The Roots of Our Painful Oil Addiction
Posted June 9, 2008 in Moving Beyond Oil
Hear that sound? It's the shattering of records. Oil prices rose to nearly $140 per barrel in the oil futures market, driving the national average gas price to $4 a gallon for the first time, hitting those with lower incomes hardest. And GM fell below one-fifth of U.S. vehicle sales. These are of course linked, and as my colleague Roland Hwang has written new global warming policy would help to alleviate the painful repercussions for Detroit automakers and gasoline consumers.
In addition to the current economic hardship caused by these trends, we need to keep in mind that our national security is also undermined by overdependence on this strategic commodity. A stark reminder of this fact: We are now very close to Osama Bin Laden's outlandish target price for oil about ten years ago, as my friend Anne Korin of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security reminded a Senate committee in recent testimony.
This is not news, of course. But what may surprise some readers is the history behind this Faustian bargain spans half of the twentieth century, back to a symbolically important 1945 meeting between FDR and the ruler of Saudi Arabia, Ibn Saud (accompanied by his slaves and an astrologer) aboard a U.S. battleship in the Suez Canal. There are no transcripts from the meeting, but this was a priority for FDR in the last months of his life because of what lies beneath the sands of the kingdom: The world's vastest reserves of petroleum.
Our entanglement with the Middle East stretches back to the eighteenth century, as historian Michael Oren documents in his masterful history Power, Faith and Fantasy. But the past six decades have been particularly costly, both in dollars and in lives.
This is the topic of an excellent, timely new documentary, Blood and Oil, which puts Hampshire College Professor Michael Klare's body of work on the screen for the first time. The historical thread he documents marches from FDR, through Truman (shown here speaking on this topic before Congress)...
...through President after President into the present.
Klare also boldly forecasts a future where conflicts over this resource spread into Africa, with the U.S. military becoming entangled there too. Klare's historical analysis is certainly bracing and enlightening, so his predictions are worth a listen.
The main takeaway lesson from the film is that we really need our elected leaders in Washington to break away from this twentieth-century pattern of slavish oil addiction. And as switchboard readers know the best way to do this is to drive down our Goliath-sized demand for this commodity. This would shore up national security, take a huge strain off our military, and give consumers a way off this gas price rollercoaster.
One final note: Thank you to the documentary producer for the stills from the film included in this blog post.
Comments are closed for this post.
Comments
Trudy Sclar — Jun 11 2008 06:40 PM
I couldn't agree more that our nation's addiction to oil must be resolved, and for this reason my goal is to put more electric cars on the road as soon as possible.
Outdated low speed vehicle laws that are not "up to speed" are discouraging demand from people who would like to drive city EVs, so we at Environmental Motors would appreciate your support by signing the petition on our website: "Stop Limiting Electric Vehicles."
Montana and Washington created a Medium Speed Vehicle classification and we believe this should be extended to the federal level. It's time for a needed change and to look forward.
Thanks so much,
Trudy Sclar
www.environmentalmotors.com
PotRoast — Jun 12 2008 01:37 AM
The Democratic run Congress which is controlled by the Environmentalist Lobbyist and the "Free Lunch Bunch" Lobbyist need to wake up and do something.
Sunday, May 14, 2006
Although, US law will not allow American companies from drilling for oil off the coast of Florida, the US laws will not stop the Chinese from setting up 36 new oil wells there for Cuba.
"No Zone" laws pushed by the current minority party and passed by the US government, will not stop China with its abyssmal environmental record from drilling WITHIN 50 MILES from the Florida Keys:
The Cuban government is to allow China to station 12 oil rigs in its waters in the Gulf of Mexico.
Fidel Castro's government has stepped up work on 36 new oil wells in partnership with Chinese and Canadian companies, officials said on Thursday.
The Cuban government is generally silent about oil matters, but this week Communist Party newspaper Granma also reported that Cuba had drilled its deepest oil well yet near Varadero, east of Havana.
Diplomatic sources said Indian, Norwegian and Spanish companies would begin searching for crude oil in the gulf.
"China, as our National Security Strategy points out, is trying to lock up resources around the world, and they are locking up resources in our own back yard where we can't even compete," Senator Craig (R-ID) said in his own speech to the Senate on Thursday.
The current "No Zones" prevent American companies from drilling, well, anywhere off the US coastline.
On Thursday, Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) gave Senate speech explaining the current MiNOrity "No Zones" for drilling and exploration:
We are experiencing higher gasoline, oil, and natural gas prices today because of decades of restricted development of new sources of petroleum.
From ANWR to off-shore development such as Lease Area 181 in the Gulf of Mexico, we have identified oil and natural gas reserves that can be developed and used responsibly. Yet time and time again efforts to increase supply, and reduce prices, are blocked. For instance, ten years ago President Clinton vetoed development in ANWR.
For decades, the minority party has blocked one effort after another to responsibly develop the energy resources our country possesses, transforming vast areas of opportunity into "The No Zone."
Because of current U.S. policy, U.S. companies are prohibited from developing oil fields that lie in Cuban waters and come within 50 miles of Florida.
However, Cuba is exploring and potentially developing these oil fields, estimated by the U.S. Geological Survey to possess more oil than the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, and Cuba is partnering with China and other countries, such as Spain, France, and Canada.
Now, as we sit idly by, worried about development 100 miles from Florida, China is actively exploring oil fields 50 miles from Key West, Florida. U.S. companies are barred from working in this area because of U.S. policy . So, instead of allowing the most environmentally responsible companies to operate there and increase our domestic supply, China, who has a dismal environmental record, is sucking close, lucrative oil reserves dry.
Cuba's national Granma reported the news about the bill presented in Congress that would change current oil policy:
TWO Republican Congressmen presented a bill on May 12 that would make it possible for U.S. companies to make investments for oil prospecting in Cuban waters, according to the AFP...
..Senator Larry Craig of Idaho said that the U.S. people would be surprised and amazed if they knew that the country was suffering a serious energy crisis while foreign oil companies like "China, India, Norway, Canada and Spain have already…bought the rights to undertake exploratory drilling in the North Cuba Basin," just 50 nautical miles from the U.S. coast."
It is time to change the law and allow U.S. industries to explore and extract resources in "our own region" before foreign companies monopolize potentially profitable resources, he added.
With this bill, both Congressmen were responding to legislation proposed in Congress recently by supporters of Cuban-American Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Republican representative from Florida.
The speech by Senator Craig on Thursday could not have been more timely. While the senator was giving his talk, Cuba was announcing that China will start drilling operations off the coast of Cuba and within 100 miles from the Florida coast.
If America is lucky, maybe we'll be able to purchase oil from Fidel Castro some day soon!
Dan Troutman — Jun 16 2008 10:15 AM
There is something seriously wrong with the "pay more to take longer to do less" philosophy of a lot of the "green" movements. Who can afford a $75,000 electric vehicle (55mph, 200 mile range, 500lb useful payload)?
Every new transportation system has offered TIME savings over the one it replaced. Jets > propeller aircraft > trains > autos > horse/buggy > bicycle > walking. Think about it!
When you get down to it - TIME is MONEY!
America needs a new transportation system that moves people and goods at 300mph minimum! As a nuclear physicist and part time inventor I'm working on an electric/mag-lev system oriented to the average American commuter. Such a system needs to be constructed in the current interstate highway corridors. Can you imagine the "I gotta get me one of those!" comments when commuters chugging along at 30-45mph in their hybrid autos get a look at those folks traveling at 300mph+ on their way to work!?
Design a zero-emission HIGH-SPEED computer controlled transportation system!
Offering a substantial performance benefit is the only way for Americans to quickly adopt and pay for a new transportation system (whatever form it takes.) Going slower and being more expensive is literally a "waste of time."
Dan Price — Jun 17 2008 11:49 PM
The only way we will work out way out of this problem is to stop subsidizing our automobile transportation system by constructing fee highways with income taxes.
We need to realize that we subsidize many technologies. Coal has an economic subsidy given many years ago to the railroad companies so they would build many rails to disparent places. These subsidies have long lasting effects.
For my part I am attempting to gain traction on energy storage concepts that have the potential to truly break our link of fossil fuels with reliable electricity (See www.gravityenergystoragesystems.com. Electricity can be used for transit and would make more economic sense if we started taxing gasoline like the europeans do.