Our Current Energy Policy
Our current energy policy is almost totally supply-driven; although renewable energy is given minor amounts of funding, the main goal is to try to find new sources of hydrocarbons, in particular oil. We are operating on the assumption that oil is and always will be plentiful, with little care as to whether that assumption might be wrong.
And maybe that key assumption will prove to be correct. But do we want to bet the farm on it?
My take is that there’s a good chance that oil production will peak and then start to decline in the next ten to thirty years. Once you accept that possibility, then it becomes imperative to start seriously considering contingency plans, and I don’t see us doing that.
One of the big questions in the peak oil arena is “how much time do we have left?” This breaks down into: how much time do we have until oil peaks; then how rapidly does oil production decline, and how much time does it take us to switch to alternatives. Of course, nobody really knows the answer to any of those questions. I would feel safer if we charted a course that recognized the uncertainties and didn’t, well, bet the farm on any one approach. We don’t need to break the bank now preventing something that we don’t know will happen, but it would be prudent to start preparing a little.
We shouldn’t get too focused on peak oil in any case. There are a number of excellent reasons why we in the U.S. should try to reduce our oil consumption.
· By purchasing oil, we are giving money to Saudi Arabia and other countries with corrupt governments. Some of that money is going to terrorists, and has already funded 9-11.
· By depending on oil, we place the security of our country in the hands of oil producers in general, including, once again, countries who might not have our best interests at heart.
· The correlation between energy price spikes and recessions is strong. As demand grows, small disruptions in supply, or even the threat of such disruptions, can send prices skyrocketing. We are seeing this right now.
· Oil consumption leads to global warming, which has its own significant costs.
· The shift to renewable resources is going to happen eventually; let’s have our industry lead the world and make this a profit source for the US instead of giving our money to the current leaders in Europe and Japan.
The big critique against trying to wean our dependence on oil is that the alternatives cost too much. I would consider that the real costs of oil are huge, getting larger every year. The U.S. currently consumes over 20 million barrels of oil per day, which works out to over 400 billion dollars a year at current market rates, not to mention the significant associated costs listed above. It would be altogether better for us to drop an extra billion or two per year to take us in a better direction.
And maybe that key assumption will prove to be correct. But do we want to bet the farm on it?
My take is that there’s a good chance that oil production will peak and then start to decline in the next ten to thirty years. Once you accept that possibility, then it becomes imperative to start seriously considering contingency plans, and I don’t see us doing that.
One of the big questions in the peak oil arena is “how much time do we have left?” This breaks down into: how much time do we have until oil peaks; then how rapidly does oil production decline, and how much time does it take us to switch to alternatives. Of course, nobody really knows the answer to any of those questions. I would feel safer if we charted a course that recognized the uncertainties and didn’t, well, bet the farm on any one approach. We don’t need to break the bank now preventing something that we don’t know will happen, but it would be prudent to start preparing a little.
We shouldn’t get too focused on peak oil in any case. There are a number of excellent reasons why we in the U.S. should try to reduce our oil consumption.
· By purchasing oil, we are giving money to Saudi Arabia and other countries with corrupt governments. Some of that money is going to terrorists, and has already funded 9-11.
· By depending on oil, we place the security of our country in the hands of oil producers in general, including, once again, countries who might not have our best interests at heart.
· The correlation between energy price spikes and recessions is strong. As demand grows, small disruptions in supply, or even the threat of such disruptions, can send prices skyrocketing. We are seeing this right now.
· Oil consumption leads to global warming, which has its own significant costs.
· The shift to renewable resources is going to happen eventually; let’s have our industry lead the world and make this a profit source for the US instead of giving our money to the current leaders in Europe and Japan.
The big critique against trying to wean our dependence on oil is that the alternatives cost too much. I would consider that the real costs of oil are huge, getting larger every year. The U.S. currently consumes over 20 million barrels of oil per day, which works out to over 400 billion dollars a year at current market rates, not to mention the significant associated costs listed above. It would be altogether better for us to drop an extra billion or two per year to take us in a better direction.
posted by Jim at
9:18 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home