For years the United States has been content to view it’s almost nonexistent energy policy with the pessimism it deserves. Much of the country depends on fossil fuel for heat in winter and for air conditioning in summer. The American transportation system is fed mainly by fossil fuels and connects the country materially to the rest of the world, including to more than 60% of its oil supplies. American food now ‘embodies’ more fossil energy than solar energy. Many products on retailers’ shelves, from various textiles to personal computers are made, in part, from oil or natural gas.
The reality is, despite this country’s high tech wealth, the country’s entire post-industrial economy still floats on a pool of oil and gas. Domestic sources are drying up, demand everywhere is rising, and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), taking advantage of its increasing dominance in world markets, has tightened the screws on global supplies.
Beccause of recent howls of complaints about the skyrocketing costs of fuel, the federal government has responded to the price hikes by lobbying OPEC to produce more oil - with some success. While this is may be good short-term politics it In fact only scratches the tip of the problem. US consumers enjoy the most underpriced fuel available in any major industrialized country — with predictable results. The invariable consequence of underpricing is overuse. Americans live in ever-larger energy-inefficient houses, drive ever-bigger and less fuel-efficient vehicles and are generally squandering in a few decades a non-renewable resource that took tens of millions of years to accumulate. Even if there were no other issues at hand, it would be economically rational and ecologically beneficial for the federal government to intervene in today’s energy market.
But there is another issue at hand. The world is running out of conventional oil. Recent price hikes are mere tremors heralding the real price shock to come. Surely this is not the time to be deepening our dependence on fossil fuel.
Several recent studies project global oil production to peak by 2013 or sooner, possibly as soon as 2007. Even the conservative International Energy Agency (IEA) in its World Energy Outlook, 1998 concurred for the first time that global output could top out between 2009 and 2012 and decline rapidly thereafter.The IEA projects a nearly 20% shortfall of supply relative to demand by 2020 that will have to be made up from "unidentified unconventional" sources (i.e., known oil-sands deposits have already been taken into account). Other studies show that by 2040 total oil output from all sources may fall to less than half of today’s 25-26 billion barrels of oil per year.
And running out of oil is not running out of just oil. Oil is the means by which industrial society obtains (and over-exploits) all other resources. The world’s fishing fleets, its forest sector, its mines, and its agriculture all are powered by liquid portable fossil fuels. Seventeen percent of the US energy budget, most of it oil, is used just to grow, process, and transport food alone. (It takes a gallon of fossil fuel to feed each American every day.) Keep in mind, too, that petroleum is not just a fuel. Oil and natural gas are the raw material for thousands of products from medicines, paints, and plastics to agricultural fertilizers and pesticides. Since oil is directly or indirectly a part of everything else the coming scarcity of oil and the attendant price shock means higher prices for everything else as well.
The data and trends are no secret. Major governments have known about the deteriorating supply situation for years yet prefer to allow the public to wallow in ignorance while hoping something will happen to halt the downward slide. This in turn creates a political climate in which a looming crisis remains invisible and corrective action is impossible.
And here we have President Bush claiming that by drilling for oil in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the United States would be less reliant on foreign oil production and therefore drive the cost of gasoline and other associated products to the lowest level in years. But there are a few problems:
Conservatively high estimates place the available volume of oil at a level that would supply only a percentage of the population for less than a year.
Also, experts, including geologists within the region, do not agree where these deposits are located. How long will Americans wait before this oil reaches the end-user? Some experts say as long as 25 years.
And something else to consider:
The physical stock of exploitable oil is not being "renewed"; historically, improved technology has simply made a dwindling finite resource more accessible. Abundant short-term market supplies then effectively short-circuit the price increases that would otherwise signal impending real scarcity, even as finite stocks are depleted.
Moreover, there is the fact that oil exploration is very much subject to diminishing material returns. Despite increasing effort, we currently discover less than six billion barrels of new oil per year, not even a quarter of present consumption. A few decades ago, oil extractors in the US would discover 50 barrels of oil for every barrel consumed in drilling and pumping. In the mid-1990s the ratio was five to one, heading to one for one by 2005. At that point, there will no point in extracting oil with oil at any price even though there will still be plenty left in the ground.
Unfortunately, the President’s policy uses the watchword of energy independence to justify more drilling and more incursions into areas around the country where oil can be extracted. This cannot be the solution, as it is a policy without a future.
To date the Bush administration has shown an unwillingness to wean the country from its addiction to petroleum. Unless the President views the consumption of petroleum to be a problem, there is a good chance he will not change his mind in spite of the Senate vote on April 18 to prevent oil drilling in The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which was a great victory for protecting the environment.
Unfortunately, the President’s policy uses the watchword of energy independence to justify more drilling and more incursions into areas around the country where oil can be extracted. This cannot be the solution, as it is a policy without a future.
The facts are that America consumes 25 percent of the world’s total oil production, yet has less than 3 percent of its known reserves, while 65 percent of the world’s known reserves lie beneath Persian Gulf nations. No matter how hard the oil industry tries, there is no way to generate new domestic sources to replace imports.
So what about the alternatives:
First let us consider the following quandry: different fuel types are not readily interchangeable. Wind, photovoltaics, and other forms of solar electricity may be able substitute for most of the electricity currently generated by fossil fuels (nuclear fission has failed and commercial fusion reactors are decades in the future). However, electricity cannot replace many of the direct uses of petroleum derivatives as fuel nor overcome their clear advantages in energy storage. There is great promise in fuel-cell development but the fact is that no suitable substitutes are yet in sight for the fossil fuels used in heavy farm machinery, construction and mining equipment, diesel trains and trucks, and ocean-going freighters. Jet aircraft cannot be powered by electricity, whatever its source. (While rapid advances are being made in coal- and other carbon-based synthetic fuels, these substitutes leave us with the specter of climate change.) Again, nothing yet can replace cheap hydrocarbons as feedstocks in the manufacture of myriad industrial and agricultural products. Finally, it is no small irony that we need high-intensity fossil fuel to produce the machinery and infrastructure required for most alternative forms of energy. Sunlight is simply too ‘dilute’ to use in manufacturing the high-tech devices and equipment required for its own conversion to heat and electricity. Industrial civilization faces a paradox: we need oil to move beyond the age of oil.
The human population has grown six-fold in less than 200 years. The global economy has quintupled in less than 50. No factor has played a greater role in the explosive growth of the human enterprise than abundant cheap fossil fuel. No other resource has changed the structure of economies, the nature of technologies, the balance of geopolitics, and the quality of human life as much as petroleum. Little wonder that some scientists believe that passing the peak of world oil production will be a shock to the human enterprise like no other event in history. Population and consumption are still on a steep trajectory but the rocket is running out of fuel.
In this light, ordinary citizens and public service organizations alike should be urging the US government to get real about energy policy and pricing.
It will require strong visionary leadership but unprecedented partnerships must be established within the environmental movement. The first order of business will be to agree on the energy policy goal, which should be realistic and straightforward.
For instance, 70 percent of U.S. oil consumption is for transportation. If the leadership focused only on improving fuel economy for cars and trucks to 40 miles per gallon, U.S. oil imports can be eliminated by 2010.
The second task will be to extend the principle of bringing together environmental groups to individuals and organizations outside the environmental movement. Outreach efforts and campaigns in the past have been aimed at building individual organizations. This time, partners will be asked to unite behind a single issue that binds them together.
Effective education will be key. Armed with knowledge and opportunity, the coalition can find interested partners everywhere. Americans will support an energy policy that is sensible and offers logical solutions.
Automobiles that incorporate ethanol or even electricity into their particular drivers are a start. These alternatives will not only deter overwhelming dependence on Middle Eastern oil but will in turn spur the economy as emerging corporations who avoid the status quo look to develop new ways for Americans to flourish in the success of new found technologies.
The effort should be to embrace new energy technologies that make our economy more efficient and our environment cleaner and safer. Ones that will give America the opportunity to become a world leader in energy. Instead of relying on oil from the Middle East, Mexico, or Russia, we can become net exporters of fuel cells, solar panels, and other technologies that will create good American jobs and help the rest of the world develop with a cleaner, healthier energy source.
--Provide legislation that makes renewable and alternative energies more affordable for consumers
--Through tax credits and funding for research and development
--Provide legislation to increase CAFE standards, making cars more fuel-efficient
--Develop stricter emissions standards for power plants
--Leading the House New Democrat Coalition working group on energy issues
During the past 30 years, American consumers have transferred more than a trillion dollars to oil producing countries – mostly in the Middle East. Annually, we pay Iraq more than two billion dollars for oil. We import more than half of our oil from some of the most unstable regions of the world.
Since September 11th, Americans have begun to comprehend the true costs of an oil-dependent economy. Energy conservation and ending our dependence on oil are consistent with the need to keep our citizens safe from terrorist acts. The connection between national security and a more prudent energy policy has become clear.
Complete and total energy independence is not a practical or immediate goal. Steps towards the solution can commence immediately. The American public can contribute by acquiring hybrid cars, which travel comfortably at 65 miles per hour and get 50 miles per gallon. At the same time, the current trend toward gas guzzling vehicles such as SUVs should be discouraged.
If the government raises minimum fuel efficiency standards to 40 miles per gallon, we can eliminate all dependence on Persian Gulf oil in several years.
The longer-term solution lies in developing hydrogen fuel cells for which the technology already exists. Accomplishing this end will eliminate dependence on foreign oil.
