CHANGE MY LOCATION
Commentary - Americans must start cutting back on oil
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Related Topics:
The supplies needed to feed America’s voracious appetite for oil continue to tighten, but we have not yet done anything effective to reduce our
dependence on this vital commodity.
High oil prices are a symptom of tight supplies and have grown $20-30/barrel during 2000-2003 to over $90 now. The world’s spare oil pumping capacity has dwindled to almost nothing – less than 1.5 million barrels per day (mbd). Thus the supply/demand balance has changed dramatically and permanently for the worse.
Even though the United States has only 2.4 percent of the world’s oil reserves, it uses 24 percent of all oil consumed, importing over 60 percent of it. Americans no longer have much oil, but continue to use it extravagantly.
We’ve also been losing control over supplies. Our percentage of the world’s oil reserves has fallen from 25 percent in 1950 to 2.4 percent today. And oil companies now have less authority over the development of reserves in foreign countries where oil rights are generally owned by the state.
Historically, these states leased their oil lands to major oil companies – mostly American – with the technological expertise to find and develop the reserves. However, governments now realize how valuable these oil
rights are and have become much more restrictive about giving foreign oil companies control. Some have even reneged on previous contracts.
Oil is so convenient and economical that it fuels 97 percent of our transportation. Gasoline constitutes 45 percent of our daily oil usage. Substituting another fuel for transportation is inevitable over the
coming decades, but we do not have the luxury of moving from automobiles to mass transportation.
The infrastructure of homes, schools, and workplaces in most of this country was built around personal transportation. While we can afford to revamp cars and fueling stations as needed, we cannot
afford to move the entire population together enough for mass transit to work for everyone. We will have to solve the problem of powering vehicles with
something other than oil.
What actions can the U.S. take to use less oil to accomplish the same transportation task and stimulate development of alternatives? Conservation alone can provide large savings in oil consumption. For
decades, Europe has heavily taxed fuels with the result that their cars get much better mileage than ours. If our cars were as efficient as those in Europe, we would reduce oil imports by more than what we now buy from the Middle East.
We have been too timid in rolling out new technologies. For example, the “Set
America Free” blueprint states that America could reduce oil consumption in 2025 dramatically if all cars were hybrids and half of them were plug-in
Hybrids powered by virtually any source, including nuclear. Instead, we have wasted several precious years and spent considerable money on our experiment with corn-based ethanol, a process that dramatically raises the price of corn but does not have the potential to make a big impact on oil consumption.
Considerably higher fuel prices would stimulate both conservation and alternative fuels by harnessing the
ingenuity of private industry. Thousands of companies driven by the profit motive would take up the challenge to find the best technologies.
Higher prices could be caused by taxes of perhaps 20 cents per gallon over ten years, with the government returning the money by reducing other taxes. This steady increase would minimize any negative impact on the economy, while sending a clear message to encourage conservation. Other approaches, such as stiffer CAFÉ standards or other investment incentives, are more complicated, slower acting, and often produce unanticipated side effects:
To ensure its economic health, America should take steps now to halt the growth in oil consumption and accelerate the long process of developing new technologies. Given that we sent a man to the moon in ten years and completely converted our nation’s industry to a wartime footing in the six months after Pearl Harbor, we certainly have the capability to cut the growth rate in oil consumption to zero
by January 2010, and lower it annually by a half million barrels per day after that.
Tom Mast is the author of “Over a Barrel; A Simple Guide to the Oil Shortage.”
Comments from Examiner Readers
1:52 PM MST on Thu., Jan. 17, 2008 re: "GOP must reclaim its Reagan roots"
Report as inappropriate
1:44 PM MST on Thu., Jan. 17, 2008
re: "GOP must reclaim its Reagan roots"
Report as inappropriate
8:30 AM MST on Tue., Jan. 15, 2008
re: "GOP must reclaim its Reagan roots"
Report as inappropriate
11:32 AM MST on Mon., Jan. 14, 2008
re: "GOP must reclaim its Reagan roots"
Report as inappropriate
9:55 PM MST on Sat., Dec. 8, 2007
re: "Teaching Sudan a lesson"
Report as inappropriate
7:48 PM MST on Mon., Dec. 3, 2007
re: "Why is Disney bashing America?"
Report as inappropriate
11:40 AM MST on Mon., Dec. 3, 2007
re: "Why is Disney bashing America?"
Report as inappropriate
5:39 AM MST on Sat., Dec. 1, 2007
re: "Teaching Sudan a lesson"
Report as inappropriate
6:01 PM MST on Sun., Nov. 25, 2007
re: "Private profit disguised as public health"
Report as inappropriate
9:27 PM MST on Fri., Nov. 23, 2007
re: "Private profit disguised as public health"
Report as inappropriate
9:44 AM MST on Mon., Nov. 19, 2007
re: "With Sarkozy, conservatives discover new-found love of France"
Report as inappropriate
3:58 PM MST on Wed., Oct. 31, 2007
re: "What's not to like about Nicolas Sarkozy?"
Report as inappropriate
2:00 PM MST on Sat., Oct. 20, 2007
re: "Oprah's gaze turns to politics"
Report as inappropriate
1:15 PM MST on Sat., Oct. 20, 2007
re: "Turkey has history of being 'insulted'"
Report as inappropriate
11:30 AM MST on Sat., Oct. 20, 2007
re: "Turkey has history of being 'insulted'"
Report as inappropriate
11:28 AM MST on Sat., Oct. 20, 2007
re: "Oprah's gaze turns to politics"
Report as inappropriate
9:08 AM MST on Sat., Oct. 20, 2007
re: "Turkey has history of being 'insulted'"
Report as inappropriate
8:39 PM MST on Thu., Aug. 23, 2007
re: "Giving Prince George's parents choice will fix the schools"
Report as inappropriate
3:00 PM MST on Fri., Aug. 10, 2007
re: "Big Business is LOST at sea"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
while your at banning stuff,mike.could you ban those women in church from wearing all that cheap tiolet water.sometimes its so bad that lighting a match in there would blow the roof clean off.tell them that taking a shower is o k in the eyes of jesus.
172 agree | 172 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
huckabee wants to ban smoking in the u s? i guess it would be like the "war on drugs". what would madison ave call this one,"war on coffin nails".wow!!! another blackmarket business to get into. america is truly a great country full of opporunity for those of a criminal ilk.lets go after booze next,mike.in fact i think the program was written back in the 20's or 30'so all you need is a "ciggie and cocktail czar".that ought to clear out wash d c . BUT!thats o k you could sell it to pat robbersome and make some pocket change.your my man huckel!!!
175 agree | 192 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Mr. Mirth Alert said:
Apparently, Mr. Shirley needs to be reminded that this religious right was wrapped very tightly around those Reagan roots, something a genuine libertarian-conservative like the late Barry Goldwater railed against. The sirens' song of fed. intervention that the religious right heard when G.W. Bush was elected is one written & rehearsed in the latter days of the Reagan tenure & practiced in secret while Clinton reigned. When conservative ideology subplanted conservative values, then did Reagan roots shrivel & croak.
187 agree | 167 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Brilliant and well said. I have been saying for years that the social conservatives have hijacked the Republican party and are driving the party off of a cliff intellectually and philosophically.
168 agree | 167 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Well said. If anything, Mr. Kirchick is too polite in his assessment of Sudan. It is high time we resumed aboveground testing of nukes, and Khartoum would be an ideal location. Omar Bashir is nothing more than another copy of a Saddam Hussein or Manuel Noriega, save forthe fact that he is a representative of the great "religion of peace". Don't bother invading, just kill off the vermin.
208 agree | 182 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Perhaps this is why Disney decided to showcase Canada in their "Welcome to America" video; I guess they really do hate all of us and simply want our money. Shame on Disney.
225 agree | 223 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Follow the money for the real story. The Travel Industry Association desperately needs money and counts on some, if not all of the $200 million federal outlay to flow through its books. The Discover America staff is on Travel Industry Association payroll so the public isn't exactly getting an objective view from two different groups. Naturally the big attractions, hotel groups, etc. support the $200 million tourism promotion fund because it will directly help their business at taxpayer expense. When the Commerce Department opposes the plan, that tells you something. Follow the money. Look at little closer.
259 agree | 249 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Teaching Sudan a lesson - Muslim intolerance in this case was mild, in Kosovo the Muslim burn alive and decapitate their victims - why then do our government alaways pander to the Muslims? Why the double standards?
265 agree | 231 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"Non-profit" is a huge misnomer, as there is always someone who benefits (profits) from such activity. Profit itself is not bad - it's a necessary incentive to make sure people invest in activities that generate a return. Where it becomes a profit is when an activity or program is pushed as altruistic when there is clearly a party who stands significant financial gain.
294 agree | 282 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
BostonRay said:
Nothing new here. All these "non-profits" exist as "advocates" for whoever and get to pretend they don't. Until the IRS cracks down on this major fraud do not expect any change. It is a massive tax dodge as they are lobbyists (without being taxed). It's all profit to them.
285 agree | 304 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Finally reconciliation and PBS and CBS and NPR Go ballistic.. its time once again to return to French food and wine ! Its time celebrate the friendship. Yes Vie Le France and Ms Sarkozy
345 agree | 244 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Eric Land said:
In my opinion, the leftists (including those in the media) want to silence rightists' opinions in any way they could, including but not limited to digging out the rightists' personal lives rather than where the rightists stand on the issues. For example, The Examiner commentator Jay Ambrose mentioned an interview of rightist French President Nicolas Zarkozy by leftist media reporter Lesley Stahl (from leftist TV broadcaster CBS): "What's not to like about Nicolas Sarkozy?" wherein Lesley Stahl insisted on asking about Nicolas' relations with his wife. Moreover, those leftists have the gall or audacity to accuse the rightists of doing the dirty tricks that they (the leftists) themselves are guilty of doing. I think those leftists have perception (or cognitive) distortions that are needed to be treated by psychiatric experts on cognitive therapy.
289 agree | 315 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Vincent Onditi said:
We all know that you examine all that might prevent Hillary from clinching the DC party nomination, but attacking Oprah, this way, you have exposed how the demon of racism inside you is reacting to the reality that Barack is the next President of the United States of America. According to you, if Oprah, should support Hillary instead of Barack, she‘d just be fine, but now that, she is supporting Barack, she an opportunist. Michael Taube you say, you are a public affairs analyst, commentator and columnist in Canada, but me, I only see hate and demagogy in this article. This article exposes your lack of information and your lack of ideas that emphasises general problem skills. I’m sure Mrs Clinton would not want an idiot like you to be in her campaign staff. Senator Barack Obama is the next President of United States of America, “sad” isn’t it? Ha ha! Dr. Vincent Onditi is white, and a supporter of Ill. Senator for president, because America believes and supports the idea w
322 agree | 280 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Kirk, first of all, the Armenian genocide by the fact of its denial is very much current. Second the USA was very much involved at the time and finally by not recognizing others does not mean the US should not recognize none! The where do we start? Many of the recent troubles of the US have their roots in the past. By ignoring the past the US is not doing a favor to itself neither to the world.
309 agree | 291 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Kirk, You miss the whole point. We have cozy relations with the genocidal perpetrating turks. MY TAX DOLLARS GOES THERE. The price of that relationship with the turks is we have to rewrite history for them which you seem to not have a problem with. Your message is: as long as there is gain, we can overlook mass murder???? The Armenian genocide isn't disposable or arguable. It is a fact and the turks need to get used to being "insulted" if that is what the truth does. P.S. Tell me one george w. bush policy that isn't flawed?
321 agree | 306 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Dawn Deskins said:
Mike clearly doesn't have a problem with iconic celebrities endorsing or raising money for political candidates; he only has a problem with Black celebrities endorsing Black candidates! Where's the castigation of Hillary Clinton supporters and fund-raisers like Steven Spielberg, arguably the most successful and powerful director in the world or Rob Reiner or Quincy Jones or Magic Johnson...? What makes their endorsements and fund-raising any different than Oprah's? Only one: Oprah is a Black woman supporting the only Black candidate running. He makes a bill deal of Oprah exclusively interviewing Senator Obama, but he doesn't mention that Cathy Hughes, Black female owner of TV One (only one of two national telelvision networks) as well as the largest urban radio network in the world has endorsed Hillary Clinton and she will only be interviewing Hillary Clinton during the primary season--not Barack Obama or any of the other candidates.
324 agree | 321 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The real problem is: Turkey lives in “civilized isolation” and it is exporting its saggresive denial policy US should have the courage to call a genocide by its name... Which message is US congress going to send to the world if US cedes to the turkish threats and blackmails ? what will ask Turkey next ? to "deport" kurds, inorder to get ride of tehm? Why should the "partnership" of US with Turkey be build on the foundation of denial a crime aginst all humanity, this is denial of Armenian Genocide? How lang can exist such a partnership because of American Values (freedoom, justic , moral )!? Promisses, promisses .. read more on this in internet G. BUSH in 2000 ... GEORGE W. BUSH RECOGNIZES ARMENIAN GENOCIDE Republican Candidate Calls on Americans to Remember and Acknowledge "Facts and Lessons" of the "Genocidal Campaign" against the Armenians ...
306 agree | 296 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Arnold said:
As a parent of children in Prince George's County schools, I can see how the unfortunate reputation of the system might seem useful as a way to promote libertarian values. However the author needs to look deeper into what happens at schools in the targeted county to provide a full diagnosis and remedy. First, not all schools in the county system are troubled. County schools just received the US Department of Education's highest honor, the blue ribbon or NCLB's adequate yearly progress. Second, parents don't need a tax credit in order for their choices and involvement to make a difference. Parents in the system already have selective programs from which to choose. They also can choose to become more active in their own school and work with teachers to get the desired result. I know it works, because I've done it. Third, with choices comes the challenge for preferred programs to "scale-up" to meet demand. Tax-credits do not guarantee service. The answer is in shared leadersh
366 agree | 342 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Mr. Carney is totally ignorant of the provisions of the treaty or of the 1994 protocol which modified it in order to accommodate the concerns stated in President Reagan's Oceans Policy Statement of March, 1983. (So is Ms. Schlaffly, who makes repeated false statements about the TEXT of this treaty. Not interpretation, the TEXT!) Please inform me what article of the treaty proclaims the oceans and all their resources to be the "common heritage of mankind," whatever that means. The reference should be to the seaBED beyond national jurisdiction. That's why Russia is busily trying to claim large portions of the Arctic, and as non-parties to the treaty, we can't lodge our own claim or object to Russia's. The opponents to this treaty have been waging a disinformation campaign for years. Before that, they were telling us that water fluoridation was a communist plot. Having raised three kids to adulthood with no cavities, I'm in no mood to listen to them now.
350 agree | 372 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree