" />
Building a world of
resilient communities.



Study cites plan to end U.S. oil imports

American imports of oil could be eliminated by 2030, a new study by an interstate consortium asserts, if the nation turns to an aggressive program of energy efficiency and commercialization of four already-demonstrated technologies for making transportation fuels.

The study, sponsored by a nonprofit group of legislators and governors called the Southern States Energy Board, urges a crash program to meet fuel needs without imports, a strategy it says will lead to an American “industrial rebirth.” It says that such a strategy could create more than one million new jobs, reduce the trade deficit by more than $600 billion, and end oil price shocks that hurt the economy.

Roger Bezdek, an author of the report, to be released Monday, said that the volatility in fuel prices is driven by the narrow dependence on a limited number of big oil-producing countries as practically the sole source of energy for transportation. “Right now,’’ he said, “if a couple of oil workers get kidnapped in Nigeria, the price goes up $5 a barrel.”

But for the strategy to work, the study said, an expansive investment of private funds would be required, with encouragement from “appropriate fiscal, regulatory, and institutional support mechanisms” for 20 years.

The study also suggested that the current push to produce ethanol from corn as a fuel supplement is largely misplaced.

The four technologies for producing the fuels are profitable when the price of the oil they replace is $35 to $55 a barrel, the study said.

Three are closely related. The one with the biggest potential — estimated to displace 29 percent of imported oil — is making liquid fuels from coal, using the Fischer-Tropsch method.

A second is to take the carbon dioxide created in both that process and other processes and pump it into old oil fields to push more oil to the surface, a technique called enhanced oil recovery.

A third is to use biomass, including wood and crop wastes, as feedstock for factories that make a fuel gas consisting of carbon monoxide and hydrogen. That so-called synthesis gas is the same as that made from coal in the Fischer-Tropsch method and it can then be turned into a liquid.

The fourth is production of oil from shale, a technique tried after the oil shock of 1979, but abandoned when prices fell.

Editorial Notes: For the complete text of the article, see the original at the NY Times. Also posted at the Taipei Times. It's significant that the New York Times is giving sympathetic coverage to proposals from Roger Bezdek, a coauthor of the Hirsch Report, an important document for the peak oil community (Peaking Of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation, & Risk Management). Note the NY Times article phrases the topic in terms of energy independence for the U.S. -- "peak oil" is apparently politically incorrect. Although Bezdek's recommendations are not necessarily widely shared, he is a long-time energy expert and has spoken out strongly about the coming shortage of liquid fuels. His analysis should be taken seriously. Roger Bezdek talked with GPM correspondent Jason Brenno about the followup to the Hirsch report: Economic Impacts of Liquid Fuel Mitigation Options. Global Public Media has a a transcript of the interview. Other talks by Bezdek are available on GPM and other peak oil sites. Comments on the Bezdek interview from an earlier EB article: Berkely comments on The Oil Drum:
Bezdek keeps sounding like an optimist of the Daniel Yergin type ("shale oil will save us") - until you listen to what he is saying carefully. He's talking about investments in the trillions of dollars that have to be carried out on a non-market timeframe long before they are obviously needed. The interviewer, who is very sharp, doesn't bother to ask where the political impetus for this is ever going to come from. This is the best deconstruction of the There-Is-Plenty-of-Nonconventional-Oil argument I have seen, since instead of handwaving of the Kunstler type ("nothing will save us") it patiently and sympathetically reduces the optimist scenario to a financial absurdity.
(hat tip LATOC) - AF and BA

What do you think? Leave a comment below.

Sign up for regular Resilience bulletins direct to your email.

Take action!  

Find out more about Community Resilience. See our COMMUNITIES page
Start your own projects. See our RESOURCES page.
Help build resilience. DONATE NOW.


This is a community site and the discussion is moderated. The rules in brief: no personal abuse and no climate denial. Complete Guidelines.

The Curse of the Modern Office

The information society promises to dematerialise society and make it more …

Howling at the USGS’s Wolfcamp Announcement

The recent USGS announcement about the Wolfcamp play may inspire another …

Transition in Ireland  

Ireland is one of the most advanced countries in energy transition, getting …

Trudeau’s Six Unanswered Questions on Kinder Morgan Expansion

In early November, the Trudeau government tabled a ministerial panel report …

Tiffany's Fallacy: the Mineral Pie is Shrinking, and Most of What's Left is in the Sky

In the debates that deal with energy and fossil fuels, it is rather common …

Peak Oil in a Fact-Free World: the New "Oil Bonanza" in West Texas

So, the USGS comes out with a press release that the media immediately …

Why the Office Needs a Typewriter Revolution

Artificial cooling and digital equipment are the main drivers behind the …