A Few More Words on Oil

Perhaps, it's not too surprising that while the Bush Administration has had seven-plus years to come up with a "comprehensive energy plan," it has not done so. Bush and Cheney are "oil people." In 2009, Cheney may go back to Halliburton and Bush will retire to Crawford (and probably purchase a home in Dallas where his presidential library will be built).

What this suggests to me is that basically any "comprehensive solution" to the energy problem, coming from this administration has to have "oil" at its center. In turn, this means open drilling in places such as ANWAR and off-shore along our coasts, as well as a major reduction in environmental regulation concerning refineries. In other words, the plan had to first and foremost take care of the oil industry and then, secondarily include some window dressing for alternative fuel advocates, global warming and environmentalists.

When this approach ran up against the latter and failed to get even a Republican Congress' approval, the "comprehensive solution" became dead in the water. Bush has "talked" about ridding ourselves of foreign dependency on oil and the promotion of alternative fuels (ethanol). But, as with so many other issues within this administration, the idea of "policy formulation," seems to be to call in industry lobbyists, listen to what they want and then find a "political way" of achieving it.

I suppose buggy whip manufacturers also "died hard," with the advent of the automobile and, in their day, lobbied to prevent the horseless carriage. And, today, I see the oil industry and the Bush Administration in a similar light. Here's the deal: Peak Oil (or, at least Peak Easy Oil) has or is about to occur. There may still be ways to fore go completely running out of oil for another 100-200 years via shale oil, drilling off-shore, etc., but the cost of the remaining oil (once the present known reserves are gone) will be high, maybe high enough to sustain $100-200 a barrel. At those prices, the cost of a gallon of gasoline isn't going to decline much and will probably rise higher over the long run. Speculation regarding a non-renewable resource will continue.

Plus, even if the search/drilling for additional oil is successful, we still end up with a comparatively "dirty energy." Let's forget, for the moment, global waming and disturbing Alaska, Floridia and California eco-systems and wildlife. Putting large amounts of carbon emissions into the air we breath for the sake of economic growth is just not a very smart idea if there are alternative energy solutions. Government subsidies, tax incentives, etc., should be shifting from fossil fuel conversion toward these alternative forms (bio-mass, solar, nuclear, hydro, wind - and the least emphasized, simple conservation).

A couple of more points. All of the oil in ANWAR doesn't substantially change our reliance on foreign oil at current rates of usage. Shale oil technology has a way to go before the result can be refined into vehicle useable gasoline. Similarly, coal conversion to useable oil is still a long way off. And, of course, even at higher prices we are left with essentially a "dirty fuel." Off-shore drilling? While oil covered Florida or California beaches doesn't particularly bother me personally, I doubt the tourist industry or environmentalists in those states will want to run the risk. [Prediction: Charlie Crist, Republican Governor of Florida, recently flip-flopped on his stand against off-shore drilling along Florida coasts, apparently to bring his position in-line with John McCain, in anticipation of becoming a VP candidate. I would predict that a) Crist will NOT get the VP slot and b) he'll be voted out of office in the next election. The Arnold, in California, also a Republican Governor, has announced he'll continue to fight against off-shore drilling in California.]

As for refineries: would you want one next door to you? Plus, why invest money in a refinery that may be useless in twenty years?

In sum, the Bush Administration is using the "scare pressure" of high oil prices to force Congress to return to an essentially outmoded form of energy.

In my opinion, given the long term and short term demand for energy (not just here, but around the world), oil prices will continue to rise whether we drill off-shore or in ANWAR and Americans would be kidding themselves if they think American oil companies are going to sell that oil at lower than the global market price, based on some patriotic motivation.

It's time to hold firm against drilling in ANWAR and off-shore, end fossil fuel subsidies and create a "comprehensive" energy program based on alternative energy forms. This will be a battle against one of the most powerful lobbying groups in our history and will probably require a global effort, led by the "post-industrial" West, which has achieved much of its material wealth and success based on fossil fuels.

The American people need to understand the "scare tactics" and stand-up to them. At an absolute minimum, environmentally sound ANWAR and off-shore drilling should be "traded" for a genuine long-term alternative fuel program, with a rough, overall phase out for fossil fuels and a phase-in for substitutions.