I work for a natural gas company. We have studied all these alternatives. Once several years ago, we drilled into the Birmingham landfill, tapped the natural gas from it and piped it into Birmingham. It was only 5 psi coming out of the ground, but usable. It played out about 5 years later. We have studied replacing natural gas in pipelines with hydrogen gas. It would work, but hydrogen doesn't burn with color. You can't see it burn, so, every burner tip would have to have a steel wool plate installed to glow red to show it is burning. We have a seaweed that grows 6' per day. It can be grown in bays and in shallow offshore underwater farms. It can be harvested and put in a methane digester and can make natural gas using bacteria like the manure. We have lots of alternatives, and we will use them when it is cost effective. That is the capitalist system. Any alternative fuel will eventually come on line when the cost of existing fossil fuels catches up and/or the cost of the alternative comes down. Oil in the 20th century replaced coal of the 19th century which replaced firewood of the 18th century and before. I predict if liberals don't interfere, that eventually nuclear, wind, and solar will overtake coal for power production, but it will be 50-100 years from now. I also predict that manure derived natural gas or natural gas hydrogen blend will replace the existing natural gas in 50-100 years. Not right now. Oil will be the first fossil fuel to go out, and I predict algae oil will replace this, again in 50-100 years. If the government would just let capitalism follow its normal course and stay out of the way, alternatives will come on line.
The reason we will not get away from oil and natural gas is two fold.
1) The trillions of dollars worth of pipelines and mains that have been installed the last 150 years. (infrastructure)
2) Synthetic alternatives can be used in this infrastructure.
The reason wind power isn't coming on line as fast, is the power transmission lines are not there to transmit the power from the plains states east and west to were the people are. It will take years to install. They were going to install windmills off Cape Cod and the people of Mass voted against it, so they are importing fuel oil to operate a new fuel oil powered generating plant. Hmmm. Same in Delaware. Delaware could have had enough windmills installed to power the whole state, and it was voted down.
Nuclear power is being held up, not so much for safety reasons, but the EPA.
Natural gas fracking of rock over 8,000' is being held up by the EPA for a few minor problems. Also, pipelines in Alaska to bring the natural gas back to the lower 48 are being held up by EPA. (natural gas operates under pressure and is not a liquid, just the gas has to be warmed occationally to keep the equipment from icing and this might damage the permafrost?)
Coal will become more expensive as they have to scrub it and filter it so it doesn't pollute the air. The also want to trap the carbon underground.
Environmental wackos are keeping new supplies of oil and gas from being produced within our own country AND they are voting against windmills to replace old coal or fuel oil power plants.
Right now 1/3 of our natural gas in Alabama is used to produce electricity in the summertime to handle air condition peek demand. 20-25% is nuclear powered. About 50% is coal fired year round. Only about 10% is hydropower.
Ok liberals where are the cost effective alternatives? And why are you against alternatives that are available yet vote against them?
New homes built today use about 1/3 less natural gas than 30-40 years ago, and older homes have put in new equipment. A natural gas furnace made in the mid 1970's got about 60-65% efficiency. The worst furnace today is 80%, will you can get as high as 97%. A tankless natural gas water heater uses half the gas of a tank type. Pilotless ovens and cooktops use about 10% less gas, just because they eliminated the standing pilot lights.
There is only so far cost effective efficiency can go, then you have to produce more fuel.
