that instead of the company having to pay for fuel stocks, they can receive waste, possibly being paid to collect it, and drive the prices of fuel downward instead of upward, since waste should always be plentiful.

This is an exciting development in the race to find viable, affordable, environmentally friendly, renewable fuels to replace dependence on fossil fuels.  Because of its ability to help in all these areas, development of ways to turn waste into energy could truly be a big part of the long-term energy solution.

This is a good question that has been asked in the 80’s during the last major fuel crisis, and is being asked in some places in the country now, during the current fuel crisis.  So what ever happened to the movement toward CNG as a good alternative to the usual gasoline?

Another good question.  During the 80’s, CNG was an idea whose time had come.  It began being used in many municipalities throughout the country to power mass transit vehicles, such as buses, as well as government employee vehicles and vehicles for many organizations throughout the country. 

At that time there was a push toward using CNG and there were fuel stations that began carrying CNG.  Automakers were beginning to create the double tanks needed to carry enough fuel to help cars travel long enough distances to make it worth their while. 

Once the fuel crisis of the 80’s ended and the hysteria died down, so did the interest in building the CNG supply.   Where there were once ideas regarding how to create more filling stations and how to make it feasible for even private individuals to have CNG tanks, there was simply no activity.  It was as though this was just forgotten.

Some municipalities continued to use CNG and still use it today for many of their vehicles.  Some continued to quietly develop CNG and look for the ways and means of distributing and using it.  As a result, there is still an interest in CNG as an alternative fuel.

With fuel prices topping $4 per gallon, which is much higher than it cost during the 1980’s and much higher than the $1.50 per gallon for CNG, interest is building continually.  Many of the ideas and plans being put forth for alternative fuels today include CNG.  It is readily available.  It burns clean.  It is cost effective.  It diminishes foreign oil dependence.  It eliminates the need for at least a portion of fossil fuels.

With all of these positives, even with the obstacles, CNG may be worth a second look.

The fuel crisis is out of control.  We are hearing all sorts of theories about what needs to be done to fix it.  One minute we hear that we need alternative energy sources.  Then we hear that there is plenty of fuel right now.  Then we hear that there is a need for more drilling.  And we keep hearing that one.

Drilling may be part of the solution to the problem, but is it enough?  Some people are saying that it is. 

We are being told that drilling would be enough if it was done smartly and efficiently.  We are also being told that with the right agreements with the right countries, the United States and other countries would not be dependent upon oil that is being held hostage by countries who would benefit from seeing prices continue to rise worldwide and seeing the “free word” have to scramble for oil.

The solution, some say, is to drill more ourselves.  Perhaps that is true, but it will take time to find out.  For instance, it is important that tests be done in advance of drilling.  With many of the computer programs and models available today, “virtual drilling” on a computer program is possible.  Not only are these programs able to pinpoint where oil is thought to be available, but also to determine how far under the ground it is and what type of drilling is needed to gain access to it.  These programs can also tell researchers the best way to approach the drill is and what the approximate results would be. 

Even with all this information, there are questions as to whether drilling will be enough.  Can the oil be processed fast enough to be converted to fuel?  Can it be marketed fast enough to avert a further shortage or market collapse?  Can all this be done in a way that is financially prudent?

These are questions that are still being researched and will need to be answered.  In the meantime, we are already in the middle of a fuel and economic crunch now. 

It is important to look at all the options available.  Drilling is one of them.  Time will tell if drilling will be enough to stop the crisis.  Additional drilling might be enough to at least help. 

We are being told by Congress, the news, the President, politicians, the oil companies and others that there are solutions to the fuel crisis.  However, every entity has a different opinion as to what the most appropriate solutions are.

There are ideas about alternative fuel, alternative energy, traditional fuel, fossil fuels, solar power, hydrogen power, water power and more. 

All of these seem to have their place and it seems as though, since the world is in such a crunch for energy, there might just be a place for most types of energy to keep the world running.

Since all of the various energy sources are available – some in more limited quantities than others – why not do what we can to use them all in the most efficient ways possible? 

Wind power can provide for the energy needs that electricity provides for.  Solar power can create electric energy plus energy to run cars and fill other energy needs.  Hydrogen and water can run vehicles and they can provide for other energy needs, as well. 

There is water power – hydro-electricity, which has been around for decades.  There is also nuclear power – which is often a “nasty” word, but in times like these even some of the ideas we don’t like become less distasteful if we can find positive uses for them – especially in saving the planet, creating energy and saving money, not to mention, making the country “fuel independent.”

When we look at all the types of fuel available, it is good to know that there are choices, alternatives and combinations of energy that we can use to address the energy needs now and in the future.

There are a host of solutions proposed for the fuel crisis depending upon who you are.  If you are congress, drilling is an issue on the table.  In fact, there is a lot of talk about Congress and offshore drilling, as well as the idea to drill in the Alaskan and Arctic wilderness.  There is a lot of reaction to that one, much of it quite negative.

Another solution that has been proposed is that of converting individual’ cars into hydrogen based and hydrogen run vehicles, thus eliminating the need for and dependence upon fossil fuels, and eliminating pollution, helping the environment and helping the ecosystems.  The barrier at this point is that the conversion of cars can be costly, and may not save as much money in gas – at least for the first few years – as the conversion costs.

This is much the same as electric or solar powered cars.  People talk about this regularly and would be willing to five it a try if there was not an extremely high initial cost.  There are various estimates as to what the actual cost would be to do the conversions, however, most of them differ.  Many of them run in the thousands of dollars, averaging at around $3,000. 

These are all good ideas and can be workable over time, however, in an economy that is already strained, it would be hard for most people to make the changes to their vehicles (or buy vehicles) that would eliminate the need for fossil fuels.  There have been ideas promoted that involve incentives for consumers that would make that step and create the conversion in their cars.

Whatever lawmakers and citizens decide upon, it is evident that fuel is in short supply, it is expensive and changes will need to be made.  Hopefully there will be some reasonable ways to enlist the solutions to this problem soon.

With the fuel crisis looming large and causing problems and disruptions in families, businesses and industries around the world, there are many questions floating in the air.  Many questions are being asked about whether we will be able to turn the situation around.

Some experts say that it can turn around, but it will take a few years.  Others say that things can be better, but not totally turned around without an infusion of money, drilling and more.  Still other experts say that the situation can be turned around only if we approach things in a totally different way, not looking to fossil fuels to save us, but looking for viable, effective and efficient alternatives that are environmentally friendly, affordable and will actually work.

As if we don’t have enough to think of and deal with, the question has repeatedly been raised about what might happen to natural gas.  Yet more experts are talking about types of alternative fuels, with the main possibilities being natural gas, coal and nuclear energy.  As with anything in life, each of these energy sources has  a number of advantages along with some problems.

Environmentalists and conservationists are encouraging as much solar and wind power as possible, however, it would take more of those types of power than is possible from those sources to be able to supply the massive amounts of power needed to maintain power demand of cities, counties, states and the majority of the country.

So what is the problem and the worry with natural gas?  It would actually be an ideal fuel for many situations, except for the fact that it is also non-renewable, meaning that once it is gone, it is gone.  The great part about natural gas is that it is versatile and it is used in making everything from plastics and chemicals to fertilizers, and even to manufacturer and process hydrogen – a fuel source that many countries are looking at as an alternative to gasoline.

Natural gas burns cleaner than fossil fuels, however, it is hard to transport and extremely explosive – often responsible for catastrophic explosions that took days, weeks or months to contain.  One more point in favor of using natural gas is that 95% of the natural gas that the U.S. uses is gathered from right here in the U.S.  One of the problems, as mentioned earlier, is that natural gas will eventually run out, most likely sooner than we think (just as this fuel crisis has shown), and we need to find a fuel that will be sustainable and renewable.

There are sill many questions to be asked and ideas to be explored to solve the fuel crisis for the long term.  In the meantime, we can all do our part to conserve the fuel that we do have now and deal with sensible alternatives today and for the future.