« U.S. Equipment Market: Steady Sales and Constant Prices | Main | Specializing in Everything »

Is Our Infrastructure Prepared for Alternative Energy?

February 10, 2008  |  from From the Top

We all recognize that we must reduce the carbon in the atmosphere now if we are to survive in the future.  We all recognize that we must minimize our dependence on foreign oil.  We all recognize that in order to improve the quality of life, we must look at alternative energies and we must do so now.  But alternative energies proposals have consequences and those consequences must be fully evaluated before committing to any one alternative energy solution.  There are multiple barriers to execution that must be examined before any one or multiple solutions can be determined. The fact is that the infrastructure required to meet our future energy needs may not be sufficient whether we continue on the same path or alternative paths. 

For instance, while it is now agreed that there are proven oil reserves in the ground, the problem of the future is not below ground, but above ground.  The new supplies are far away from the demand centers.  There are access issues.  The infrastructure required to move the raw materials from future reserves is currently not in place. Infrastructure cannot expand without new investment. Given that industry looks at energy investments at 50-100 years, it is not as simple as stating we have enough reserves for future needs. 

It is not just the infrastructure for new oil reserves that is at stake.  The infrastructure system to carry alternative fuels is also not yet in place.  Currently at debate is whether the U.S. has the infrastructure capacity to carry alternative fuels.  Take cellulous-based alternative fuels as an example.  How does one transport the feedstock to the production center?  How do you get the production plant output to the pump?  Do we know whether the reactive nature of future alternative fuels will be compatible with today’s pipeline material? We simply have a huge logistical issue facing us even if we decide on an alternative fuel source that appears to be a long term solution.

To make the matter more complex, it’s not just merely the physical infrastructure that is of concern, but also the workforce infrastructure. How do we replenish the skilled workforce needed to devise solutions to the alternative energy crisis?  Where do we find the skilled labor to build the alternative energy structures once designed?  If we do not have the sufficient workforce in place, then efficiency has to be increased through increased productivity of the workforce. This requires additional research relative to newer automation techniques, advanced networking and advanced control systems.  We face serious shortages in both of these areas.  There must be an investment in not only physical infrastructure but in human capital infrastructure.

I have written previously about the importance of life cycle analysis and its importance.  However, I cannot stress enough the importance of life cycle analysis when it comes to alternative energy.  Multiple studies, including recent studies from McKenzie, highlight the complexities of life cycle considerations in the choices of alternative energies. We must be careful not to lock ourselves into a technology that is least costly today without consideration of the future consequences on both the environment and social behavior. 

Consider that a few years ago it appeared that the production of ethanol-based fuel from corn might be the answer to some of our energy problems. However, given additional research and pilot projects, we now realize that there may be long-term environmental impacts and social questions with regard to food versus fuel and the price of farmland and its future use.  The social integration is simply more complex than we may have realized and cannot be solved easily. 

Other energy efficient savings of today may in fact pose a future cost and environmental problem in the future.  For example, the mercury in the long-life light bulbs--it is not a problem now, but will become so in a decade when we attempt to recycle these bulbs. 

The questions engineers need to address regarding new technologies are multi-fold: What will be the means to assess the benefits of alternative energies as well as their adverse impacts?  How do we best inform the public of the options before them and stimulate interest in funding including investment in R&D dollars? 

We as engineers build infrastructure to protect the wealth safety and welfare of the public.  However, it is not merely our transportation infrastructure that is failing-it is also our energy infrastructure.  We must act now if we are to design the energy infrastructure of the future. We must become 21st Century Engineers and recognize the social, economic and human dimensions of sustainable energy.  We must begin to think in new ways and out of the box and frame our solutions with multi-disciplinary teams and integrated research if we are to prepare our nation’s future infrastructure to be ready for the alternative energies that are needed today.  

Filed: Green-Construction