By Bruce L. Brager
The decline in oil prices is an interesting sensation. However, we are seeing the same mistakes in the current energy policy debate as in the debates three decades ago – the same mistakes, and the same shorted-sighted, politically motivated, arguments being thrown about. Damn the complex reality, full speed ahead. Déjà vu all over again.
The best known examples of the energy debate today are the Keystone Pipeline and fracking. I love hearing all the conservatives, normally appalled at government “make work” programs, stressing the job creating aspects of the pipeline. They conveniently forget any potential environmental problems. Opponents stress only the environmental issues, and the fact that some of the Canadian oil may be sent overseas – though this has always been uncertain – limiting the payoff for the risk. They conveniently forget the continuing national security need for energy sources as close to home as possible. They also forget the complexity of the oil trade; that Keystone oil may stay home as well as be sent abroad.
Fracking engenders continuing debate, but the opponents focus on its environmental problems. Both sides calls for “yes or no,” spending far too little time on seeing what the problems are and how they might be fixed. How can fracking be made safer? Can any environmental danger from the Keystone pipeline be decreased? This was done with the then – the controversial Alaska pipeline. We stopped shouting and looked for a way to solve a problem.
Debating whether something should be done is the American way. Looking for how something can best be done is also the American way. Neglecting the how, in the search for simple answers, is part of the déjà vu I am feeling.
Thirty years ago, during the Arab oil boycotts, “experts” said it would take several decades for alternative fuels to meet a substantial part of American energy needs. So I guess we don’t have to worry about fracking starting earth quakes and the Canadians can ship their own dirty oil through their own country? Use of alternative is growing, however, though far slower than it should be growing. Nuclear energy is staging a mild comeback – both mild and comeback are good in this case.
One problem in American energy policy has been in assuming that the private sector is always best at determining energy needs, rather than just usually best at meeting these needs. This is the most familiar part of déjà vu all over again. Oil prices have been cut in half recently. And we are already relaxing our energy development efforts. We should be using some of the energy cost savings to speed up research into alternatives, into making fracking safer, into seeing if we can answer the arguments against the Keystone Pipeline.
Energy companies with an eye to the future, and to future long term profits, should be in the forefront of these efforts – not doing their best to sabotage the growing use of solar panels. And if they do not want to, perhaps because they don’t want it to affect their stock price tomorrow – legitimate, if short-sighted business decisions – let the government do it. More efforts should be made to use the probably brief breathing spell to prepare for the inevitable, and probably short term, future. Basically, oil prices are going back up. The question is when.
Back in the day, American energy policy reminded me of a classic horror film. It still does. The monster had ravaged the village but it was chased off. Things were peaceful again. But the monster had not been destroyed. The monster was coming again. The villagers had to listen to the voices saying to get ready. We need President Obama, who tends to act well when he acts, to use his rhetorical skills to make the case that the energy monster still lives. We need Congressional Republicans to lay off their social agenda, to lay off trying to make the President look bad, and at least consider long term energy development actions.
The energy monster is not dead. It is just sleeping, and it is coming back.
All opinion pieces reflect solely the views of the writer(s) and do not reflect the opinions or views of CAB News Online.
No comments:
Post a Comment