Retiring WVU-Tech provost Charles Bayless said global warming is the biggest environmental problem facing the world today.
We need to use all reasonable sources for producing energy in the future, including nuclear power.
These are among the insights offered during a Tuesday presentation to The Charleston Gazette by Charles E. Bayless, retiring provost of West Virginia University Institute for Technology in Montgomery.
"The world is in dire peril from greenhouse gases," Bayless said. "I believe it is the worst environmental problem. I am very pessimistic about out ability to reverse it. ...
"And as developing counties grow, they are going to consume much more energy to produce food, copper, iron and steel and other products."
Today, the U.S. has 4 percent of the world's population, but produces 26 percent of the world's gross domestic product and consumes 29 percent of the world's energy.
Those percentages are destined to change, especially as economic growth explodes in countries such as China, India and Pakistan.
"China is where we were in 1904 in terms of kilowatt hours used per capita," Bayless said. "Today, the U.S. produces $34,000 in GDP per capita, while China produces between $2,000 and $3,000 in GDP per capita."
If the rest of the world rises to our levels of energy use, Bayless said, the world would burn 4.78 times as much energy as it does now.
Where will all that new energy come from? What effects will additional energy production and consumption have on the world's environment?
"We have to learn to conserve," Bayless said. "Today, three barrels of oil are used for every one barrel we discover. Suburbs developed when energy was cheap."
Bayless believes the near future will see changes in how far people drive to commute to work every day, what kinds of vehicles they drive and how fast they drive.
"It is no longer acceptable to waste energy," he said. "Americans should stop driving SUVs. ...
"The U.S. is no longer in the driver's seat to control its own destiny," he notes. "During the next few years we will see at least 130 million new vehicles in China, which has 1.3 billion people."
During his Power Point presentation, Bayless asked which of these scenarios is more likely:
"Humanity will band together like never before in history and confront our collective energy challenges for the benefit of all mankind."
"People and nations will compete with one another and go to war over resources as they have done for thousands of years?"
Bayless chose the second.
The United States and the world face a growing energy crisis.
The effect of greenhouse gases on the environment is becoming more and more frightening.
We need to use all reasonable sources for producing energy in the future, including nuclear power.
These are among the insights offered during a Tuesday presentation to The Charleston Gazette by Charles E. Bayless, retiring provost of West Virginia University Institute for Technology in Montgomery.
"The world is in dire peril from greenhouse gases," Bayless said. "I believe it is the worst environmental problem. I am very pessimistic about out ability to reverse it. ...
"And as developing counties grow, they are going to consume much more energy to produce food, copper, iron and steel and other products."
Today, the U.S. has 4 percent of the world's population, but produces 26 percent of the world's gross domestic product and consumes 29 percent of the world's energy.
Those percentages are destined to change, especially as economic growth explodes in countries such as China, India and Pakistan.
"China is where we were in 1904 in terms of kilowatt hours used per capita," Bayless said. "Today, the U.S. produces $34,000 in GDP per capita, while China produces between $2,000 and $3,000 in GDP per capita."
If the rest of the world rises to our levels of energy use, Bayless said, the world would burn 4.78 times as much energy as it does now.
Where will all that new energy come from? What effects will additional energy production and consumption have on the world's environment?
"We have to learn to conserve," Bayless said. "Today, three barrels of oil are used for every one barrel we discover. Suburbs developed when energy was cheap."
Bayless believes the near future will see changes in how far people drive to commute to work every day, what kinds of vehicles they drive and how fast they drive.
"It is no longer acceptable to waste energy," he said. "Americans should stop driving SUVs. ...
"The U.S. is no longer in the driver's seat to control its own destiny," he notes. "During the next few years we will see at least 130 million new vehicles in China, which has 1.3 billion people."
During his Power Point presentation, Bayless asked which of these scenarios is more likely:
"Humanity will band together like never before in history and confront our collective energy challenges for the benefit of all mankind."
"People and nations will compete with one another and go to war over resources as they have done for thousands of years?"
Bayless chose the second.
"I vote Republican 60 percent of the time. But George W. Bush has been a disaster for our federal budget. He tanked the dollar."
Bayless supported the Iraq war when it began, but became very disillusioned after Bush started implementing his "de-Baathification" policy.
That policy, Bayless said, was a "debacle" that removed tens of thousands of ordinary Sunnis from their former government positions, made them unemployed and exacerbated ethnic hostilities between the Sunnis and Shiites.
Here at home, coal and nuclear power are key factors in our own domestic energy future, he said.
Today, the U.S. has 25 percent of the world's coal reserves, but only 3 percent of its oil reserves and 4 percent of its gas reserves.
"Coal mining is close to an environmental disaster," Bayless added. "But we, as a nation, will have no choice but to use more coal. In five or six years, we will have to go coal-to-liquids. We have to figure out now how to do that in an environmentally acceptable manner. ...
"I think we've got to turn to nuclear, and also to solar and wind power," he said.
"Nuclear power got a bad rap after Chernobyl [the April 1986 disaster where a poorly-built and maintained Soviet nuclear plant spewed radioactive materials over a wide area]. People got scared. ...
"But solar and wind power are not predictable. And every form of energy has environmental impacts. Solar plants take up huge areas."
Bayless, like many other analysts, dismisses ethanol production - from corn and other crops - as a "political debacle."
Bayless also believes extensive use of dams to generate hydroelectric power is not a wise policy.
"Hydro is one of the most land intensive sources for energy. And it changes the ecosystem."
In the Northwest, for example, Columbia River dams increase the amount of time it takes a baby salmon to swim to the Pacific Ocean from about 18 days to three months.
"The predator fish loved it. And they got huge."
Bayless believes the U.S. must reduce its dependence upon oil as soon as possible.
The ratio of domestic oil reserves to annual domestic oil production varies widely throughout the world, from 9.5 in the United States to 43.5 in the Asian/Pacific area, 60.6 in Central and Latin America, 60.8 in Europe, 97.5 in Africa to 271 in the Middle East.
Bayless was named to head West Virginia Tech in 2005, after working as an Army nuclear missile specialist, lawyer, engineer and executive in the energy utility industry. He worked for a variety of companies, including Tucson Electric in Arizona, Illinois Power and Dynergy.
To contact staff writer Paul J. Nyden, use e-mail or call 348-5164.
Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, sexually explicit, racist or offensive will be removed. If you wouldn’t say it to your mother, don’t post it here.
Be civil. Don’t threaten to hurt anyone. Personal attacks, insults or harassment of any kind are subject to removal.
Be truthful. Don’t lie about a situation or person.
Keep it brief. Keep your comment to one post. Redundant or multiple posts in a row aren’t allowed.
Stay on task. Stick to the topics relevant to the story and discussion.
Don’t post links to sites other than wvgazette.com.
Let us know about offensive comments. Click the “Report Abuse” button if you think a comment is against the rules.
Report a violation or offensive comment.
[X] Close
Posted By: hey(8:35am 08-08-2008)
Report Abuse
WindWaterEngergy, your statement lacks clarity. Sounds like a Bayless creation.
Posted By: WindWaterEnergy(10:53pm 06-12-2008)
Report Abuse
Free natural resources that could help us out. But we have those that fight against using. Win/Win outcome for our nation but some few rule and then we ALL suffer.
Posted By: gainful(10:47pm 06-12-2008)
Report Abuse
To Techer
You commented: ". . .Tech can't go back to what it once was . . ."
Pa-Lease!
That comment sounds just like the negative comments that have been circulating on the Tech campus for too long--years, and years, and years. The defeatist attitude. Excuses, excuses as to why a job can not be done or goals can not be achieved instead of just doing the job.
Other colleges in West Virginia have managed to grow at a steady pace while Tech has gone backwards.
If as much energies were exerted on that campus in getting the job done as is exerted in the energies of making excuses as to why a job can't be done, then Tech would make it to the top of the mountain.
Change starts at the top--leadership needed! WVU usually gets what it wants. They have had every opportunity to put their administrative skills to work on the Montgomery campus. It appears as if they would rather put their administrative skills to work in the desired location for Tech--in Charleston.
Posted By: tango(4:42pm 06-12-2008)
Report Abuse
Mike Neese may have been there for 20 years, but he did NOT rule Tech. Amongst others, Mike took and orders from three presidents--Carrier, LaRoe, and Bayless. He was shifted at their will and pleasure from one job to another--housing, dean of students, athletics, physical plant, etc., thereby, resticting progress on the Montgomery campus. The main position in which he served--the dean of students position--was vacated upon his departure and that position is vacant today.
If Mike made any one mistake, it was not taking orders from the leaders more objectively.
Even though Mr. Neese is no longer with Tech, the administrative infrastructure at Tech is no stronger today than then. In fact, the school is administratively operating with a skeleton crew.
Oh, I forgot, he, also, was a faithful servant to WVU.
Where is WVU's
The main position that Mike handled was the dean of students position which is now vacant and has not been advertised. Therefore, h
Post a comment
You commented: ". . .Tech can't go back to what it once was . . ."
Pa-Lease!
That comment sounds just like the negative comments that have been circulating on the Tech campus for too long--years, and years, and years. The defeatist attitude. Excuses, excuses as to why a job can not be done or goals can not be achieved instead of just doing the job.
Other colleges in West Virginia have managed to grow at a steady pace while Tech has gone backwards.
If as much energies were exerted on that campus in getting the job done as is exerted in the energies of making excuses as to why a job can't be done, then Tech would make it to the top of the mountain.
Change starts at the top--leadership needed! WVU usually gets what it wants. They have had every opportunity to put their administrative skills to work on the Montgomery campus. It appears as if they would rather put their administrative skills to work in the desired location for Tech--in Charleston.
If Mike made any one mistake, it was not taking orders from the leaders more objectively.
Even though Mr. Neese is no longer with Tech, the administrative infrastructure at Tech is no stronger today than then. In fact, the school is administratively operating with a skeleton crew.
Oh, I forgot, he, also, was a faithful servant to WVU.
Where is WVU's
The main position that Mike handled was the dean of students position which is now vacant and has not been advertised. Therefore, h