Oil industry expert gives warning on conservation of energy

and another thing … Getting away from it all
from: Offshore Engineer
by: Rick von Flatern
Monday, November 01, 2004

In the US, the survival of the government hinges largely on the retail price of a gallon of gasoline. So it is surprising how few solutions to rising oil prices have been forwarded by any office holders or seekers. Those few strategies that have been mentioned are obvious window dressing aimed at hiding the fact that politicians, if they were honest, must concede the problem is too complex for them.

Among the so-called ’solutions’ that did float to the top of the propaganda pile is the suggestion by presidential hopeful John Kerry that oil currently being sent to the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve be diverted back into the market. The SPR is a series of salt caverns designed to hold millions of barrels oil in storage in case of a serious supply interruption.

The quite cogent reason for the current administration’s refusal has been the understanding that the whopping 0.2% of daily production the diverted supplies represent would add not nearly enough supply to affect prices. Indeed, that someone with such a poor grasp of the laws of supply and demand could one day be the most powerful man on earth is a bit worrying.

But what is most notable in all the rhetoric that has sprung from all sectors of the political spectrum concerning the blame and solution for high prices is what goes unsaid, that since upping oil supply is not an immediate option, the only recourse is a drastic reduction of demand. It is a notion not much considered on the campaign trail because Americans are not overly fond of imposing personal hardship on themselves and that leaves the job to government. And, as every political adviser is well aware, calling on Americans for personal sacrifice is not historically a sure way to get elected.

Assuming, however, that any politician were indeed candid enough to introduce to the masses such a notion as personal responsibility, the obvious first legislative step towards reduced US oil consumption would be aimed at changing Americans’ driving habits.

Driving the ubiquitous sport utility vehicle on public roadways, for instance, could be made illegal anytime WTI prices reach beyond some tipping point, say $35 per barrel, or some level tied maybe to the price of a gallon of imported bottled water. Alternatively, so as not to discriminate against big car owners, a rationing system might be imposed which of course offers the added benefit of creating a black market that can be good for sluggish economies.

Second only to its love of driving is the American addiction to comfort. As such they are accustomed to living and working in buildings cooled to the point at which an overcoat is required in Houston restaurants during summer and raging furnaces render tropical attire quite adequate for après ski in the dead of a Rocky Mountain winter.

An easily framed ordinance requiring all American air conditioners and furnaces to be equipped with sensors to maintain inside temperatures at 90°F or above in summer and 60°F or below in winter could go a long way toward controlling this excess.

Not all energy conservation measures need be hardships, however, and as such may be politically the best place to begin such a program. For instance, Americans consume a great deal of energy because they work more hours every year than the citizens of any other industrialized nation. That means they spend an inordinate amount of time burning the midnight oil as it were, keeping the furnaces and air-conditioners humming and the lights burning as they toil from early morning to late night through every season.

It would certainly serve the cause, therefore, to force workers to slow down during times of high oil prices. All workers and their families could be required to take minimum three-week vacations in a warm environment during winter months and another three weeks somewhere cool during the summer to take pressure off heating and cooling units. As an addendum to this rule, Americans could also be forbidden arriving at their workplace before 8am or staying beyond 5pm. The getaways could be made possible through tax breaks.

Traditionally, the thousands of men and women that make up the federal government are exempt from unpalatable laws the US Congress imposes upon the rest of the citizenry. But in times so dire that Americans are being asked to suffer the harsh indignities of driving small cars fewer miles and to be uncomfortably warm or cold, surely nothing can be out of bounds.

In fact, it would probably serve numerous causes unrelated to energy to simply shut down the Washington legislation factory for three or even four months out of every year. The energy saved not printing billions of pages of interminable drafts of nonsensical position papers and amendments to useless pork laden bills alone would be enormous. Greenpeace should be happy to back this tree-saving measure as well.

Likewise, shutting down the late-night lobbying in well-lit hotels and bars for months would be enough to light several Midwestern states for those months and relieve any energy shortages that might threaten the northeast US power grid.

The unprecedented success of post-war America has meant the concept of personal sacrifice for a greater good is one with which the overwhelming majority of its citizens are unfamiliar. Not since the great depression and WWII has any significant percentage of the populace been forced to endure even manageable shortages of energy for any length of time.

But if the nation is not careful and no leader steps forward to force the issue, the children and grandchildren of that generation could one day wake to a world no longer able to support giant automobiles or air conditioning or fast food or the millions of plastic products that are the base of its throwaway society. The end of western civilization certainly would be not far behind. OE

http://www.oilonline.com/news/features/oe/20041101.and_anot.16305.asp

——————————————————————————–