skip to main content

→ Top Stories:
Keystone XL Pipeline
Clean Energy Successes
Defending the Clean Air Act

Deron Lovaas’s Blog

Slashing Oil Dependence Key to Avoiding More Spills, Here and Abroad

Deron Lovaas

Posted September 2, 2010 in Moving Beyond Oil

Tags:
, , , , , , , , ,
Share | | |

In the wake of spills in the Gulf, we must take real steps to safeguard our coasts and oceans. However, the oil market is global and other nations such as Nigeria and Norway may be advancing offshore drilling programs with an eye to replacing U.S. oil production.

This is in part explained by the globe's tremendous thirst for the black stuff. I recently stumbled across a new and compelling way to wrap my head around the scale of our oil addiction. Globally we consume about one trillion gallons of oil annually, which is about equal to one cubic mile of oil. Just to explain how massive this is, you could fill the giant Bird's Nest Stadium from the 2008 Beijing Olympics 850 times over with that amount of oil. Here's a graphic depiction next to the Eiffel Tower for scale:

Cubic_Mile_of_Oil.jpg

Unfortunately results from additional drilling are likely to vary greatly depending on the country, and increased drilling elsewhere is likely to yield substantial social and environmental damage. This is due in part to what economists call the “resource curse” whereby nations endowed with large natural resource endowments don’t necessarily prosper. Recent analysis shows that governance – i.e., whether or not there are democratic elections and other checks and balances to keep corruption at bay – is the key factor in whether or not society and its economy and environment benefit from being abundantly gifted with some commodity under one’s soil.

This is why Norway may not be at risk should it increase production, also made more likely due to laudable environmental policies and practices. For example, the bulk of profits from petroleum exports to into a special fund created in part to finance the transition to other energy and industrial income after resources are drained. Norway also assesses a carbon-pollution-based tax on industry including oil. It is also the host to the first commercial-scale underground (and underwater) sequestration of carbon dioxide, in the Sleipner field where one million tons of this heat-trapping pollution has been disposed of annually since 1996 (information in this paragraph comes from Frank T. Manheim's The Conflict Over Environmental Regulation in the United States).

Nigeria, like many other oil-exporting countries, is a different story. Many have weakly-enforced environmental laws (or, in the case of Kazakhstan, laws that are merely three years old!). This means that spills are more of a fact of life than in the U.S. As Amnesty International documented in a 2009 study there are spills in Nigeria almost weekly, with about 2,000 active ones last year and an eye-popping 9-13 million barrels of oil have been spilled onshore and offshore in the last 50 years. The Niger Delta, one of the world’s most important wetland and coastal ecosystems, has been plundered for its oil since commercial production started in 1958. Yet as described in this analysis the people of the region have suffered the consequences extensive pollution, including damage to fishing needed for subsistence and a massive transfer of resources out of the region to corrupt officials and other parts of the country.

This is why my friend Lisa Margonelli has rightly said we need a moratorium on oil itself, not just one offshore drilling, to avoid exporting oil spills and contributing to the misery of countries cursed with oil and poor governance.The best way to counter the oil curse is to break our addiction, and the next biggest step in that direction is to push the fuel economy performance bar on our car and truck fleet up further, saving consumers big bucks to boot.

Share | | |

Comments

Brooke Mackie-KetchamSep 2 2010 11:53 PM

how about a graphic comparing what the Deep Water Horizon Oil Rig catastrophe oil amount was.........and you can compare it to the Eiffel Tower or the Statue of Liberty, whatever you'd like.

Deron LovaasSep 3 2010 12:39 PM

Good idea, Brooke, although the reality is that it will be a much, much smaller cube. As I've written about before, given that we here in the U.S. alone consume more than 13,000 gallons per minute on average the amount spilled in the Gulf -- while ecologically and economically devastating -- pales compared to how much oil we guzzle as part of our daily routine. Breaking from that routine is possible, and in fact gasoline use is projected to decline in coming decades thanks to increasing vehicle efficiency and more moderate growth in vehicle travel. But driving our dependence down for real will require serious, effective vehicle and transportation policy moving forward.

Stewart FarberSep 4 2010 01:19 PM

I had made a previous post [at about 1:30 EST the morning of 9/3 ] to the one below made the evening of 9/3. My original post of early morning 9/3 as one of the current 50 or so comments posted seems to have been deleted in its entirety. Why was it removed? It smacks of censorship by the NRDC about the benefits of nuclear energy in reducing oil use.

================
9/3 evening post to Facebook:

Stewart Farber
I made a post early this morning that nuclear power plants in the US, since they began operating, have generated an amount of electricity that, if generated by oil, would take the volume of 5,000 Gulf oil spills. WHY WAS MY POST APPARENTLY ...CENSORED IN ITS ENTIRETY?? Is there a reason the NRDC doesn't want this point made because it shows how much oil/fossil fuel use has been avoided by nuclear electric generation? And for all those who think electric rechargeable autos are a magic answer to reducing fossil fuel use --the immediate prospect is that much of the electricity needed will come from coal fired power plants. More CO-2 will be released in making the electricity for rechargeable cars from coal than would be released if the cars ran on oil. My graduate training is in Public Health and conventional Air Pollution control. The benefit of nuclear power plants in avoiding fossil fuel [coal/oil/gas] burning in making electricity is incontrovertible. Why should this information be censored by the NRDC??See More
15 hours ago · LikeUnlike ·

Deron LovaasSep 6 2010 08:13 PM

Stewart - I'm not sure what you're referencing; this is the first time I've seen your comment. I do know that while you have a point that large-scale vehicle electrification in the coming decades would increase greenhouse gas emissions especially in those areas where the grid is most coal-dependent. That means that ramping up low-carbon power sources (a task made easier when demand is moderated via more efficient use of energy). A portfolio of such sources is probably the best approach, one that will vary depending on the region of the country. However, I confess that I'm a transportation expert and get out of my depth quickly when discussing electricity. At any rate, thanks for your comment.

Take care,

Deron

Kim@NRDCSep 7 2010 11:50 AM

Stewart,

We apologize for the deletion of your comment on NRDC's Facebook page and are trying to find out why it happened. In the meantime, we encourage you to re-post your comment on the Facebook post (in addition to what you posted on 9/3) and apologize for the inconvenience.

Here is a link to the Facebook post:
http://bit.ly/a4yeJ0

Best,

Kim
NRDC Web department

Comments are closed for this post.

About

Switchboard is the staff blog of the Natural Resources Defense Council, the nation’s most effective environmental group. For more about our work, including in-depth policy documents, action alerts and ways you can contribute, visit NRDC.org.

Feeds: Deron Lovaas’s blog

Feeds: Stay Plugged In