[ROCKMAN]

Loki - One would have to beat on the numbers a bit to show it but in one way the US has a big advantage over the EU as far as improving fleet economy: the US could become more European. And how would the EU improve itself...become more Indian? LOL. US fuel economy could improve X% whereas there is no existing technology for the EU fuel economy to increase by the same amount. Between good fuel economy and high fuel taxes the EU has already called up its reserve troops...they have very little left to commit to the effort as the battle field changes. The US OTOH has many divisions of gluttonous fuel users we can ship to the front. Of course, we might have to shoot a few draft dodgers first to get the attention of the rest of them.

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', ' ')Between good fuel economy and high fuel taxes the EU has already called up its reserve troops...they have very little left to commit to the effort as the battle field changes.

[Graeme]

Oil dependence: Fracking is no remedy; alternative fuels are

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')orty years ago, the Saudi Oil Ministry informed the Secretary of Defense that it would no longer supply fuel to the U.S. 6th Fleet. The OPEC oil embargo had begun. For the next five years, the U.S. made serious efforts to escape monopoly dependence on oil. Then, with the decline in oil prices, we fell asleep.

Even when prices began to rise to the stratosphere in 2004, America kept on snoozing. Whenever voices from the military, who bear the heaviest burden, urge us to end oil's stranglehold on our transportation system, the oil cartel and industry concoct a new theory to put us to back to sleep.

This time, the sedative is the promise that huge, exciting, Saudi-sized oil production in the U.S. will achieve "energy independence."

Increased U.S. oil production, combined with more efficient autos pouring into the marketplace powered by the Obama fuel-efficiency regulations and a revived U.S. auto industry, are indeed lowering the volume of oil that the U.S. imports. But world oil prices have risen so much that the dollars and jobs we export to pay for imported oil are greater than ever. We'll add another $4 trillion to our national debt from importing oil over the next 20 years.

As long as the United States uses almost 20 million barrels of oil each day, increasing our domestic production by fracking a million or two barrels a day -- which are the projections -- still leaves us importing more oil than we did when the first embargo hit, at a much higher price. And new U.S. oil costs more than $90 a barrel to find and produce, so it only comes to market if oil continues to be unaffordable.

[Graeme]

Tempering Oil Dependence

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')oday, the 1973 oil embargo is often remembered as a crisis caused by America’s over-reliance on imported oil. Crude imports almost tripled between 1970 and 1973, to reach nearly 30 percent of supplies. This did leave the country vulnerable to supply shocks — and our political leadership conveyed the idea that what America needed, above all, was “independence” from foreign producers.

This analysis was simply wrong. The key to America’s crisis in 1973 was our dangerous dependence on oil to power the economy, particularly transportation — and not on our dependence on overseas suppliers per se. At the time of the embargo, petroleum fuels accounted for 96 percent of the energy consumed by our cars, trucks, ships and aircraft. Consumers and businesses that depended on oil to power their transportation had no choice but to pay more at the pump, or travel less. It was that vulnerability that put us at the mercy of the global oil market and actors like OPEC.



This ambitious but achievable target would provide the American economy with a crucial degree of insurance against future oil-price spikes, while supporting economic growth and a healthy balance of trade. We propose a three-pronged strategy.

First, the federal government should double research and development spending on advanced transportation fuels and automotive technologies. The increased funds would accelerate the technological developments needed to make critical components like automotive batteries and natural-gas storage tanks more economically competitive in the future.

Second, public-private partnerships designed to deploy alternative fuels must be fostered. To get cars and trucks powered by natural gas and electricity will require a coordinated rollout of infrastructure and regulatory policy involving a variety of stakeholders, from cities and utilities to automakers. A key first step would be to build a natural gas refueling network for heavy-duty trucks.

Finally, these initiatives should be funded by the revenues from increased domestic oil production in order to minimize their effect on the federal debt. Over the past year, lawmakers from both political parties have proposed the establishment of an Energy Security Trust Fund to invest in research in future technologies. The concept of using oil revenues to fund energy security deserves support.

[ROCKMAN]

Graeme - "This analysis was simply wrong. The key to America’s crisis in 1973 was our dangerous dependence on oil to power the economy". There you go: I figured if I followed your posts long enough I would find something we would agree on. It may have taken 40 years but thank goodness we've changed our ways.

[Loki]

From Graeme's link "Tempering Oil Dependence":

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')merican crude production is projected to approach a historical record as soon as 2015