Economic Aspects of U. S. Energy Independence in the Coming Decade

  • K. D. Timmerhaus
  • D. H. Weitzel
Part of the Advances in Cryogenic Engineering book series (ACRE, volume 21)


There is no doubt that energy is a subject on the minds of many today. A great deal of what is being said about energy not only bears repeating, but requires careful evaluation and should be followed by constructive action. Energy research and development will play a central role in most of this nation’s scientific, technological, and industrial endeavors for years, if not decades, to come. This is true not only because of the overwhelming importance of energy to the nation but because our energy problems—both immediate and long-range—are complex. It is also true because the urgency of dealing with these problems must be brought home to the public and to people at all levels of responsibility in government, industry, and education. These problems have not vanished with the end of the oil embargo and the disappearance of lines at the gas stations. The United States will be living with them and working to solve them for a long time. Before turning to some of the solutions that might be considered for the coming decade, it is useful to make a few observations to illustrate the national and global impact of the energy situation.


Capital Requirement Coal Production Synthetic Fuel Energy Independence Potential Energy Saving 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    W. G. Dupree Jr. and J. A. West, United States Energy Through the Year 2000, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. (1972).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. C. Hottel and J. B. Howard, New Energy Technology, Some Facts and Assessments, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts (1971).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. L. Auer, Science 184(4134):295 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. J. Frank, Science 184(4134):316 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. R. Stauffer, Science 184(4134):321(1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. G. Stever, “Energy Research and Development,” paper presented at Louisiana State University Energy Conference, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, May 6, 1974.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    U.S. Energy Prospects: An Engineering Viewpoint, National Academy of Engineering Report, Washington, D.C. (1974).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    National Petroleum Council, U S. Energy Outlook: A Summary Report of the National Petroleum Council, Washington, D.C. (December 1972).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stanford Research Institute, World Energy, Menlo Park, California (November 1972).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shell Oil Company, Current Energy Outlook, Houston, Texas (July 1975).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Arthur D. Little, Inc., Energy, Environment, Electric Power, Cambridge, Massachusetts (April 1973).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Associated Universities, Inc., “Reference Energy Systems and Resource Data for Use in Assessment of Energy Technologies,” prepared for U. S. Department of Commerce, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, D.C. (May 1972).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, “Certain Background Information for Consideration When Evaluating the ‘National Energy Dilemma’,” U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (May 4, 1973).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Field, “The U. S. Energy Puzzle,” presented at American Petroleum Institute, May 17, 1973, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, California.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    H. Linden, Energy Production Program to Implement Project Independence, Institute of Gas Technology, Chicago, Illinois (December 5, 1973).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    The Chase Manhattan Bank, Outlook for Energy in the United States to 1985, Chase Manhattan Bank, New York (June 1972).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. L. Ray, The Nation’s Energy Future, U. S. Government Printing Office, Stock Number 5210–00363, Washington, D.C. (December 1, 1973).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Office of Economic Data Analysis and Strategic Planning, U. S. Energy Self-Sufficiency: An Assessment of Technological Potential, Federal Energy Office, Washington, D.C. (February 6, 1974).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ford Foundation, A Time to Choose, Energy Policy Project of the Ford Foundation, Ballinger Publishing Company, Cambridge, Massachusetts (1974).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bureau of National Affairs, U. S. Energy Statistics for 1972 and 1973 (Preliminary), Energy Users Report No. 31, Bureau of Mines, U. S. Department of Interior (March 14, 1974).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shell Oil Company, The National Energy Problem: Potential Energy Savings, Houston, Texas (October 1973).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. J. McKetta, Energy Communications 1(1):5 (1975).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shell Oil Company, The National Energy Outlook, Houston, Texas (March 1973).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shell Oil Company, Enhanced Recovery, Houston, Texas (July 1975).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gulf University Research Consortium, Planning Criteria Relative to a National RD&E Program Directed to Enhanced Recovery of Oil and Natural Gas, Rept. No. 130 to the U. S. AEC (November 30, 1973).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shell Oil Company, Energy Self-Sufficiency: II, Houston, Texas (July 1974).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    H. J. Frank and J. J. Schanz Jr., “The Economics of the Energy Problem,” Economic Topic Series, Joint Council on Economic Education, New York (1975), p. 1.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    A. L. Hammond, W. D. Metz, and T. H. Maugh II, Energy and the Future, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C. (1973).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    C. Garner, R. Morris, and B. Wollf, Context 3(2): 15(1974).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    W. K. Davis, “Converter Reactor Alternatives,” paper presented at Atomic Industrial Forum Conference on Energy Alternatives—Technologies, Economics and Priorities, Washington, D.C, February 19, 1975.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    W. K. Davis, “Nuclear Power’s Contribution to Energy Growth,” paper presented at Atomic Industrial Forum Conference on Accelerating Nuclear Power Plant Construction, New Orleans, Louisiana, March 3, 1975.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Energy Development in the Rocky Mountain Region: Goals and Concerns, Federation of Rocky Mountain States, Inc., Denver, Colorado (July 1975).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    J. Klemenic, “Some Financial Aspects of the Domestic Uranium Mining and Milling Industry over the Next Fifteen years,” Planning and Analysis Division, Grand Junction, Colorado Office, U. S. AEC (September 1973).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Electrical World, March 15, 1974, p. 51.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    G. R. Robson, Science 184:371 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    R. T. Jaske, “Nuclear and Solar Power,” paper presented at Conference on Engineering Solutions to Future Resources Problems, London, September 29-October 3, 1975.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    B. W. Birmingham and C. N. Smith, Cryogenics 15(3): 115 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    J. W. Lue and R. W. Conn, in: Advances in Cryogenic Engineering, Vol. 21, Plenum Press, New York (1976), p. 41.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    T. M. Henderson, R. B. Jacobs, D. E. Solomon, and G. W. Wuttke, in: Advances in Cryogenic Engineering, Vol. 21, Plenum Press, New York (1976), p. 455.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    J. Hord, in: Advances in Cryogenic Engineering, Vol. 19, Plenum Press, New York (1974), p. 1.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    L. A. Sarkes and D. B. Mann, “A Survey of LNG Technological Needs in the USA—1974 to Beyond 2000,” paper presented at Fourth Intern. Conference on LNG, Algiers, June 1974.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    W. V. Vogen, B. Clawson, and H. F. Morrison, in: Advances in Cryogenic Engineering, Vol. 21, Plenum Press, New York (1976), p. 51.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1960

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. D. Timmerhaus
    • 1
  • D. H. Weitzel
    • 2
  1. 1.University of ColoradoBoulderUSA
  2. 2.National Bureau of StandardsBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations