Alternative energy isn't the problem

This week, a friend of mine who is a good guy and a respected member of our community, passed along a social media rant from an organization named, “Voice of the Majority” (VOM). It was one of those deals that hits our mailbox along with 40 other things, and it reads well enough on the first pass that we share it with our contemporaries. We don’t fact-check every line of every paragraph, nor are we expected to do so. We hit the share button, and 98% of the time it’s ok, but every now and then a turkey slips through.

While reading my friend’s post, I noticed one area I knew was inaccurate, so I began to question the entire piece. I attempted to do a bit of research on VOM and didn’t find much. They refer to themselves as a non-profit organization, have what appears to be a well-executed YouTube channel, and actively promote a conservative social media site named “Gab.” Beyond that, I was unable to find a proper “dot-com” site, a mailing address, or anything that would allow me to confirm their non-profit status.

The piece in question was a reasonably well-written diatribe against government promotion of electric autos. The article, which was in the neighborhood of 500 to 750 words, outlined hidden costs that are not considered in the industry’s claims of energy savings. It also touched on an area that I don’t think receives nearly enough attention, which is the additional strain that widespread electric vehicle use would put on an already antiquated and vulnerable power grid.

It has been my opinion that when we were tossing around trillions of dollars like loose change, it would have been nice if some of that had gone to harden our nationwide electrical infrastructure. We could have backed up several of the massive transformers (that are no longer made in the USA) and in the process, perhaps address the grid’s inability to deliver the amperage needed to charge electric vehicles in residential markets. On those topics, the piece seemed accurate; unashamedly biased, but accurate.

The piece also included the perennial reminder that the majority of electricity for zero-emission electric autos comes from those dirty, stinky, fossil fuels. That was a valid reminder the first hundred or so times I read it, and the photos of electric vehicles being charged by diesel generators are always good for a chuckle, but it’s not a secret anymore folks. We get it. That horse is dead.

The portion of the piece that grabbed my attention was the writer’s claim that no provisions had been made to tax electric vehicles in a way that would replace the highway funds provided by the gas tax. My parents taught me that it’s not nice to correct people, and I sincerely hope that my friend who forwarded the message knows that I wasn’t correcting him, but I couldn’t help myself.

Ten years ago, our state and many others, plugged that hole with a $75 alternative fuels tax paid on the annual renewal of a car’s registration. That goes for cars powered by electricity, hydrogen, natural gas, french fry oil, and anything else that can fuel a vehicle. That was ten years ago, but VOM is sounding an alarm in all capital letters today. In all fairness, VOM makes a reference to Canadian energy policies later in the piece, and perhaps Canada has not yet made similar allowances, but the article was concluded with, “Wake up North America.” We are part of North America, and in Nebraska, we have most certainly anticipated and addressed (for now) the potential loss of highway funds.I can even take it a step further. The $75 dollar registration fee is a flat tax. It would be the same for an eighteen-wheeler as for the Prius that your herbalist drives. It’s not a concern now, but by the end of this decade, I can see that becoming a point of contention. Folks who drive residential electrics, as well as those who drive legacy diesel trucks, will rightly cry foul. Well, folks, a plan for that is in the works for that eventuality, and you aren’t going to like it. Big Brother has already taken significant steps to track everyone’s odometers. I caught the first glimpse of mileage tracking during my time in the Insurance business, but have you seen those ads for Carfax and similar services? Do you ever wonder how they can tell you so much by simply providing a Vehicle Identification Number? Have you called a mechanic who requests your VIN, or even a license plate number before they will discuss repairs with you? Our government signaled that the honor system wasn’t working for them when they imposed a $600 reporting threshold on our banks. Well, now they have our car’s data too. Orwell would be impressed.

The reason I wanted to share this with you today (aside from my embarrassment for correcting the post of a friend) is that many of us are conflating the potential value of developing technologies with the premature market manipulations of our Federal Government. Those are two entirely different animals, but too often, I see the frustrations with lawmakers spill over into a criticism of energy alternatives, and that doesn’t benefit anyone. That doesn’t move the conversation forward.

This is not to say that I don’t share those concerns. I do. In many instances, overreaching policies are the enemy of innovation. During my lifetime, I watched trade unions destroy our auto industry, and I get an eerie sense of déjà vu as I watch our oil industry suffer a similar fate. I’m told that within the oil industry there is a general consensus that no more oil refineries will be built on U.S. soil. We are witnessing the destruction of a resource long before we have the capacity to replace it, and if you want to know who is angry about that, count me in.

The technology, however, is very cool. Even my friends who are muscle car devotees are salivating over the acceleration rate of the new Tesla offerings. With Luxury badges like Bently, Lotus, Cadillac, Lagonda, and Maserati jumping into the electric game, there seems to be a demand for the product that doesn’t rely on government subsidies. It’s also becoming a greenfield opportunity for startups and new joint ventures. Look for new names to emerge, like Genesis, Byton, Canoo, Faraday, and Polstar. There’s also a car in the works from Honda that will be branded with the venerable consumer electronics icon, “Sony.”

With all of this innovation taking place outside the legacy auto world, I am also reminded of the highly competitive, early days of the piston automobile with brands like Hudson, DeSoto, Kaiser, Checker, Nash, Packard, and Studebaker. Some of the brands went bust and were relegated to history, while others were merged with competing manufacturers. It’s the kind of a competitive environment that free markets do well. With electrics, the subsidies might give the industry a kickstart, but public demand always wins in the end.

While battery-powered automobiles get most of the attention, strides are being made in solar autos as well. A Dutch company, Lightyear, has developed a car that runs and recharges on a solar-paneled roof. It boasts a range of 388 miles when charged, but even that includes the equivalent of 44 miles worth of energy harnessed en route and only applies to daytime driving. At best, it’s a cool toy, but at more than $250K, it’s not yet a toy for everyone.

Efforts are being made in aviation as well. The challenge with any aircraft is the power-to-weight ratio, and batteries are heavy. The engineering required to reduce weight and maximize power for electric flight has challenged the aviation industry since they first started experimenting with electric power in dirigibles at the beginning of the last century. Since then, the motor hasn’t changed much, but battery technologies and light, strong composites have. Designers are hard at work, dusting off previous unsuccessful designs and applying new materials

Earlier this month, an aircraft manufacturer named “Beta,” (not to be confused with “Meta”) announced the completion of a 2,200 kilometer (a bit over 1,300 miles) trip in a dual-motor, single prop electric plane. Once past the headline, we learn that they covered that ground in seven hops. In truth, they are only getting a bit over 200 miles per charge. For comparison, the range of a base model Cessna 172 is over 700 miles, so they still have some work to do.

The future is bright. Technology is full of promise, and a free market will reward innovators if we can force ourselves to stand out of the way. Let’s be careful not to blame truly fascinating technological developments for the brutish, short-sighted market manipulations we’re seeing today. It can only confuse disengaged citizens and adds nothing to a constructive conversation.