Will America ever declare war on foreign oil?
What would it take?As a $150 million dollar natural gas for transportation research bill works its way through Congress, I can't help but wonder, could America end foreign oil dependency with its own resources?
Could America draw a line in the sand and determine to be foreign oil free within 10, 15, or 20 years using some combination of natural gas, biofuels, batteries and whatever other tools are available today?
While natural gas is typically cleaner than oil, it's not renewable. Should that matter?
If we could end foreign oil dependency, but only minimally reduce our CO2 footprint along the way, could that still be a good thing? For instance, wouldn't ending foreign oil dependency eventually lead to a massive cost-savings, once military costs are factored into the equation? Couldn't such a savings be used exclusively for developing cleaner and more sustainable energy?
Is there a way to declare war on foreign oil that both those from the green side and the 'drill, drill, drill' side could find consensus? Is an aggressive move against foreign oil dependency even possible without such a consensus?
Will America ever declare war on foreign oil? Or will America's energy paradigm ultimately be dictated by forces beyond America's control?
Labels: Foreign Oil Dependency
posted by Dahcredyns at
7:45 AM
17 Comments:
I only have a few minutes before I go fix my daughters boat but try and get the posts rolling.
Everyone on this blog knows that I favor a 90% 10% $1.00/gallon phased in gas tax and that the collected tax must ONLY be used to fund renewable energy. Doing this would reduce our dependence on foreign oil, reduce our carbon footprint and help clean up our environment. Of course I understand this is never going to happen. So what will it take to become energy independent?
My best shot out of the gate to answer this question is to say; "LEADERSHIP" and lots of it.
It really doesn't make any difference to me as an individual if you are a Democrat, Republican, Liberal or Conservative we need to stop the bickering and get on with fixing some stuff on our planet.
Special interest groups and lobbyists are making all of us suffer and in the end it will be these very same groups that will be blaming each other as we all go up in flames.
What we need are some real leaders; well actually LOTS of leaders. In my not so humble opinion to say our president either is or is not doing a good job is really a meaningless statement. There are currently about 6 billion people on this planet and to say one individual can fix everything is truly a joke. I will give you one example.
Back in the early 90's we discovered a hole in our ozone layer and we needed to come up with a different refrigeration gas to fix the problem. So we created an air conditioner gas called R-403a which everyone at the time thought was 'green'. Well yes it is green as far as the ozone layer is concerned. However later after everyone in the industry re-engineered their air conditioning products to work with this new gas and started telling everyone how green it was, it was determined that its just as bad as the old [freon] gas because it still can cause "global warming". The moral of the story is this.
No one is stepping up to the plate and 'leading' the good fight to find a better refrigeration gas even though we know it can add to global warming. I don't hear of any CEO's from Trane, York, American Standard or any other company saying how hard they are working to find a replacement which will not hurt the ozone layer OR cause global warming.
Instead what they are doing is to still trying to tell you how 'green' their new products are. Now I understand capitalism but sooner or later someone needs to step up to the plate and show some LEADERSHIP. This is not a problem to be solved by the Democrats, Republicans or any other branch of the government and it sure as heck isn't the Presidents problem either.
This is just one example of how a lack of 'leadership' is affecting our country. We blame the Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, and Conservatives but maybe what we should be doing is looking in the mirror. It doesn't make any difference if you believe in global warming or not. We - all of us - all Americans need to step up to the plate and solve our energy problem. We need to stop the blame game, take the bull by the horns and show some real "LEADERSHIP".
Thank you for listening
This post has been removed by the author.
Having lost a brother in Iraq, I am more concerned about foreign oil dependency that global warming. I do not want to see any more American families have to go through what my familiy has gone through.
We need to stop getting Americans killed in order to feed our oil addiction.
I believe that Natural gas can be a part of the solution for foreign oil independence. Thats' why I joined Pickens plan when it started. We need all of the solutions in order to truly achieve it.
Tom:
You are right that we need leadership, and not just in Washington. Each one of us needs to be a leader.
The best way to lead is by example. I think each one of us needs to ask ourselves....
"WHAT STEPS AM I TAKING 'TODAY' TO REDUCE MY OWN FOREIGN OIL DEPENDENCE?"
The answer should not be that I am "waiting" for the perfect electric car to go on the market or some other solution that is years into the future.
We need to supports today's solutions as they are the bridge to tomorrow's solutions.
If we support these solutions, it will be easy for Washington to jump on board.......
Smurf - well said and I am sorry to hear about the loss of your brother.
Also sorry to hear that Smurf.
Leadership. It's easy to lead those that share similar beliefs. It's dealing with people with whom you disagree that seems to be the real problem.
It just seems to me that at least foreign oil dependency is a subject that can drive some amount of consensus, at least according to most polls I've seen.
Global warming or cap and trade will not lead to consensus any time soon. Moreover, I believe that if America doesn't conquer foreign oil dependence, whatever we do on CO2 might not really matter.
Yet, I'd bet if America ended foreign oil dependence, it would inevitably - without any intent - have a huge affect on CO2 emissions.
After Foreign Oil is vanquished, we can go to war with foreign happy meal toys. Where ever oil comes from, we should use less of it.
No offense, John, but I find your statement disturbing.
Foreign oil dependency is not about import/export issues. It's about the fact that Bin Laden, for instance, has clearly stated that foreign oil dependency was the impetus for 9/11. It's the fact that foreign oil dependency has stunted automotive innovation in the US. It's about the fact that foreign oil dependency is considered to be one of the greatest dangers to American national security according to the Pentagon.
America's foreign oil dependency has become a cancer upon America, and the world.
Thus, comparing foreign oil to foreign-made happy meal toys is a pretty poor analogy.
Certainly, we should be trying to use less oil, but at some point we have to be honest. If that means a bit more drilling for oil in the US, plus natural gas and ethanol, i'll take that trade if it means ending foreign oil dependency.
To just say less oil is what environmentalists have been saying for decades and its gotten America nowhere but more dependent upon foreign oil.
Sure, we can hope for monkeys to fly out of our asses and build a super smart grid powered by solar and wind power to fill our battery powered cars, but do you really believe that's going to happen in decade or two?
I've not seen a single legitimate study that comes even close to such a scenario.
Waiting for batteries and solar power to end America's foreign oil dependency is a massive gamble and a terribly dangerous risk.
Is that what you are advocating?
John,
One big difference between oil and happy meal toys is that our economy won't collapse if they embargo happy meal toys for 3 days.
We are so dependent on foreign oil that if the flow of oil stops for even a few days, the whole U.S. economy will go into a tail spin.
I don't know how valid the results of this 2008 study are but since it comes from Scientific American it is probably pretty good. The following article is only a snippet of the full article found here:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan
"A Solar Grand Plan
By 2050 solar power could end U.S. dependence on foreign oil and slash greenhouse gas emissions
Key Concepts
* A massive switch from coal, oil, natural gas and nuclear power plants to solar power plants could supply 69 percent of the U.S.’s electricity and 35 percent of its total energy by 2050.
* A vast area of photovoltaic cells would have to be erected in the Southwest. Excess daytime energy would be stored as compressed air in underground caverns to be tapped during nighttime hours.
* Large solar concentrator power plants would be built as well.
* A new direct-current power transmission backbone would deliver solar electricity across the country.
* But $420 billion in subsidies from 2011 to 2050 would be required to fund the infrastructure and make it cost-competitive.
The Editors"
I like the last statement the best; the part about the $420 billion in subsidies. Last year according to our old friend T. Boon Pickens we spent $475 billion in 2008 alone on foreign oil. Here they are only asking us to spend that amount in 40 years.
We can do this - there is nothing holding us back except the will to make it happen.
Oh, and did I mention that the whole $420 billion could be collected in just 3 short years by implementing my $1.00/gallon gas tax plan. So I guess I could reduce the $1.00/gallon to $.25 since that will be more than enough to get the job done. I might even get a few more supporters that way huh? LOL
Just couldn't resist bring this up just one more time ;-)
and i'm certainly not arguing that we shouldn't try to implement this solar plan by 2050. Still that's 40+ years from now, and i just don't believe we have 40+ years to wait and tackle foreign oil dependency.
by all means, make that the 50 year plan, but we need real benchmarks, real reductions in foreign oil use, between now and then.
thus, in 5 years, expect this decline. then, 10, 15, etc,
if america were committed, i believe we could end foreign oil dependency within 15 years, at least 20.
Why couldn't such a plan be just a piece of the larger 50 year plan? However, to only end foreign oil dependence once it can be achieved in a completely green and renewable way is just too much risk in my opinion.
likewise the military costs that America could save by ending foreign oil dependence will easily cover the costs of converting to clean energy once we're foreign oil independent.
Dahcredyns said...and i'm certainly not arguing ... Still that's 40+ years from now, and i just don't believe we have 40+ years to wait ...oil dependency.
I could not agree more. We can not afford to wait any longer. We are currently building about 800 MW of solar here in Arizona that I know of. There is probably more.
For every solar plant we build that's one less coal or natural gas plant we need. If only we could build enough we could maybe even start shutting down some of the coal plants we currently have running.
The only problem I see is we aren't building solar fast enough to make a significant impact QUICKLY ENOUGH. We could however:
Provide a few billion to existing manufacturers to significant increase production.
For example; Nanosolar has one roll to roll machine running making 1000 MW of thin film solar panels each year. Most of them are going to Germany since that's were it pays to send them. Why not give them a billion dollars to build 100 roll to roll machines so we can get 100,000 MW.
Another example' First Solar currently prices at $.96/watt for thin film. Lets give them a billion for a few new factories.
Lets help multi-crystalline manufacturers by spending a billion dollars to build a poly silicon plant and then just give them the raw material for free.
If we only invested this 3 billion dollars, and a few million to run the poly-silicon plant each year; we could increase production 100 fold and make some real progress NOW!
Lets give another billion to build some geothermal plant so we 24/7/365 backup power when the sun does not shine.
Lets give a billion to Chervon, Texaco and Shell Oil to set up the underground compressed air storage facititles since they are experts in that field.
Lets give Bechtel Power a billion dollars to come up with the least expensive method of building and installing solar trackers.
There will be billions and billions of dollars to be made and millions and million of jobs created. We just need to quite fiddling around and get on with the program.
That's my mind set, Tom.
Let's end foreign oil dependency as fast as possible. If that means a little more drilling, a big chunk of natural gas in the short term, I'm fine with that, as long as the long term is more renewably focused.
To me, that's seems like a way that we could rise above partisanship, find consensus, and tackle foreign oil dependency much the same way America tackled the moon.
Certainly, I'd prefer to discontinue any new drilling in the US, but if it buys a significant amount of solar development, then I'll make that bargain.
I'd rather focus on results versus the perfect path.
Carpe diem!
Indigo Incarnates
I think it is a leadership and cultural problem in the United States. We still have leaders peddling corn-based ethanol and hydrogen fuel cell cars. These are dead-end proposals for a variety of reasons. Then we have the leadership in the automotive industry that will sell a 60 MPG car in Europe and then sell a dumbed-down version of that same car in the United States that only gets 27 MPG. Oh, and other than the Inisght-II, all of the hybrid choices are prices well above the reach of the working class.
Culturally, Americans still favor size and raw power over efficiency and utility. Too many people still use a 13 MPG guzzler as their commuter vehicle. And when it comes to alternative energy, the wealthy elite continually block plans for windmills and solar arrays since they view them as "ugly".
Oh, and don't get me started on the number of ways that the Obama presidency is exactly like a third Bush term!
And to me, Indigo, I think America is ready for a cultural revolution, but it must be void of any partisanship and it must include compromise. Unfortunately, I don't see anyone in mainstream politics ready to lead such a revolution.
This post asks the question "Will American ever declare war on foreign oil?"
Well my short answer is I don't know for sure. However, the more I think about this question the more I begin to question WHY I don't know.
For example. Do you think oil imports are killing our economy? Do you think burning all that oil is causing global warming? Do you believe foreign oil is bad for America? If it is so bad why is China importing so much of it? Do you believe that a global war could break out by 2015 over foreign oil?
If you believe that global warming is TRUE you probably believe Al Gore is right. If you think global warming is just a bunch of BULL, there is a group of individuals who also believe that.
But I would really like to know what the American people think wouldn't you?
So my question to you then becomes:
which one of these bucket do you fit into?
THE PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL, OR;
THE PEOPLE WHO THAT BELIEVE GLOBAL WARMING IS JUST A BUNCH OF BULL.
A simple YES or NO answer will do. After at least 4 years of pounding information into the heads of the American people everyone should have an opinion by NOW.
If you haven't formed an opinion by now what would it take?
Did anyone see ABC's 20/20 tonight titled "over a barrel"?
ABC said the same thing that we have been saying........
"In the U.S. the price of a gallon of gasoline at the pump does not reflect the true cost of producing that gallon of gasoline."
Its on the DVR but haven't watched it yet today.
Tom G.
Post a Comment
<< Home