Not To Slick!

 America depends on other countries for much of its oil supply. But what would happen if the well suddenly went dry?

In the modern world, civilizations lifeblood comes in the form of a black liquid called oil. Also in this modern world, people live in large concentrations on land that is unable to sustain them. The answer to the latter issue has been to import food and necessities from other locales. This has been accomplished by the use of trucks and other vehicles powered by petroleum or other oil distillates, in the majority of cases. But what would happen if that supply of fuel were interrupted permanently? The strategic oil reserve provides enough oil to fuel the countrys needs for a month (optimistically). What would happen when the food cant get from its distribution point to the supermarket? Would people finally come to realize what they have been warned about all along?

America produces some of its own oil and natural gas product, but the amount has been in decline for years and marks a dangerous situation for the country. The domestic production agencies are at the mercy of foreign producers who could easily flood the market to devalue the product and bankrupt them. Which, some say, has already occurred. Aside from any damage that could be done to our own production capabilities, there is the very real concern that the supply could be totally cut off. In 1997, the United States was 55% dependant on imported petroleum products for its petroleum needs. How much is too much? It is easy to see that figure rising to 70, 80 or 90 percent. If tomorrow the countries that sell us the majority of our oil were to stop doing business with us, the results would be grim. Current stores of oil and domestic production would be insufficient to meet the demand. Grocery stores and other food distribution points would quickly be depleted. I have no doubt that this would lead to aggression on our part, and that we would use a large portion of the remainder of our supply to assault the parties responsible.


Ironically, much of the oil that finds its way to our shores comes from countries that are considered enemies, or harbor and cooperate with groups that are hostile to the U.S. Our nations current number one enemy, Osama bin Laden, comes from a family made wealthy by this same mechanism. So why dont we change? Why cant we stop relying on oil? Rich oil companies and petroleum resellers keep things the way they are to line their pockets with monies paid for in blood. The recent terrorist attacks are exemplary evidence of what happens when you dump billions and trillions of dollars into friendly governments without regard for their internal affairs or mistreatment of their people. Money that is being used in some cases to support militant groups who are researching nuclear and biological weapons, in addition to training their troops and broadening their base of operations. Not all of the oil producers in the Middle East are bad, but the area is so volatile that one never knows from year to year whom we are buying our oil from or what their agenda is. Some 20% of the worlds population is in control of the primary source of petroleum-based energy for the other 80%. Oil provides many of the countries that produce it with over half of their national income. Many of these countries have no other viable exports. Many people believe that some assistance should be made to these nations to diversify their economies so they do not have to charge monopolistic prices for their oil.

Gas prices have remained low due to lower oil prices per barrel and the desire to keep tax on petroleum low. An interesting fact is that property taxes are used to pay for new streets, roads and other paved surfaces, instead of a tax on gasoline for the vehicles that actually use these fairways. Of course, gas prices would probably go up about 18 cents, and that would be unacceptable for the majority of the American populace. Although, the next time the whim strikes the producers and the price per barrel raises, that will undoubtedly be passed along to the consumer anyway. Historically, this country has repeatedly fallen victim to foreign products sold to us at bargain prices. Once we are hooked, the price starts climbing. I believe this is similar to a tactic employed by drug dealers. This is not completely different from what happened to the automobile industry years ago, when foreign competitors flooded our markets with cheap vehicles. Today, many of the vehicles from those same manufacturers are not so cheap. This time around the consequences are much more dire.

We know that petroleum byproducts are bad for the planet and the atmosphere. We know that some people who sell us oil are our enemies and will use the money to harm us. And we know that one day we will run out of oil, yet we do little to move away from this dangerous situation. Regardless of these facts, little is done to alleviate the situation. Complacency and greed are the norm. Prior to the recent terrorist attacks, the government had been criticized for abandoning its participation in global environmental treaties, in particular the Kyoto Treaty. Protected land was ready to be plundered and numerous Whitehouse policies were causing environmentally aware citizens to become alarmed. Now we are distracted by bombings and missile strikes, but the problem is still there and needs to get some focus soon.

There are many alternatives to the way we currently power our nation. Thankfully, some of the impetus is coming from the automobile industry, which is at last showing some inclination to break up the status quo. Fuel cells, deriving electricity from a hydrogen and oxygen reaction, have finally come to a point where they are economically viable. In the straight-hydrogen variety, practically the only waste byproduct is water. The versions that use natural gas to derive hydrogen produce lower amounts of carbon dioxide than internal combustion, petroleum-burning engines. Fuel cells arent just for vehicles, though. Larger units (about the size of a mini-van) are in use around the country in places where grid power is too expensive or not reliable enough. There is even an installation that uses methane from a landfill as a fuel source. There are still some advances that need to be made to make this technology fully viable, but it is one of our prime candidates. Hydrogen is, of course, highly flammable, and a supply of hydrogen in an automobile accident would be a bad thing. There are methods of storing hydrogen in less volatile forms that are being investigated and the problem will eventually be resolved or an alternative will be found. Fuel cells have found their way into other niches, as well as illustrated by a recent development of a tiny methanol fuel cell that provides roughly 10 times the power of a standard Li-ion battery. These new cells are designed for use in mobile electronic devices.

Another possible solution for engine fuel lies in the production of ethanol (ethyl alcohol or grain alcohol). Ethanol can be used in various forms, either mixed with gasoline or on its own. Ethanol produces carbon dioxide during the fermentation stage of its creation, but this can be captured and used for other purposes, such as carbonating soda or flash freezing meats. As mentioned, ethanol is often combined with gasoline to create Gasohol, and has been successfully used in blends as high as 85% in some manufacturers flexible fuel vehicles. Bus and truck engines that use 100% ethanol already exist, as well. Ethanol is made using corn, grains, potatoes, biomass waste products or other crop residues. There have also been advances in bioengineering that allow cheaper vegetable crops to be genetically altered for use in making ethanol. The biggest positives about ethanol are that it burns cleaner and it is renewable. Not to mention the plants that are grown to provide the fuel in the first place are also taking carbon dioxide back out of the atmosphere. Ethanol contains 28% less energy per gallon than a comparable amount of gas, so it will take more ethanol to go the same distance but this seems like a fair trade. It has also been illustrated that ethanol could be used as a fuel for fuel-cell vehicles.

There are numerous other alternatives to our oil dependency. Wind, water and solar energy can be converted to electricity. Electricity has been proven capable of powering vehicles as well as society. Im not a big fan of hydroelectric dams, though, as the environmental impact has been shown to be significant in some studies. Methanol, methane hydrate and other options can fill some of the voids that are coming in the future and may operate as transition fuels. Methane hydrate is plentiful, but it is also a greenhouse gas that is 10 times as effective as carbon dioxide at raising temperature. It exists in plentiful concentrations below the ocean floor and is released during seismic activity, underwater landslides or other shifting. If there was an accident during its removal, it is feasible that a large quantity of it could be released through the ocean and into the atmosphere. The end result of such an accident could be a catastrophic rise in the global temperature, to the order of 10 degrees Fahrenheit over 10 years. Personally, I would like to see something renewable or readily available (ethanol or solar power) used, instead of an alternative that will eventually run out and leave us in the same position or something that could potentially ruin the environment during its extraction.

There is also a confusing situation in the government that, on the one hand, trumpets how important it is for the U.S. to reduce its dependency on foreign oil, but at the same time cancels programs that investigate alternate energy sources and scoffs at conservation methods. The governments answer seems to be opening up protected wilderness and coastal areas and drilling them dry. This will not solve the long-term demand problem, though. Clearly the problem is that there is an ever-growing need for a product that exists in a finite quantity. Sooner or later, even with ravishing all of natures last refuges, we will run out of oil. To eliminate our reliance on foreign oil we must eliminate our reliance on oil, period. Increases in domestic drilling do not offset the growing demand. Never mind the fact that we could seriously reduce the impact of the human animal on the planet if we were to switch to something cleaner.

Piper