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.
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.
First, natural gas is clean. It is the cleanest of all fossil fuels, emitting 40% less carbon dioxide than coal, 30% less carbon dioxide than oil and 15% less carbon dioxide than propane. Using more of our product to displace other fossil fuels reduces greenhouse gas emissions. But that’s not all. When we use natural gas directly in our furnaces, water heaters, ranges or dryers, we emit even fewer greenhouse gases than if we used appliances operated by electricity generated from coal, oil or even natural gas.
Consolidated Edison Company of New York (Con Edison)
Laclede Gas Company (Laclede)
ONEOK Partners
El Paso Pipeline Group (El Paso)
Recently, I was riding home to Northern Virginia on the Washington, DC Metrorail and stood across from a poster, which was obviously designed to sway public opinion away from including domestic oil and gas drilling in our national energy policy. The poster said “No, to oil and gas drilling” and included a large image of a man holding an oil covered bird in his hands. When is this going to stop?
