With gas prices at record highs and the Senate engaged in a fruitless struggle to find a new way forward on energy policy, the House Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming held a timely hearing this morning on "The Future of Oil."
The general consensus: the long-term prognosis for global oil supply and demand ain't good, and the U.S. had better start doing something different, quick. But what exactly? No consensus on that point.
Many Republicans in Congress -- and several of the organizations represented on today's panel -- maintain that the solution to our energy woes is more domestic drilling for oil and gas. Others -- including Select Committee Chair Ed Markey (D-Mass.) -- argue that the solution is investments that will move us away from reliance on fossil fuels.
"If we do not have a plan, there's going to have to be a high price that our economy is going to pay," said Markey, who stressed the need to invest in green technology and efficiency. He noted that while the U.S. has only 2 percent of the world's oil supply, we have demonstrated strength in the technology sector that, if we invest in it properly, could change both our energy path and the world's. "If we don't use that strength, we are ultimately going to be subservient to the geopolitical whims of the Middle East," said Markey.
Guy Caruso, administrator of the Energy Information Administration in the Department of Energy, testified to the severity of oil price increases -- in case anyone wasn't convinced yet. Gas prices are expected to hit an average of $4.15 by August, with prices for the whole year projected to average $0.97 a gallon more than in 2007. Caruso noted that provisions in last year's energy bill -- including the first fuel-economy increase in nearly 30 years and the creation of a renewable fuel standard -- should reduce oil use by 1.8 million barrels a day by 2030. Of course, additional improvements to efficiency could improve that figure.
All of the panelists agreed that there should be significantly more investment in renewable-energy R&D, but they had starkly different opinions on what to do about oil.
Karen Harbert, executive vice president of the Institute for 21st Century Energy, testified on behalf of the "drill domestic" crowd. "We are not running out of resources, we are running out of access to resources," she said. "We are depriving the American consumer of opportunity."
Amy Myers Jaffe, energy studies fellow at the James Baker Institute for Public Policy of Rice University, testified that the country needs to diversify its fuel sources, noting that in the '70s, the United States stopped relying on oil for electricity and home heating. The same needs to be done for automobiles, she said, which use the bulk of the oil consumed in the country today. And in order to diversify, companies are going to have to invest in research and development, she said, citing a report that found that the five largest oil companies spend very little on R&D each year -- less than half of what General Motors or Microsoft does, she said.
Myers Jaffe also rebutted the folks who are lobbying for the government to allow oil and gas drilling in new offshore areas and places like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, noting that oil companies aren't spending money on exploration in the places they're already allowed to drill.
Athan Manuel, director of the Sierra Club's lands protection program, testified on behalf of the "no new drilling, no way, no how" set. He cited estimates that 80 percent of the undiscovered oil and gas in the U.S. is in areas that are already open for exploration, much of which isn't being tapped right now. Manuel painted the future of oil as bleak -- and the future of the country as bleak if we don't wean ourselves.
"When you look to the future of oil, we hope you will see clean energy and renewable power," Manuel told the committee.
Committee members, of course, also had different takes on the best approach to the fuel problem. Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) nicely summed up his view: "As long as we rely on dead dinosaurs for our energy, we're doomed to global warming and high energy prices."
Cautious optimism for Copenhagen deal as Barcelona climate talks end
Another coal plant bites the dust
Barcelona outcome: White House strategy is plea for more time
Comments
View as Flat
EdieFrederick Posted 3:30 pm
11 Jun 2008
currently available for drilling, only 26% are being accessed.
His point was -- why rush into opening up new land when
existing resources are not being used. His point was -- a push
to open up new land distracts attention from the necessity to
acknowlege that oil supply is ultimately finite and we need to direct energy into developing new technologies ASAP.
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 4:59 pm
11 Jun 2008
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 9:21 pm
11 Jun 2008
But I certainly agree with the sentiment (and of course with Wolverine's "Less Consumption!" message). Ironically, the "keep drilling!" crowd ("wherever we want!"; "and screw the caribou, and the Gwich'in, and the Inupiat too, and best of all the polar bears, ha ha ha ha ha!") are the ones seeking the violation of paleontological remains of prehistoric living creatures. So sure, let us vilify them, all the time, whenever.
Nevertheless, let us also not forget our fundamental respect for all living creatures. Dinosaurs were fun beasts. There were lots of them; and the whole bunch of them lived off-and-on for 150 million years, at least, which is mighty respectable.
And birds are dinosaurs too: not very distant cousins from Velociraptor mongoliensis. Think about that, next time you bite into your Chicken McCluckburger (which I do not recommend, actually, the ordering-plus-biting, I mean, but far be it from me to pontificate).
Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
gmobus Posted 12:42 am
12 Jun 2008
I am always amazed at the way Washington works. Or rather, fails to work. So many self-important people who only think to talk to other self-important people, none of whom have any particular insights into ground truth. As Dick Cheney supposedly said, if I want to know about oil, I'll talk to the head of Exxon. OK maybe he didn't say that, but you get the point. If he really needed to know about oil he should talk to people like Ken Deffeyes. But all these people are interested in is oil-money, not oil geology and energy physics.
Well, we get the government we deserve.
George
George Mobus,
Associate Professor, Institute of Technology,
University of Washington Tacoma,
and Professional Student for Life
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 1:25 am
12 Jun 2008
We need to just trust our politicians and their near infinite wisdom.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
randino Posted 2:17 am
12 Jun 2008
Randy Cunningham
Cleveland, OH
Randy Cunningham
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 2:26 am
12 Jun 2008
That might clear up the confusion regarding whether it refers to petroleum or our representatives in Washington... or does it?
Generally, Americans, though they don't believe in evolution, appear very fond of dead dinosaurs. So I'd say this IS a country for dead dinosaurs. Indeed, we NEED them. Dinosaurs, by stimulating the curiosity of our youngsters, are the only thing standing between us and a new dark age of religious fundamentalism.
So... leave "sleeping" bacteria lie, in the ground, where they belong.
Permalink
Kenny B Posted 3:03 am
12 Jun 2008
Anyway, I think we should be listening to Nobuo Tanaka of the IEA and create an energy revolution, or as Ted Turner would say, another renaissance. That level of change is the only way to get out of the energy/environmental mess we're in.
Reducing consumption is good too, but I've tried being the gadfly to push that message on folks, and most of them just roll their eyes. In the meantime, I try to do my part.
Permalink
John former Marine Posted 3:30 am
12 Jun 2008
Honestly though, the hardest part of riding a commuter bus now is that it's full of SUV drivers who can't wait to get back out on the road in their Escalades (Escape/Escalante/Excapade/Excalibur) as soon as the price of gas drops back to a reasonable price ($3.85/gal.). It used to be that all of us bus-riders could laugh about the price of gas and bash SUV drivers openly...now we have to self-censor.
Shu pas a vende.
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 4:10 am
12 Jun 2008
"It used to be that all of us bus-riders could laugh about the price of gas and bash SUV drivers openly...now we have to self-censor."
I suggest continuing the joyous laughter regarding the price of gas. Perhaps the SUV drivers will recognize the joy of not relying on gasoline and they'll be motivated to permanently abandon their vehicles. Openly discuss the benefits of vegetarianism, recycling, et cetera as well. Consider this an opportunity to educate a community that normally insulates itself from the more progressive elements of our society. They can no longer hide in their steel cocoons.
It is, however, very kind of you and probably wise to not "bash" them openly. You should consider trying to help them by demonstrating a better way of life, not further alienate them and reinforce any bad stereotypes.
Permalink
cbh Posted 6:20 am
12 Jun 2008
Permalink