Would this work? OPEN LETTER to President Obama.?

Would it work? From an engineering standpoint?
From a political standpoint?


Dear President Obama:
You are now in a position to fix America’s energy woes, if you have the courage to do so.

Ironic, isn’t it, you are running two wars in…

Do all young “Environmentalists” think the millions of Engineers, Physicists, and other scientists in the past are stupid, or without curiosity and innovative ideas and experiments?

I applaud your effort to create a new vehicle that uses less fossil fuel, but I am afraid it would defy the laws of physics and economics if you could accomplish the design you came up with. One of the biggest design problems with hybrids and electric cars is the weight and size requirements due to batteries. Your design would require a lot of space (Boiler and turbine generator) along with the batteries weight. It would also be very costly.

Europe has many small turbo-diesel cars getting over 50 MPG and seat 5. These can burn bio-diesel as well. This is probably the most cost-effective short term alternative until new hydrogen or other technology is available.

It may be a bit naive. The “Open Letter” first assumes that power is with the president and then assumes that an appeal to reason is sufficient in itself.” Finally there is an assumption that you have the “correct” answer. These are grade school Pollyannic perspectives. It represents a world that might be nice but it would have to exist without human beings.

We like figureheads, it is a kind of fiction that helps us order the world. However, even in the days of kings and queens politics was as much discovering where the power rests as how to manipulate it. There are some who believe that the president of the US is the “most powerful man in the free world” or that he is the “chief executive.” Alternatively, when the person in that position does not agree with your perspectives it tends to be “all his fault.” This may even be a popularly held belief.

But just because most people like to believe a thing does not make it true or accurate. It is after all a logical fallacy. Politics is more often a series of conflicts, crisis and compromises than facts, reason and justification. Power is as often as not based upon certain convenient fictions. There is a fiction that power rests with leadership. This is only true until the population decides they don’t want to play the game any longer. At that point, they may not only stop working to supply wealth and power to the leadership but deny access to anything the leadership has acquired. The mechanics are an entirely different issue.

Science has some standing in discovering the nature of the world and provides one method of analysis. With our rather short historical memories and imaginations we tend to assume it is the only possible alternative rather than historically a fairly recent iteration. It has accomplished much but is subject to the hopes, desires, fears, and misinformation that resides in every scientist. Its greatest potential failure is when it believes itself to be correct. It is a human tendency to stop looking when we feel we have found the answer. It is when we do not know that there is a problem to be solved that we miss a discovery.

Economics and politics will trump science at almost every turn. Partly because they must and in part because we allow our fears and insecurity to govern our actions. We fear losing the result of our efforts and we fear losing the power we assume we control. Also in this way, what we call confidence can simply be irrationally holding on to a world view simply because it is annoying, unsettling and simply too much work to do otherwise.

Acting with confidence can be powerful, but there are risks that a more humble approach could avoid. Your only real nod to a question here are the first 3 words that comes out as a bit of a challenge. Even science tries to make only one assumption at a time and prove that one before moving on to another. Making too many assumptions may easily allow you to become far removed from rationality and logic into an entirely different world. Here you have made three each based upon the other, none of which may survive a serious challenge. The piece may therefore have lost focus and direction. This seriously challenges its potential effectiveness.

If you actually believe Obama reads any of these letters, you’re kidding yourself. Most get trashed, a few are read by his underlings. If they deem it important enough for him to read, they’ll pass it along. You have about a 1% chance of that letter actually reaching his desk.

Sounds arrogant. Try being more constructive and helpful, and less patronizing

Wait, you want to build a car with a steam engine?

It’s called a turbo charger and it decreases efficiency

How about building one and proving it works before insulting everyone else for not designing your wing-ding car

If you are always so tractful when presenting ideas, you’re going to grow old and cynical.

it probably wouldn’t be given to him

We don’t have energy woe’s… we have plenty of it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *