The New Chinese Threat
Posted by Moonage on 15 Jun 2005 | Tagged as: International Politics
A comment was made on The Motley Fool:
Very bright student and look forward to reading what he comes up with. Alot of ways to slice and dice it but PRC and a few other fast developers are the wild cards, no doubt about it.
To which my buddy KentM responds:
There is an "economic war" out there, with the opening salvos recently "fired". "How WE respond", especially in the area of economic competition for scarce commodities resources, will determine the "wither" of the USA survives as a global power, or not.
IMO, one of the initial responses is H.R. 6, Energy Policy Act of 2005. Otherwise known as:
- Arctic Coastal Plain Domestic Energy Security Act of 2005
- Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 2005
- Electric Reliability Act of 2005
- Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Commercial Application Act of 2005
- Enhanced Energy Infrastructure and Technology Tax Act of 2005
- Grand Canyon Hydrogen-Powered Transportation Demonstration Act of 2005
- John Rishel Geothermal Steam Act Amendments of 2005
- National Geological and Geophysical Data Preservation Program Act of 2005
- Price-Anderson Amendments Act of 2005
- Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005
- Set America Free Act of 2005
- Underground Storage Tank Compliance Act of 2005
- United States Refinery Revitalization Act of 2005
What this act is doing is totally updating every aspect of energy legislation. Never before in the history of the US that I am aware of has there been such a total restructuring of the energy issues within the US. Along with tabling Kyoto and changing the EPA, this administration is telling the world right now that we’re taking the near future seriously. China may be ramping up their economy, but they’re still many years away from being an economic powerhouse that rivals the US. It is the responsibility of the US government to see that the US economy runs as efficiently as it can. Allowing dated and inefficient energy policies to continue to restrict the development of new energy technologies will only allow the Chinese to jump ahead of the US economically, but will continue to drive the US economy down as it continues to rely on fossil fuels for energy .If the US succeeds in adapting to more efficient energy supplies and relying less on the shrinking supplies in the Middle East, then China will not have to be perceived as an economic threat. Just because the average Chinese citizen does well does not mean the average US citizen can succeed as well. This is not an "us versus them" situation. It’s a purely US situation where we have to assure that we are doing what’s best for our children.
5 Comments »
on 15 Jun 2005 at 12:06 pm 1.Bryan Kerwick
said …
The one missing ingredient in this Energy Bill is Hydrogen fuel. BMW already has an engine that runs at 200 MPH. The Enviromentalists should love this idea since the by products are the dreeaded combination of oxygen and water. Even they can’t bitch about that. Hydrogen is a fuel we would never run out of and it is cleaner than nuclear energy.
As far as China investing in the US is concerned, this is a very good thing. We should encourage it as best we can. Remember the first thing this country does when serious sanctions are required is to freeze assets in this country. For arguments sake, if China invested in the US on the scale of Japan for instance, that would be 700 Billion in Treasury notes. Not a bad negotiating tool to tell the Chinese they just lost 700 Billion until they straighten up and fly right.
I don’t know what jackass taught economics to these people but they should forget what they learned and get a real education on global economic policies before making such outlandish statements.
By the way, ever notice how democracy always follows capitolism? People with money don’t like welfare states such as communism or socialism. They work hard for what they get and really don’t like the government taking it away to redistribute it.
The Chinese see these things quite clearly and do not want to rock the boat. They especially want North Korea to quit making trouble in the region because the next logical step for America is to make South Korea, Taiwan and Japan nuclear as well. Think China wants any part of that? China is no threat economically or militarily because her people are no longer miserably poor and have far too much to loose.
on 15 Jun 2005 at 1:02 pm 2.Moonage
said …
Hydrogen’s not missing. It’s getting a huge boost:
H.R.6
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)
SEC. 651. HYDROGEN PRODUCTION PROGRAMS.
(a) Advanced Reactor Hydrogen Cogeneration Project-
(1) PROJECT ESTABLISHMENT- The Secretary is directed to establish an Advanced Reactor Hydrogen Cogeneration Project.
(2) PROJECT DEFINITION- The project shall consist of the research, development, design, construction, and operation of a hydrogen production cogeneration research facility that, relative to the current commercial reactors, enhances safety features, reduces waste production, enhances thermal efficiencies, increases proliferation resistance, and has the potential for improved economics and physical security in reactor siting. This facility shall be constructed so as to enable research and development on advanced reactors of the type selected and on alternative approaches for reactor-based production of hydrogen.
and,
SEC. 802. PLAN.
Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a coordinated plan for the programs described in this title and any other programs of the Department that are directly related to fuel cells or hydrogen. The plan shall describe, at a minimum–
(1) the agenda for the next 5 years for the programs authorized under this title, including the agenda for each activity enumerated in section 803(a);
(2) the types of entities that will carry out the activities under this title and what role each entity is expected to play;
(3) the milestones that will be used to evaluate the programs for the next 5 years;
(4) the most significant technical and nontechnical hurdles that stand in the way of achieving the goals described in section 803(b), and how the programs will address those hurdles; and
(5) the policy assumptions that are implicit in the plan, including any assumptions that would affect the sources of hydrogen or the marketability of hydrogen-related products.
SEC. 803. PROGRAMS.
(a) Activities- The Secretary, in partnership with the private sector, shall conduct programs to address–
(1) production of hydrogen from diverse energy sources, including–
(A) fossil fuels, which may include carbon capture and sequestration;
(B) hydrogen-carrier fuels (including ethanol and methanol);
(C) renewable energy resources, including biomass; and
(D) nuclear energy;
(2) use of hydrogen for commercial, industrial, and residential electric power generation;
(3) safe delivery of hydrogen or hydrogen-carrier fuels, including–
(A) transmission by pipeline and other distribution methods; and
(B) convenient and economic refueling of vehicles either at central refueling stations or through distributed on-site generation;
(4) advanced vehicle technologies, including–
(A) engine and emission control systems;
(B) energy storage, electric propulsion, and hybrid systems;
(C) automotive materials; and
(D) other advanced vehicle technologies;
(5) storage of hydrogen or hydrogen-carrier fuels, including development of materials for safe and economic storage in gaseous, liquid, or solid form at refueling facilities and onboard vehicles;
(6) development of safe, durable, affordable, and efficient fuel cells, including fuel-flexible fuel cell power systems, improved manufacturing processes, high-temperature membranes, cost-effective fuel processing for natural gas, fuel cell stack and system reliability, low temperature operation, and cold start capability;
(7) development, after consultation with the private sector, of necessary codes and standards (including international codes and standards and voluntary consensus standards adopted in accordance with OMB Circular A-119) and safety practices for the production, distribution, storage, and use of hydrogen, hydrogen-carrier fuels, and related products;
(8) a public education program to develop improved knowledge and acceptability of hydrogen-based systems; and
(9) the ability of domestic automobile manufacturers to manufacture commercially available competitive hybrid vehicle technologies in the United States.
(b) Program Goals-
(1) VEHICLES- For vehicles, the goals of the program are–
(A) to enable a commitment by automakers no later than year 2015 to offer safe, affordable, and technically viable hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in the mass consumer market; and
(B) to enable production, delivery, and acceptance by consumers of model year 2020 hydrogen fuel cell and other hydrogen-powered vehicles that will have–
(i) a range of at least 300 miles;
(ii) improved performance and ease of driving;
(iii) safety and performance comparable to vehicle technologies in the market; and
(iv) when compared to light duty vehicles in model year 2003–
(I) fuel economy that is substantially higher;
(II) substantially lower emissions of air pollutants; and
(III) equivalent or improved vehicle fuel system crash integrity and occupant protection.
(2) HYDROGEN ENERGY AND ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE- For hydrogen energy and energy infrastructure, the goals of the program are to enable a commitment not later than 2015 that will lead to infrastructure by 2020 that will provide–
(A) safe and convenient refueling;
(B) improved overall efficiency;
(C) widespread availability of hydrogen from domestic energy sources through–
(i) production, with consideration of emissions levels;
(ii) delivery, including transmission by pipeline and other distribution methods for hydrogen; and
(iii) storage, including storage in surface transportation vehicles;
(D) hydrogen for fuel cells, internal combustion engines, and other energy conversion devices for portable, stationary, and transportation applications; and
(E) other technologies consistent with the Department’s plan.
(3) FUEL CELLS- The goals for fuel cells and their portable, stationary, and transportation applications are to enable–
(A) safe, economical, and environmentally sound hydrogen fuel cells;
(B) fuel cells for light duty and other vehicles; and
(C) other technologies consistent with the Department’s plan.
(c) Demonstration- In carrying out the programs under this section, the Secretary shall fund a limited number of demonstration projects, consistent with a determination of the maturity, cost-effectiveness, and environmental impacts of technologies supporting each project. In selecting projects under this subsection, the Secretary shall, to the extent practicable and in the public interest, select projects that–
(1) involve using hydrogen and related products at existing facilities or installations, such as existing office buildings, military bases, vehicle fleet centers, transit bus authorities, or units of the National Park System;
(2) depend on reliable power from hydrogen to carry out essential activities;
(3) lead to the replication of hydrogen technologies and draw such technologies into the marketplace;
(4) include vehicle, portable, and stationary demonstrations of fuel cell and hydrogen-based energy technologies;
(5) address the interdependency of demand for hydrogen fuel cell applications and hydrogen fuel infrastructure;
(6) raise awareness of hydrogen technology among the public;
(7) facilitate identification of an optimum technology among competing alternatives;
(8) address distributed generation using renewable sources; and
(9) address applications specific to rural or remote locations, including isolated villages and islands, the National Park System, and tribal entities.
The Secretary shall give preference to projects which address multiple elements contained in paragraphs (1) through (9).
(d) Deployment- In carrying out the programs under this section, the Secretary shall, in partnership with the private sector, conduct activities to facilitate the deployment of hydrogen energy and energy infrastructure, fuel cells, and advanced vehicle technologies.
(e) Funding-
(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall carry out the programs under this section using a competitive, merit-based review process and consistent with the generally applicable Federal laws and regulations governing awards of financial assistance, contracts, or other agreements.
(2) RESEARCH CENTERS- Activities under this section may be carried out by funding nationally recognized university-based or Federal laboratory research centers.
(f) Cost Sharing-
(1) RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT- Except as otherwise provided in this title, for research and development programs carried out under this title the Secretary shall require a commitment from non-Federal sources of at least 20 percent of the cost of the project. The Secretary may reduce or eliminate the non-Federal requirement under this paragraph if the Secretary determines that the research and development is of a basic or fundamental nature or involves technical analyses or educational activities.
(2) DEMONSTRATION AND COMMERCIAL APPLICATION- Except as otherwise provided in this title, the Secretary shall require at least 50 percent of the costs directly and specifically related to any demonstration or commercial application project under this title to be provided from non-Federal sources. The Secretary may reduce the non-Federal requirement under this paragraph if the Secretary determines that the reduction is necessary and appropriate considering the technological risks involved in the project and is necessary to meet the objectives of this title.
(3) CALCULATION OF AMOUNT- In calculating the amount of the non-Federal commitment under paragraph (1) or (2), the Secretary may include personnel, services, equipment, and other resources.
(4) SIZE OF NON-FEDERAL SHARE- The Secretary may consider the size of the non-Federal share in selecting projects.
(g) Disclosure- Section 623 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13293) relating to the protection of information shall apply to projects carried out through grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts under this title.
on 16 Jun 2005 at 12:21 am 3.--H
said …
So supposedly the future of the world is what is now known as the B-R-I-C (Brazil-Russia-India-China). It’s true that Russia, India and China are producing more engineers than the US (probably some kind of indicator of interest and advancement in science and technology) and on a total economic output basis, China - at the current rate - may exceed Japan in size in about 20-25 years and will level the US in 80-100 years (I read the study somewhere sometime ago, should be Google-able).
But it’s total output and not per-capita.
With 3+ billion people it’s not a surprise to me that China and India combined will be powerhouses in the future but with absolute size that huge, also comes as huge a responsibility. India is a more progressive country than China, yet it still has years to catch up developed country.
I totally agree with you that it’s not “us vs. them”, in fact, it will be better if “they prosper together with us” to create less potential problem in the future.
I read the post on the Fool you linked, as usual, the American hater who plays the role of a concerned Americans exaggerated the “competition” between us and China (just because it’s written by every so called medias that the Chinese are buying our debts). Some things never change.
on 18 Jun 2005 at 7:18 am 4.StormWarning
said …
In some circles, it is expected that China will be the next great power when it comes to outer space. Whether the concerns over weaponization of space are well-founded or not, the Chinese are coming/going to outer space.
China’s Space Program Driven by Military Ambitions
Initial projections had the Chinese launching a manned space craft in the second part of the first decade of the
millennium.
So it remains to be seen how China will play a role in the future of space exploration, or is it exploitation?
http://www.cnsa.gov.cn/main_e.asp
on 18 Jun 2005 at 1:58 pm 5.Moonage
said …
I agree the Chinese space initiative could be the next big challenge, but, I probably will discuss it in greater detail over on the Space blog.