5
U.S. surprisingly close to energy independence
Power lines run past the cooling tower at American Electric Power's (AEP) Mountaineer coal power plant in New Haven, W.V. A new report shows America produces 81 percent of its own energy.
To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.
Kai Ryssdal: You could try, but there probably aren't many issues on which you can draw a straight line from Richard Nixon to Barack Obama.
But then you get to energy independence. It's been a goal of this country and every president since Nixon, since the Arab oil embargos of the '70s. Looks like we're moving closer to it.
The folks at Bloomberg crunched the latest numbers from the government. The U.S. is now 81 percent energy self-sufficient. We're talking energy for both transportation and electricity, just to be clear.
Sarah Gardner reports from the Marketplace Sustainability Desk it's progress -- not a panacea, though.
Sarah Gardner: If the U.S. is moving closer to energy independence, it’s thanks, in no small part, to the boom in shale oil and natural gas. In fact, last year we relied less on foreign oil than in any of the past 16 years. Experts say that good news for national security, jobs, and the trade deficit. It also puts America on track to be world energy’s Big Kahuna.
Jamie Webster is senior manager at PFC Energy.
Jamie Webster: Because of the boom, largely in natural gas but a bit in oil as well, by the time you get to 2020, we will actually be above Saudi Arabia, we will be above Russia, and we will be the number one producer on a country by country basis.
But Daniel Yergin says that won’t totally protect us. He’s author of “The Quest: Energy, Security and the Re-Making of the Modern World.” Yergin says when it comes to energy, we’re all connected.
Daniel Yergin: We’re still going to be part of a global oil market where there’s one price and if something happens in the Persian Gulf, something happens with Iran or some other scenario and it affects supplies and the price of oil, you’ll feel that everywhere including the United States.
Critics say all this domestic production of fossil fuels has its downsides, like environmental risk. But natural gas prices are now so cheap, there’s less incentive to invest in cleaner energy, like solar and wind.
I’m Sarah Gardner for Marketplace.
What a strange notion of "independence". The more of our fossil fuel reserves we burn now, the more dependent our nation will be on foreign sources in the future. It demonstrates how shortsighted markets can be, and how that mindset has infected people's thinking.
While I respect Marketplace as a news program, and look forward to the Sustainability stories, with all due respect, I disagree with the main idea of "U.S. surprisingly close to energy independence."
For the average American, the idea of "energy independence" is that anyone can quickly fill up the tank of a car for a cheap price, travel 200 miles, from entirely domestic sources. The trouble is that all the cheap oil from the United States has been discovered and turned into carbon dioxide. The current price of oil is historically high, so companies have the incentive to drill to increase production a little, and American consumers have the incentive to reduce consumption.
The most important increase has been for natural gas. Unfortunately, most American cars do not run on natural gas. It does not have the ubiquitous infrastructure to deliver consumers. Although it can be turned into a liquid fuel for cars, there are very little built capacity to do so. It may take several decades for the free market build the natural gas cars, fueling stations, or gas-to-liquids plants to make us independent.
There is also a question of how much of these claims are hype. Some experts, such as Art Berman, believe that shale gas plays are overstated. Some of the natural gas production are "asset plays" which means companies drill at a loss so they can sell shares to Wall Street at a profit. Perhaps all that natural gas does not really exist.
Before the severe economic downturn, America was consuming about 20 million barrels of oil per day. In the past few years, we have raised domestic oil production to about 5.7 million per day. It is very doubtful we can raise domestic production to 10 million per day peak that we reached in the 1970s, much less likely to the levels during a prosperous economy any time soon.
Unless we develop incredible, revolutionary technology, America will not have "energy independence" any time soon. Electric vehicles may work, but will we buy them? Hydrogen fuel cells have require several technological miracles. If we really want to stop importing oil soon, we need to use bicycles and public transportation, which will not happen until we pay the painful European price for a long time.
"Critics say all this domestic production of fossil fuels has its downsides, like environmental risk. " That's it? Is that all you can say about the impact of burning tons of fossil fuels on the environment?
Please indicate the environmental impacts and risks of continued domestic fossil fuel production and use instead of using alternative non-carbon based energy sources. For example, discuss increased carbon in the atmosphere and its affect on the acidity of the oceans, the ability of plankton, fish and mammals in the oceans to survive. Discuss how the absence of ocean-based species will affect humans. Or discuss how mounting atmospheric carbon will affect the proliferation of insects that thrive in warmer conditions such as bacteria, viruses and mosquitos. A greater presence of such health-affecting species will affect world-wide health and economies.
While I applaud energy independence this report fails to mention a significant point when talking about fossil fuels and that is climate change. I know the public has been 'spun' into thinking this is a plot, either of liberal/socialists who want to regulate us all to death, OR of oil-companies simply trying to justify their price gouging ways, However, if you ask the thousands of climate scientists who are most active in their field you will find a near unanimous agreement that 1) The climate is warming significantly, enough to cause a large impact on civilization and 2) That this change is man-made. The agreement is 98-99%. When we begin to face this issue, energy independence based on new sources of fossil fuel will be a wrong turn.
