Issues: Oil & Energy

1. How is our country's energy policy related to national security?
2. How can we make our nation less vulnerable?
3. But aren't these fuel-efficient technologies still years away?
4. Will higher gas-mileage standards really save that much oil?
5. In the short term, shouldn't we also start drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other wilderness areas that might hold oil?
6. Is there a connection between energy security and global warming?
7. Sounds like these conservation strategies require action by the government and big business. What can I do?
8. I'm looking for a new car. What should I consider in buying one?
9. Have energy efficiency efforts worked in the past?

1. How is our country's energy policy related to national security?

The United States consumes 25 percent of all the oil produced in the world, yet we control just 3 percent of the world's oil reserves. As a result of this imbalance, we've become heavily reliant on foreign oil, much of which comes from the conflict-ridden Middle East. In 1974, our country imported one million barrels a day from the Persian Gulf; today, that figure tops 2.5 million. This dependence means our economy is highly vulnerable to wild swings in the price and supply of oil -- a fact that's become all the more unsettling since the Sept. 11th terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.

2. How can we make our nation less vulnerable?

By reducing our dependence on oil from all sources -- foreign and domestic. This is not only the fastest, cleanest and cheapest path to energy security, it's also the best way of keeping our planet healthy.

Figuring out how to do this isn't difficult. We already know that transportation accounts for two-thirds of all the oil we consume, so changing the way America travels can dramatically curb our use of oil. A first step should be improving the fuel efficiency of American-made cars, trucks and SUVs. Passenger cars today get only 24 miles to the gallon on average -- the lowest level since 1980 -- and nearly every model on the market today could easily and inexpensively be reengineered to get more miles from less fuel. The second should be speeding up the development of cleaner, more efficient fuels and cars for the future. Two promising technologies, ethanol made from crop wastes and hydrogen fuel cells, are already within reach.

Of course, decreasing the amount we drive will also help reduce our dependence on oil. Expanding public transportation systems can accomplish this. So, too, can "smart growth" communities that cluster homes around commercial areas, allowing residents to reach schools, grocery stores, restaurants and other services by walking or cycling rather than driving.

3. But aren't these fuel-efficient technologies still years away?

In some cases. Cars powered by fuel cells, for example, probably won't reach the mass market for another decade or two. (Fuel cells run on hydrogen, which is considered the ultimate "green" energy source -- its only byproduct is water.) But if we don't fund this research now, and set goals for producing these cars, they're likely to remain the next-generation novelties they are today.

Other advances, such as a new way of making ethanol, are ready to be tested on a commercial scale. This process draws on farm waste, such as corn stalks and rice hulls, to produce ethanol, while using far less energy than the current method.

Still other energy-saving technologies are available now. Automakers have all the tools they need to boost the average gas-mileage of new passenger vehicles to 40 mpg. And by increasing their production of gas-electric hybrid vehicles, they could raise the overall fuel efficiency for new vehicles to 55 mpg by 2020. But so far, Congress has failed to pass laws requiring higher gas-mileage standards, giving Detroit little incentive to make the investment needed to retool their factories.

4. Will higher gas-mileage standards really save that much oil?

Yes. By raising the average gas mileage of all new cars, including SUVs, to 40 mpg, our country would save more than 50 billion barrels of oil over the next 50 years. By the year 2020, this would mean a savings of 4 million barrels every day -- which is more than the amount of oil we now import from the Persian Gulf.

For car owners, this would translate to a net savings of more than $2000 in gas over the life of their vehicles, after accounting for slight increases in the price of fuel-efficient cars.

5. In the short term, shouldn't we also start drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other wilderness areas that might hold oil?

No, this won't solve our energy problems or make our country more secure. There's no way the United States can drill its way to energy independence -- we simply don't have enough oil. While it makes sense for oil companies to increase production in existing oil fields, the real solution to our problems is to reduce our use of oil, not to destroy our last remaining wild lands in search of new places to drill.

Nowhere is this more clear than in the debate over the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a rugged landscape of glaciers and rivers that teems with wildlife, including polar bears, Arctic wolves and caribou. After Sept. 11th, 2001, some members of Congress cited national security as a reason to begin drilling in the refuge. But if drilling started today, it would take at least 10 years for the first crude to reach refineries. And even then, the amount of oil likely to be recovered would never amount to more than 2 percent of our country's annual consumption. Such small yields would hardly make a dent in the amount of oil we import, or in the prices we pay at the gas pump.

6. Is there a connection between energy security and global warming?

Definitely. When our cars burn gasoline, they release carbon dioxide -- the primary cause of global warming and long-term changes in the earth's climate. In 2000, the production, transportation and use of gasoline for our cars and light trucks produced 1.3 billion metric tons of heat-trapping gases -- more than a fifth of the United States' total global warming emissions that year.

The good news is that we can sharply reduce emissions of heat-trapping gases by raising gas-mileage standards -- the same fix that will save Americans money at the gas pump and reduce our dependence on oil. For example, requiring vehicles to get at least 40 mpg by 2012 and at least 55 mpg by 2020 would cut carbon dioxide emissions by over 800 million metric tons per year.

7. Sounds like these conservation strategies require action by the government and big business. What can I do?

Plenty. Passenger cars account for fully 40 percent of the oil Americans consume; the car you drive and the condition you keep it in are central to reducing our country's reliance on oil. You can get better gas mileage by keeping your tires properly inflated and your engine tuned, and by using fuel-efficient motor oil. Also, try to carpool or take public transportation whenever possible.

8. I'm looking for a new car. What should I consider in buying one?

First, think about how big a car you really need. (Advertisements may woo us with the message that tooling around in a supersize SUV is cool, but in truth, it's supremely uncool in terms of national and environmental interests.) Then compare models, and pick the one with the best gas-mileage rating that suits your needs. Better yet, consider buying a gas-electric hybrid, such as the Toyota Prius. The EPA's Fuel Economy website and GreenerCars.com are both good sources of information on gas-mileage ratings and vehicle emissions.

9. Have energy efficiency efforts worked in the past?

Yes. In response to the OPEC oil embargoes of the 1970s, Congress passed tougher fuel-economy standards that helped double the average gas mileage by the late 1980s. And more recently, Californians dramatically reduced their use of electricity in response to the threat of rolling blackouts and sky-high utility bills.

Now, America once again has an opportunity to embrace a cleaner and more secure energy strategy. The proven, real-world solutions outlined here aren't about sacrifice, they're about innovation and sound decision-making. By supporting and investing in them, all of us -- individuals, business leaders and elected officials -- can help curb out nation's appetite for oil while preserving our environment for the future.

Based on DANGEROUS ADDICTION: Ending America's Oil Dependence, a January 2002 report by the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

last revised 1.16.01