Comment from Perrotti, Edward David

The facts are clear, indeeed. We can do more for the planet and ourselves by simply reducing the energy footprint that we all have. First and foremost, any emisson reductions begin at home. Surely climate change means that we lose snow pack, snow melt and we have less hydro power. Some want the removal of dams and others do not want nuclear power with the radioactive wastes. We know from the study of nano technologies that the next generation solar cells will be forthcoming very soon and in the next three to five years, we will see home here, in the Pacific Northwest with these systems for use to power even greater amounts of residential and commercial power consumption. What rain we do get will be collected and in a closed system used for all sorts of purposes in the summer months, due to the lessened amount of runoff due to the lower levels of snow pack. In addition we know that vertical shaft wind turbine generators are becoming quite efficient and do not kill fowl. So a system with all three elements can achieve a lower footprint. Batteries. I am amazed at what I see in this technology arena. I went to RPI and MIT and the Harvard Business School, albeit forty years ago and now in my seventh decade on this sphere, these systems that I described above can soon work with these new batteries to store any excess. Sure we can have much more efficient vehicles and use them to store power, but look at these tachnologies together and with digital meters that run both ways, the fifty percent could be quite underestimated. Now please go to the web and read all about carbon fiber composites. You can learn more also by going to these university sites as well as the national labs and other federal sites, such as the National Energy Renewable Labs and the National Energy Technology Labs and as we move into nano structures, new forms of carbon based materials, we see even more ways to perhaps move that curve to that seventy percent level and higher. We may not need carbon trading. Not burn coal but use it to make materials lighter and stronger that tungsten steel. Look at the energy use for steel and aluminum, from mining to use and then recycling. Compare this to taking coal and pulverizing it to a fine powder and then making it into the replacement if you will for aluminum in vehicles and all sorts of transportation systems, from light rail to high speed. Do the same for steel and perhaps look to molding that carbon material and using it as the replacement for that other metal. Now UC Berkeley has diagrams and you have the BTU use by industry. Comparative economics are simple looking at one set of methods and processes and then using CAD, CAM and CIM, then optimizing for scale. I suspect that the models both, detrministic and heuristic would reveal some quite starting outcomes. Respectfull submitted, Edward David Manzo Marino Avellino Violante Perrotti BS, Aeronautical Engineering, RPI, Troy, NY, 1969 MS, Management and Computer Science (Operations Research), RPI, Troy, NY 1971 MIT & The Harvard Business School, Advanced Management Program (Advanced Technologies Engineering Management), 1973 More about me at the link below and please feel free to visit me there.