Energy independence is a disaster in the making

It’s been a rallying cry since the 1970s — but it could doom the economy, the environment and our position in the world.

LONDON – It may be one of the most dangerous phrases in the English language. It certainly is one of the most expensive.

I speak of “energy independence,” a rallying cry since the oil crisis of the 1970s and one that has been getting a ton of ink (and pixels) lately, especially since President Bush brought up the subject in his State of the Union address.

The president didn’t actually utter those words, saying instead that he wanted to “make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past.” But lots of other people have, most notably Tom Friedman of The New York Times, who has been arguing for a while now that the president should make energy independence our generation’s Sputnik — an excuse to spend tons of money on scientific research and education.

Investing in R&D and handing out scholarships for science and engineering students are good things, mind you, and many of those calling for energy independence are driven by similarly wholesome motives. But I’m a big believer that words count, and the words “energy independence” are potentially disastrous ones.

Fortune