[The Vector] Energy Policy and Obama

“We’ve run into the same political gridlock and inertia that’s held us back for decades. That has to change,” said President Obama in his speech on March 30^th, 2011.  He seems to have finally turned his attention to energy, but now with the budget fights in Congress, will green energy be a loser?

On March 30^th, Obama gave a focused energy speech, followed it up with a few points in radio talks, and then continued the discussion on April 6^th, speaking at a wind turbine plant in Bucks County, PA. Unfortunately, more press coverage pointed out that Obama should have been in Washington over the impending government shut-down rather than out talking about energy at a wind factory. I can only conclude that the general public, much of the press and many of the folks in D.C. don’t get it. Of course, the debt crisis is extremely serious and it’s taking a great bit of attention (and will continue to), but energy will be wrapped up in the financial crisis discussions. Energy issues are among the most primal issues for Americans, along with food and shelter (in my opinion.)

Will energy finally move to the national platform, and we will make progress?  We have no energy plan and have not truly every had one.

In his speech, President Obama says by 2025, he wants the U.S. to cut oil imports by 1/3.  Bravo – but how is it going to happen? The “devil is in the details,” as they say. Where is the plan?  This energy strategy could be possible but only if both political parties will pull together and everyone works towards a common goal, continuing past his presidency and with the backing of the people through their elected officials — and a concrete plan. I am a little pessimistic on that score. But bravo for putting the general goal out there. We have to start somewhere.

What is the bottom line? 

We are too heavily dependent on oil, of which about 67% is imported. No matter what anybody says, there is only so much oil and it is a depleting resource, with the largest reserves held in Saudi Arabia and Iran, among others.

What are motivations and necessities to reduce our oil imports?

Some take the angle that the long-term oil reserves are abroad, and thinking long-term, we cannot count on always having access, or having access at prices that can be paid.

Other take the angle that we are putting money in terrorists pockets with every barrel of oil purchased and then we go and fight some of the same groups, using oil to power the military and ‘wasting’ money in a full viscious circle.

Some take the position of pollution – fossil fuels including coal – are quite dirty and are hurting the globe and causing climate change.

Others look at it from the point of view of jobs, economy and keeping money at home, through developing resources here.  Folks in this corner point out that we bleed money every day for imports of oil and energy, and that the U.S. is falling behind in the renewable energy manufacturing areas to boot.

Still others look at the energy security in light of a future oil crisis and how that can seriously impact every citizens on every level, with no true back-up plan.

Obama has said what anyone in energy knows – the U.S. cannot drill our way out of the problem. We need a strong push on renewable energy, and this means hard decisions – renewable energy standards, feed-in tariffs, tax breaks. We also need to understand that while fossil fuels are inherently strong and power a majority of our electricity and our transportation, no one renewable energy source is as powerful. We have to develop a wide array and use sources which make sense.

In order to use renewable sources – the sun that shines, the wind that blows both onshore and off, the heat of the earth through geothermal, the waves that lap or fall (ocean energy and hydropower in various categories) not to mention biofuels and biomass – we need to support these industries as we support fossil fuels.

What about nuclear?  Many are in support, some are on the fence, many are opposed. Personally, I have always been against it simply due to the toxic waste which never goes away and the danger-risk level of an absolute killing machine. (This is not an endorsement of The Vector’s opinion, one way or the other.)  I have friends who are absolutely for nuclear, and I lived in France for 16 years where nuclear powered a great part of the country.  However, I am still against nuclear power, but that is me.

No energy is perfect and there is some level of danger in most sources – wind turbines can kill birds, water turbines can kill sealife, geothermal could cause earthquakes, natural gas can explode or pollute, oil spills – just look at what occurred in the Gulf of Mexico, and the current sad state of affairs in Japan at Fukashima or in the past with Chernobyl.  But unless we are going to live like cavemen, we have to acknowledge that energy is essential and there are going to be the pros and cons in every energy source. We have to weigh which risks to take, minimize dangers as much as possible but forge ahead. (My pro-nuclear friends will probably try to use this sentence to their favor.)

And, for better or worse, we have to recognize that natural gas is going to be a player.  There are potential bad sides to natural gas, as seen in the claims and studies on groundwater pollution, disturbances through fracking, or explosions that can occur. But we also need to understand that natural gas is abundant in the U.S., natural gas is FAR cleaner than oil or coal, and natural gas can work in tandem with renewable energy sources.  There have been many discoveries of natural gas in the U.S., and of course as many know, once George Mitchell figured out how to break or frac hard shale to get at natural gas, it has opened up areas that were not previously accessible. Natural gas is abundant in the U.S., so we should use it, expand potential uses, create jobs and help reduce oil imports. Hardline greener may not like hearing this.

Energy, along with food & water, is of the most basic necessity: energy lights our homes, heats or cools our homes, schools & businesses; it gets us from point A to B, whether locally to a job or school, nationally or internationally for business or pleasure; it allows goods, trade and business to transact; energy transports our products and foods to us, keep our refrigerators cool and allows us to run our ovens and microwaves; it powers our computers and televisions and brings us information; it assists us in medical applications, and on and on. Live a few days without power, and you see how back to basics you are without it.

The U.S. is highly dependent on imported oil and domestic use of coal & fossil fuels. A good portion of the oil we import takes a big bite out of our budget (both nationally and personally); fossil fuels are part of the pollution problem.

Some countries have made the commitment to move to renewable energy, such as Germany, Denmark, the U.K. and, yes, China.  They have energy plans, supportive policies and thriving systems.  One of the aids, renewable energy standards, has made big impacts in countries that are zooming ahead. A certain amount of renewable energy MUST be purchased by the utility companies.  In the U.S., some states have an RES (whether it is in use yet or not), it is stalled in many states and several states have seen movements to block it or even say it is “unconstitutional.”  Please.

Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., and his cousin Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo recently introduced legislation for national renewable energy standard. They want to be at 6 percent in 2013 and to increase the requirement until it reaches 25 percent in 2025. Will this bill succeed where others have failed?

Oil & gas have great tax incentives, set up about a century ago to support domestic production and enhance investment into these sectors. Oil & gas investors can write down investments against active income, and that has been good for many on many levels.  I fail to understand why renewable energy has not and is not benefitting from the same treatment. Pockets are loosened, investors bring dollars, more jobs and business is done when tax incentives are present.

In his speech, Obama is right on this point:  “…We’ve been down this road before. Remember, it was just three years ago that gas prices topped $4 a gallon. Working folks haven’t forgotten that. It hit a lot of people pretty hard. But it was also the height of political season, so you had a lot of slogans and gimmicks and outraged politicians waving three-point-plans for two-dollar gas – when none of it would really do anything to solve the problem.”

He is also right with the following statement: “So here’s the bottom line –there are no quick fixes.” But I would add here, I wish he would have said: “It takes courage, focus and fortitude to make the right decisions, look at the big picture, and do what is right for the U.S. now and into the future. Don’t delay another day because we are already late. Think of yourself, your children and quality of life.”

What is the next move, and will the country benefit or lose? Will a new face appear in the cartoon above, with the next President adding to the same hapless narrative?