Getting Serious About Alternative Energy

National Review: Eliminating Oil’s Monopoly Would Not Be So Hard

(National Review Online)  This column was written by Clifford D. May.

---

You don't have to be a military strategist on the order of Sun Tzu or Carl von Clausewitz to understand: It is a bad idea to fund your enemy's war effort. But every time we fill the tanks of our cars with gasoline we put money in the pockets of terrorists intent on killing Americans.

When will our elected officials finally grapple with this problem? Maybe now. In his State of the Union speech this week, President Bush sounded serious about "diversifying" American's energy supply, about developing an energy policy that does not leave Americans interminably at the mercy of such regimes as those in Tehran and Caracas. And in Congress, legislation is being introduced that could at least begin to reduce the economic, political and military power of Middle Eastern oil.

More on that in a moment. First, let's be clear: Oil is different from other products. If the French offend me, I can buy wine from Australia instead. If the price of beef goes up, I can dine on lamb. But oil enjoys a kind of monopoly: If you drive a car, you have no choice but to buy fuels refined from petroleum, a resource most abundant in countries where hostility toward Americans runs high. Currently, we spend about $150 million a day on oil from the Persian Gulf and more than $70 million a day on oil from Venezuela.

Two obvious solutions: (1) Develop liquid fuels from other resources; (2) develop vehicles that can run on something other than liquid fuels.

In fact, such alternative fuels and vehicles already exist. A bill has been introduced in Congress — with broad bipartisan support — to get both moving down the road: The DRIVE Act (Dependence Reduction through Innovation in Vehicles and Energy) is based on an energy security blueprint drafted by Set America Free, which former CIA director Jim Woolsey calls "a coalition of tree huggers, do-gooders, sodbusters, cheap hawks, and evangelicals." (Full disclosure: Both Woolsey and I are among its members.)

If passed into law, your next new car probably will be a Flexible Fuel Vehicle (FFV): It will be able to utilize not just gasoline but also a variety of non-petroleum liquid fuels. That would provide an incentive to the private sector to produce those fuels and make them widely available. Imagine if you could pull up to a pump and choose between conventional gas and similarly-priced alternative fuels guaranteed not to fund terrorists. Which would you choose?

How much more will such cars cost? Less than $150 — a small sacrifice for the war effort. And you'd actually pay less than that, once tax incentives were included in the deal. Also: Think of the FFV as a safety feature, akin to seatbelts and airbags, except that in this case you'll be buying national security rather than protection in the event of a collision.

In addition, DRIVE would provide incentives for both manufacturers and purchasers of "plug-in hybrids," cars that can run on electricity, a source of energy not dependent on petroleum. A commuter traveling less than about 40 miles a day would plug in his car at night and go months without re-filling his tank — and when he did it could be with an alternative fuel.

What might those fuels be? In Brazil, an increasing number of cars run on ethanol made from sugar, a crop that grows easily in tropical climates. Currently, the tariff on such fuel is 54 cents a gallon — compared to zero cents a gallon for Middle Eastern oil. I would hope we could find a few politicians courageous enough to stand up to the lobbyists who favor discriminating against poor South American farmers while subsidizing Saudi billionaires and fire-breathing Iranian mullahs.

Other ideas that Congress should consider: The tar sands of Alberta contain as much energy as the deserts of Arabia. The Canadian Coalition for Democracies is pushing for a U.S.-Canadian partnership that would exploit the tar sands for the benefit of both countries on a long-term basis.

Let's be clear: Oil will be a valuable resource for decades to come, and America will not be "energy independent" any time soon. But we'd hand over less money to terrorist masters if we put an end to oil's monopoly, and diminished the dominance of oil controlled by despots who conspire to destroy us.

We have the scientific, technological and entrepreneurial abilities. What's most needed now is the political will.

[dallison7]

Al Gore advocated an agressive 'alternative fuels' program during his presidential campaign. I'll bet with a committment of $500 billion back then, we would be enrgy independent now.

[bluestardad]

America GET out of Iraq and the Middle East quit selling them weapons, learn how to make Bio-Fuel or Clean-Coal Fuel and let the Middle East drink the oil and eat the sand! They cut the Oil off in the middle Seventies and we still have not gotten independent from Middle East Oil! Media quit covering these people in the Middle East let them blow each other up without our kids seeing it on the news! Who in the American Media is forcing our media to cover this violence in the Middle East? America has paid for the entire Middle East for the last Fifty Years in Lives, Blood and Tax Money and this investment has brought us the Chaos we have today. It is time to try something else! The Middle East has been fighting since the Sons of Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac were born. Americans come home and let the Middle East be Isolated! The entire Middle East is not worth one more American Life or Dollar!

[bluestardad]

Media
Quit covering these animals in the Middle East and let them butcher themselves off camera. We have spent 50 years of time blood and money trying to civilize them to western standards and it does not work. Do they own your Job or what? Quit Covering them!

OK here is your chance, don%u2019t just set in front of your computer and complain spouting meaningless rants of sludge, do something about it! This is the contact address for your Senator! Send them a message of your opinion. All Class Two Senators are up for Reelection in 2008. Be respectful even if they do not deserve it because their office does! http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_in
formation/senators_cfm.cfm

[austin2223]

Wake up America please take the lead show maturity for your children. You have the resources to become self sufficient

[getcentered]

Now the National Review Online want to blow smoke up their constituencies ARSE as well?

They must be desperate. It seems like Republicans are changing their tune and they should be. The road of the oppressor is getting shorter and shorter.

[StanJasek]

Flexfuels and biofuels are just a very small part of the solution to our "oil addiction."
Without attempts at behavior modication America will continue to be on its gas guzzling binge.

The most effective step would be a gasoline tax of at least fifty cents a gallon for all gasoline. All biofuels and flexfuels with at least 50% biofuel content being tax free.

All encourage walking! We all need to lose weight!

[feelfree1]

Have the writers of the National Review Online ever composed an article about a subject of which they are knowledgable? Are there any such topics?

Re: "If you drive a car, you have no choice but to buy fuels refined from petroleum..."

Many people, most of the country of Brazil, for example, are CURRENTLY running their vehicles on bio-fuels. In Brazil they use sugar cane as the feddstock for their fuel refinement.

In the U.S. there is a fast-growing bio-diesel industry. Vehicles with diesel engines can run on bio-diesel without modification. Cars in the U.S. are also running on straght electric power, including at least 1 high performance sports car line. A French company has introduced a car that runs on compressed air. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles continue to be developed.

Any and all of these vehicles could rely on power production like, wind, solar, wave, tidal, hydro-electric, or geo-thermal.

[feelfree1]

The Bush energy plan is a zero. The primary energy goals of the Bush regime are to subsidise the oil and nuclear industries. The rest is window dressing.

Nuclear is the most foolish method possible for producing electricity. Not only is nuclear power production one of the most expensive methods of power production, but it also presents a serious security and safety threat.

The nuclear industry has poisoned huge sections of land, including valuable water resources, and they have no clue or interest in cleaning up their mess. They also have no workable plan for dealing with nuclear waste.

The oil/nuclear robber-barons don't seem to have a problem with turning our lands into wastelands, so long as it boosts their profit margin.

[bigdadpatrio]

You know, we had 40 years of Democrat-controlled Conress and no comprehensive energy plan that gets us away from petroleum-based fuels. THEN, we had 10 years of a Republican-controlled Congress and the same. It seems we only get all this rhetoric near election time, but nothing changes. The first step we need to do is to pass a law limiting lobbying from oil, and from Detroit (and ALL the auto makers). Those who propose new TAXES are idiots, as we pay way too much taxes as it is (maybe we should just let THEM pay extra taxes). Then we need to really get serious about alternative fuels and vdevelop ehicles that will operate on them. It is IMPERATIVE that we get rid of our dependence on foreign oil and try to become self reliant (if possible). I'm afraid this
(oil) will be the start of WWIII.

[j0hnwi11iams]

It is in Big Oil's interest to keep us as addicted to Oil as possible for as long as possible. You tell me what price Exxon has paid for their disinformation campaign trying to create the perception of a debate regarding the existence of global warming. Darth Cheney let big Oil write the energy program in SECRET. Corporations behave like psychopaths and will gladly trade in the future for the next quarter.

[gray_owl_55]

Bush is as serious about alternative energy as he is about rebulding New Orleans.

Both political parties have known since the 1970's oil embargo that we needed to develop alternative energy sources. Yet both continued to support the oil industries efforts to block such development.

Isn't it ironic that if we develop alternative energy sources and change our foreign policy of nation bulding and exploitation of oil rich countries. We remove the reason for hatred and terriosm in the middle east. Subsequently the trillions of dollars spent on Iraq could be spent here at home.