Modern Transportation – A Miracle under Attack By Climate Zealots

Guest essay by Steve Goreham

Modern transportation is amazing. Each day, millions of people fly, drive, or are transported across our world for business, pleasure, or to see distant family members. These trips, which are powered by petroleum-based fuels, were all but impossible a century ago. But today, many of our leaders call for elimination of hydrocarbon-fueled transportation.

Between 1840 and 1860, more than 250,000 people traveled by wagon train from Independence, Missouri to the west coast on the Oregon Trail. Horses and oxen carried the settlers on this 2,000-mile, six-month journey. Disease, attacks by Native Americans, and run-overs by wagons claimed the lives of more than 15,000 travelers. Today, a family can make this same journey in a few days in the safety of their air-conditioned vehicle.

Throughout most of history, traded goods were carried by camel, wagon, and sailboat. Although world trade increased throughout most of human history, the value of global exports in 1900 was only about $10 billion in today’s dollars.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is World-Trade-Graph-1950-2015-Article-720x428.jpg

Since 1900, world merchandise trade skyrocketed to $19.7 trillion per year in 2018, a gain of almost 2,000 times. Each day, trucks, trains, ships, and planes transport more than 100 million tons of freight. Petroleum fuel powers more than 90 percent of this cargo.

Trains belching smoke typified early hydrocarbon-fueled transportation. But over the last 50 years, humanity has all but eliminated dangerous pollutants from vehicle exhaust. Environmental Protection Agency data shows that US vehicles now emit 99 percent less common pollutants (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and particles) than the vehicles of 1970.

The only remaining emissions from most engines are water vapor and carbon dioxide. But carbon dioxide (CO2), a harmless, odorless, invisible gas that people exhale and plants use in photosynthesis, has been demonized.

Last week, 200 celebrities attended a Google-sponsored climate change conference near Palermo on the island of Sicily in Italy. Movie stars, business executives, and royalty traveled by private jet, yacht, helicopter, and limousine to this exotic location to discuss how humans are destroying the climate.

Dozens of articles criticized the hypocrisy of the extravagant travel by these elites and the large release of CO2 emissions. But aviation fuel powers 99 percent of commercial air travel and almost all of the other vehicles, leaving no practical alternatives.

Zach Wichter declared that air travel is now “going electric” in a New York Times article last month. But the only example he could cite was a plan for an experimental hybrid aircraft to be deployed in Hawaii that burns aviation fuel as the primary propulsion with batteries as a backup.

Jet fuel has a specific energy of 43 megajoules per kilogram (MJ/kg). The best lithium-ion batteries deliver a specific energy of only about 0.9 MJ/kg. Electric engines are more efficient, but jet fuel engines still have an energy advantage of almost 20 times compared to batteries.

Gasoline- and diesel-powered automobiles are a modern miracle taken for granted. The average family of four can travel 400 miles in comfort on a $50 fill up. Internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles also hold a 20-times energy density advantage over batteries. This is energy available to power SUVs and small trucks, a growing share of demand in the US, China, and much of the world.

Plug-in battery vehicles suffer from the weaknesses of high cost, short driving range, small carrying capacity, a lack of charging stations, and expensive battery packs that must be replaced during the vehicle life. And who wants to wait 30 minutes for a recharge, even if one can find a charging station?

Yet governments now plan to force people to buy electric cars and even to ban traditional cars. Austria, Britain, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Scotland, and several other nations recently announced intentions to ban ICE vehicles during the next two decades. Battery electric vehicle sales are growing, but still captured only about 1.5 percent of world markets in 2018.

Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg announced that she will take a sailboat to the next world climate conference in Santiago, Chile in December 2019. Her decision not to take an aircraft may save CO2 emissions, but will turn a one-day trip into two weeks of travel each direction.

Electric utilities across the world are now required by laws to urge customers not to use electricity, the product which they produce. If climate fears continue, look for airlines and cruise ship companies to be required to urge consumers not to use their services as well.

As Cardinal George Pell of Australia remarked,

“Sometimes the very learned and clever can be brilliantly foolish, especially when seized by an apparently good cause.”


Originally published in WND. Republished here at request of the author.

Steve Goreham is a speaker on the environment, business, and public policy and author of the book Outside the Green Box: Rethinking Sustainable Development.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
112 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dr. Bob
August 12, 2019 7:33 am

There are many ways to “fix” traffic flow and they depend on where you are. When I worked in the Bay Area, one major oil company did much to improve traffic. They allowed massive flex hours, shorter work weeks (4 days per week or every other Friday off, etc), and they even installed WiFi in buses and allowed their employees to claim work time for transit time if they brought their laptop with them and used it. This was progressive, and done in the 1990’s, and done by an oil company.
Allowing liberal flex hours will help rush hour. But banning trucks from commute routes during rush hour would also help. I even think that banning busses from city streets would help traffic flow. Carpools do help, but it is difficult to get more than 2 people to work out a schedule. Thus the Berkeley mandate that I80 have a 3 person carpool was counterproductive. But typical of Berkeley.

Tom Abbott
August 12, 2019 7:41 am

Ice/electric hybrids would seem to be a good compromise, rather than banning ice vehicles all together. Hybrids would reduce the amout of fossil fuels burned and would elimnate the range problems that all-electric vehicles currently have.

But I guess fanatics are not prone to compromise.

Beta Blocker
August 12, 2019 8:00 am

The jet airliners Boeing builds in Washington State spread tens of thousands of tons of carbon dioxide around the planet every single day. Airliners of the kind Boeing currently manufactures cannot be allowed to fly in a world which fits the climate activist’s vision for the future.

And yet, no one in the press has asked either Governor Jay Inslee or Attorney General Bob Ferguson — both of them self-proclaimed climate activists — why they haven’t used the powers of their respective offices to force an end to the production of Boeing aircraft in their state.

Reply to  Beta Blocker
August 12, 2019 8:33 am

Perhaps the MSM have perused the “CO2 Coalition’s” output, and realized that CO2 is a net double benefit – good for the planet and good for convincing science illiterates to accept taxation increases!

rah
Reply to  Beta Blocker
August 12, 2019 12:13 pm

You know the answer to that question: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Bill Powers
August 12, 2019 8:27 am

“Greta Thunberg announced that she will take a sailboat to the next world climate conference in Santiago, Chile in December 2019. Her decision not to take an aircraft may save CO2 emissions…”

Considering there will be a plane flying to Santiago with a seat for sale she is not saving CO2 emissions but rather virtue signalling with a worldwide Propaganda Press Megaphone.

Its telling that the money’d elite with their private planes and Luxury yachts can mute the megaphone when they exercise their wealth to create a carbon footprint larger than a third world country flying to luxurious conferences to compose their lectures to the rest of us, which will be broadcast maximum megaphone volume since they control the dials.

John Tillman
Reply to  Bill Powers
August 14, 2019 1:22 pm

The sailboat most likely has an internal combustion engine.

ResourceGuy
August 12, 2019 9:53 am

I bought another V8 ICE to celebrate bad tech predictions and other serial policy mistakes.

Al Miller
August 12, 2019 11:47 am

Great article Steve! It is bang on the point. I see very clearly that the masses of people who would like to care about things but are too busy trying to get by are voting with their feet. And the winner of their votes is carbon based fuel by a massive landslide. Should politicians and other forces succeed in diminishing the lifestyle people are struggling to attain there WILL be a landslide of stupidity crushing protests that will make the Yellow Jackets look puny.

August 12, 2019 4:57 pm

Jet fuel has a specific energy of 43 megajoules per kilogram (MJ/kg). The best lithium-ion batteries deliver a specific energy of only about 0.9 MJ/kg.

It isn’t just the higher energy density of jet fuel: commercial aviation depends on aluminum, which takes 13 mWh to produce each metric ton. Before aluminum aircraft were made out of wood and doped canvas — hardly a structure I’d care to trust my life to. I haven’t worked it out, but I suspect that substituting steel for aluminum would result in an aircraft too heavy to take off.

Ragnaar
August 12, 2019 6:58 pm

Cardinal Pell

It’s stupid. We aren’t debating liberty. It’s stupid. The idea is to win. And if that means making an article 3% better by quoting somebody not in the middle of a bleep storm, do that. Win.

I am disappointed with Watts and Goreham in this specific case.