Energy independence or…energy interdependence

January 27, 2009 by Bruce Kauffmann · 2 Comments, leave one of your own
Filed under: energy

In 1980 when President Ronald Reagan assumed the presidency in great part because of America’s domestic economic woes, America depended on international suppliers for 40 percent of its petroleum products. Last year that percentage was more than 65 percent, and although there are a number of other factors that have contributed to our current economic problems, the high price of energy certainly has not helped.

Small wonder that the just-launched White House blog recently spoke of President Obama signing “two Presidential Memoranda aimed at getting us on the path to energy independence.”

Granted, anything that can reduce our over dependence on foreign energy imports is a good thing and in his two memoranda President Obama directed the Department of Transportation to establish higher fuel efficiency standards for vehicles – known as Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE)- while paving the way for California and more than a dozen other states to raise emissions standards above and beyond the national standard.

yergincoverweb Energy independence or…energy interdependence But to play Devil’s Advocate for a moment, which is the more important goal – energy independence or energy security? I would argue that Daniel Yergin, the Pulitzer Prize winning author of The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power, is right when he says energy security is more important – and certainly more achievable – than energy independence, and achieving energy security will actually necessitate more energy interdependence. According to Yergin, the key is diversity, not only diversity of energy sources, including renewables and the expanding global liquefied natural gas market, but also diversity of energy suppliers. The more buyers and sellers there are, freely trading as many different forms of energy as currently exist, the less likelihood of supply disruptions and the more likelihood of a moderating effect on both price and volatility.

Of course, using less energy is also a critical goal, and the more that government at all levels can facilitate energy conservation and efficiency, the better – not only for our economy, but also for our environment. But the larger point remains. Our political leaders have been talking about “energy independence” since the Nixon Administration in the late 1960s and almost 50 years later we are more dependent than ever. I doubt very much we can ever achieve energy independence. But if we strengthen our ties to the global community of energy suppliers and buyers, I believe we can achieve energy security.

Share:

No related posts.

2 Comments, leave one of your own
Tags: energy

Comments

2 Comments on Energy independence or…energy interdependence

sherry on Tue, 27th Jan 2009 8:15 pm

We need to utilize everything in out power to reduce our dependence on foreign oil including using our own natural resources.OPEC will continue to cut production until they achieve their desired 80-100. per barrel. The high cost of fuel this past year seriously damaged our economy and society. Oil is finite. We are using oil globally at the rate of 2X faster than new oil is being discovered. We need to take some of these billions in bail out bucks and bail ourselves out of our dependence on foreign oil. Jeff Wilson has a really good new book out called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence Now. He explores our uses of oil besides gasoline, our depletion, out reserves and stores as well as viable options to replace oil.Oil is finite, it will run out in the not too distant future. WE need to take some of these billions in bail out bucks and bail America out of it’s dependence on foreign oil. The historic high price of gas this past year did serious damage to our economy and society.If all gasoline cars, trucks, and SUV’s instead had plug-in electric drive trains, the amount of electricity needed to replace gasoline is about equal to the estimated wind energy potential of the state of North Dakota. WE should never allow others to have that much power over our economy again. Every member of congress needs to read this book.

Melvin Goldstein on Thu, 5th Feb 2009 5:30 pm

Question: question 12 in “Thinking Physics” – page 259
Inside a warm damp cave completely sealed off from the outside world could life flourish indefinitely?

Answer: No life forms could flourish indefinitely. In an isolated system, entropy always increases. Life tries to push entropy in the opposite direction. When life is created, entropy decreases in the cave but nature demands a greater entropy increase offset. The cave, being sealed, would mean that entropy would reach its max, thus energy necessary to sustain and generate new life would be unavailable. Maybe we should learn a lesson from this. Available energy is mandatory. Wealth may equate to available energy. If you want to live in a nation that is prospering make sure that its available energy supply is abundant.

Entropy is one of”Physics Foibles”