Energy Policy for the United States....

Today's post: Wednesday, 5-25-2010

We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.

At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both. Kuwaiti scientists recently predicted peak oil in 2014 – just 3 years from now.

And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.

Today’s post:

Energy Policy for the United States....

An energy policy for the United States ideally needs to meet several goals. In decision making, Peter Drucker called them boundary conditions.

1. The policy needs to support economic growth or at least not harm it too much initially. But at the same time, it needs to prevent serious harm or collapse to our economy due to our current overdependence on fossil fuels, particularly oil and coal.

2. It needs to lower our dependence on imported fuels from near 60% to 10 % or less.

3. It needs to begin to reduce our net CO2 release. We should stop all of it but cannot now do so because of the dependence of our economy on fossil fuels. But we can lessen the disasters in the future by making a start and then speeding up the solutions.

And, related to that, the policy in this area needs to be informed by facts. The scientists who have studied the matter have established the facts. And, events are beginning to show they have their facts right.

4. It needs to find a way to allow the existing fossil fuel companies to move from making money from providing energy from burning fossil fuels to providing energy in other ways or making money from the fossil fuels in other ways than burning them. At the same time, it needs to find a way to stop or penalize the industry for using their profits to prevent action on the established facts and their risks to our economy.

So far, so far the Obama administration has had a less than perfect track record on improving the economy and adding jobs and on selling their policies to the American people.

But otherwise, the Obama administration’s actual policy and actions have done well on this list.

They’ve backed the production of electric cars and plug-in hybrids. They have backed solar companies with capital to do large projects. And they have backed companies with technologies to lower the cost of solar electricity.


This was in several recent news stories.:

“President Barack Obama has called for a one-third reduction in oil imports by 2025 and wants to put 1 million plug-in electric vehicles on the road by 2015.

In a related announcement, the White House formalized a directive Obama issued in March ordering the government to purchase only fuel-efficient cars and trucks by 2015.

A memorandum issued Tuesday directs federal agencies to develop practices to move toward the 2015 goal and come up with a plan to determine the best size of their vehicle fleet.

Under a separate executive order, Obama has called on the government to reduce gasoline usage by federal vehicles 30 percent by 2020.”

This is in addition to beginning to move the federal government’s fleet of cars to plug-in hybrids and all electric cars and build charging stations in key cities that was recently announced.

He also hired a capable scientist with energy knowledge and management experience to be his Secretary of Energy. And, Secretary Chu has also performed relatively well. At the very least he bases his decisions on scientific facts and not incorrect beliefs that are less scary.

So far, President Obama is well ahead of the energy policies or lack thereof of the candidates for President next time that the Republican party might run that are now considered to be leading.

Today, however, the San Francisco Chronicle had a story about a possible Republican candidate who may have the chops to follow up with a good energy policy.

“Republican Jon Huntsman Jr., the former U.S. ambassador to China, has a political profile that sets him apart from the pack of possible 2012 GOP presidential candidates. For starters, he starred in a 2004 advertisement with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger lobbying for congressional action on climate change.”

If he runs on that basis and finds a Vice Presidential candidate who supports good energy policy, that might work.

But, so far, it looks like the Republicans are likely to nominate much weaker candidates on energy in 2012.

If so, that leaves Obama as the best choice for President in 2012. His energy policy has actually been relatively good.

If he wins, and if his energy policy begins to add more jobs while gasoline and diesel prices continue to rise faster than new drilling could fix, maybe the Republicans will get some sense and nominate Jon Huntsman Jr for President in 2016.

That might work well.