Why does the U.S. insist on being dependent on foreign oil?

Question

It seems that if we don't rely on OPEC and Venezuela then there wouldn't be so much conflict

Answer 1

1. chavez is not a Hitler, in fact as an American, you should love the guy. he's offered free and cheap oil numerous times to help us out, and Bush denied him the ability. Chavez is not our enemy, he's our friend.

2. MONEY!!! Our government makes money off of that oil. In fact, they mae a large ammount of money from the taxes generated off of you and me. This is why the government won't invest any real money into hydrogen cell research. its next to free to operate with the proper research in place. Not only that, but hydrogen is the most simple of all elements, the government can't risk private developers making their own fuel, or even worse a machine you could use at home, tax free, to fill up your fuel cells. The government is pushing E-85 right now, they want us to have to use their oil so they can tax the piss out of us. I wrote my senator here in Indiana asking him this same question you just asked, this is what he wrote back. you can see how wrong and misguided our government is.


******************************************************************************

Thank you for contacting me to express your support for addressing our nation’s energy dependence. However, I disagree that ethanol and E-85 ethanol (motor fuel with 85 percent ethanol content) should not also be pursued.

A number of critics have argued that our government should not support production of ethanol and biodiesel fuels. Critics claim that these fuels yield less energy than is invested, cause pollution, and divert resources from more appropriate uses. Unfortunately, they fail to take account of the most recent and credible research on renewable fuels, and ignore the larger national security interests that are at stake. In fact, ethanol, biodiesel and other renewable fuels must be an essential part of our energy strategy.

These criticisms are contradicted by research that has been conducted by the Departments of Energy and Agriculture. Studies by both departments have demonstrated that ethanol and biodiesel do deliver energy gains over and above the energy used in their production. In fact, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman publicly cited an Argonne National Laboratory report that concluded that ethanol generates 35% more energy than is used to produce it, other government research suggests the energy gain may be higher. The Department of Energy also stated in a recent presentation that ethanol can be even more energy efficient than formulating gasoline. It concluded that it takes .74 British Thermal Units (Btu's) of fossil energy to create 1 Btu of ethanol; compared to 1.23 Btu's of input to create 1 Btu of reformulated gasoline. In addition, due to the fact that Flexible Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) are tuned to maximize the energy found in gasoline, they typically are less efficient when utilizing high volume ethanol blends. However, automakers are beginning to produce vehicles that use E-85 much more efficiently. I recently introduced legislation that would further improve the efficiency of FFVs.

Beyond these conclusions, ethanol and biodiesel have the enormous advantage of being homegrown resources. In an age when energy dependence is one of our nation’s most important strategic and economic concerns, increasing the use of American-produced renewable fuels should be a part of our national security strategy. The United States and Indiana are dependent on imported petroleum to fuel our cars and trucks. We must change this as rapidly as possible. Research into hydrogen powered cars and other exotic vehicular power sources continues, but ethanol and biodiesel are already a reality. These fuels are competitive with gasoline, and most vehicles already can utilize them. As public understanding of the advantages of renewable fuels grow, they will become increasingly available.

I recently spoke at length about America’s dependence on foreign oil during an engagement at Purdue University. In that speech, which is available in full on my website at http://www.lugar.senate.gov/energy/, I tried to illustrate the magnitude of the challenge that now faces our nation when it comes to securing affordable energy supplies - and the critical importance of answering that challenge with commitment, urgency, and vigor.

The gasoline price spikes we are currently experiencing - much like those that followed last year’s Gulf Coast hurricanes - underscore the tenuousness of America’s short-term energy situation. But, as yet, there is not a full appreciation of our economic vulnerability when it comes to oil.

With less than 5 percent of the world’s population, the United States consumes 25 percent of its oil. If oil prices remain above $60 a barrel through 2006, we will spend over $320 billion on oil imports this year. Unfortunately, our demand will only continue to increase. Furthermore, most of the world’s oil is concentrated in places that are either hostile to American interests or vulnerable to political upheaval and terrorism.

With these basics in mind, I believe the balance of realism has passed from those who argue on behalf of fossil fuels and a laissez-faire energy policy, to those who recognize that in the absence of a major reorientation in the way we get our energy, life in America is going to be much more difficult in the coming decades. No one who cares about U.S. foreign policy, national security, and long-term economic growth can afford to ignore what is happening in Iran, Russia, and Venezuela - or at gasoline pumps around our county. No one who is honestly assessing the decline of American leverage around the world due to our energy dependence can fail to see that energy is the albatross of U.S. national security.

That is why I strongly supported the Energy Policy Act of 2005 when it came to a vote in the Senate last year. This landmark legislation, which was signed into law by President Bush on August 8, 2005, represents an important first step in improving America’s energy situation.

I am particularly pleased that the Fuels Security Act of 2005, which I introduced in March 2005, served as the basis for the Energy Policy Act’s key ethanol provisions. I believe that biofuels, combined with hybrid and other technologies, can begin to move us away from our extreme dependence on oil in the next decade. Corn-based ethanol is already providing many Midwesterners with an alternative fuel option. Most of this is in a 10 percent ethanol mix, which is fully compatible with nearly all vehicles. I have recently called for Indiana to mandate that all gas stations in the state offer a 10 percent blend.

The ethanol provisions included in the Energy Policy Act will double the amount of renewable fuel America consumes, displacing an estimated two billion gallons of imported oil through 2012. Moreover, it will do so in a way that is environmentally sensitive.

The Energy Policy Act also includes tax credits designed to encourage the production of fuel-efficient vehicles and provisions to encourage gas stations to install and/or convert pumps that offer E-85. With more than five million E-85 capable vehicles, also called Flexible Fuel Vehicles (FFVs), in the U.S. and about one million additional vehicles expected annually, the United States could realize an immediate reduction in gasoline consumption by approximately 4.5 billion gallons per year, often at a reduced price to the consumer. This change could also bring an annual reduction in vehicle greenhouse gas emissions of 26.5 million tons.

Additionally, the Energy Policy Act includes provisions I introduced jointly with Senator Obama of Illinois authorizing $85 million for research into the creation of transportation fuels from coal. Much of this research will be done at Purdue University’s Discovery Park Energy Center. One of the technologies that will be encouraged by this program, the “Fischer-Tropsch” process, yields a diesel fuel that is compatible with existing vehicle technology and infrastructure, and superior to oil-derived fuel when it comes to performance and emissions. Just as importantly, domestically produced Fischer-Tropsch diesel is expected to be economically competitive with conventional gasoline under current market conditions.

I also have a particular interest in the development of biomass energy. Along with former CIA Director James Woolsey, I wrote an article on “The New Petroleum” (http://lugar.senate.gov/energy/) and subsequently passed legislation to accelerate and coordinate the research and development activities of federal agencies with regard to biomass. This bill created a competitive research and development program to further the advancement of biofuels, biochemicals and biopower from agricultural residues and waste materials.

These steps, while significant, are not sufficient. There is still much work to be done. That is why I recently joined Senator Obama in introducing the American Fuels Act, legislation designed to accelerate the production and consumption of alternative transportations fuels. The bill would, among other things, provide incentives to automakers for every FFV produced beyond existing federal requirements. The bill would also create a temporary tax credit to accelerate the consumption of E-85, and would increase the value of the existing tax incentive for the production of cellulosic ethanol. Our bill would create an “Alternative Diesel Standard” similar to the renewable fuels standard that was included in the Energy Policy Act.

I am also an original cosponsor of the Vehicle and Fuel Choices for American Security Act. This bill would require federal agencies to implement a plan to reduce U.S. oil consumption by 10 million barrels a day by 2031. Towards that end, this legislation offers a 35% tax credit for automakers to retool their factories so that they can make fuel efficient, advanced technology vehicles. It also removes existing caps on the number of consumers that can benefit from tax credits designed to spur the purchase of fuel-efficient vehicles. It fosters additional demand for fuel-efficient vehicles by requiring that 30% of the government auto fleet be hybrids or advanced diesels. The bill also contains many provisions to enhance energy conservation - from tire efficiency to reduced school bus idling to lightweight materials research.

I also introduced the Fuel Security and Consumer Choice Act, which requires all U.S. marketed vehicles to be manufactured as FFVs within ten years. This capability would ensure access to an important alternative to foreign petroleum in the future as the nation’s renewable fuels industry continues to expand rapidly.

I believe that biofuels, combined with hybrid and other technologies, can begin to move us away from our extreme dependence on oil in the next decade. Obviously this is not a short-term proposition, but we can offset a significant portion of demand for oil by giving American consumers a real choice of automotive fuel.

While the challenges are great, there is reason for optimism. Our current energy balance is the result of industrial and consumption choices of the past. Despite our import dependence today, the U.S. is in a strong position to choose a different path, a path toward real energy security. Success would free future generations of Americans from the energy dilemma that threatens to compromise our security and prosperity.

Again, thank you for contacting me.

Answer 2

The oil companies have big lobbyists, the oil company that operates in the gulf, announced a another huge discovery in the gulf, I think that is why the price of oil is going down, the Arab Nations heard about it to. We have plenty of our own oil in Alaska but it is the environmentalists that keep us from drilling. (HUGE)... Chavez is a jerk and and he can take his heating oil and shove it, as far as I am concerned, that man had no right to come to my country and make cracks about our President, he is nothing but a thug and a communist, he has stoped the press in Venezuela from criticizing him and he oppresses his people, he is a rising dictator. and people that think he is our friend are naive and stupid, even the devil can be nice to get his way and that is exactly what he is doing, being nice to try and get the American people on his side, these are the same people that will fall for the anti Christ and the same kind of stupid people that fell for Hitler.

Answer 3

Why don't we drill our own oil? Why don't we create jobs and boost our economy on our own soil? Because the environmentalists are worried about the spotted oil and other species that may suffer. It's appearantly not enough to spend millions of dollars on acres and acres of wetlands and protected land for wildlife. We have our own oil right here, I say DRILL IT!

Answer 4

the conflict would still be there, and the US would get blamed for mistreating the poor oil producers. The way things are, if you buy oil it's the fault of US/Bush, and if you don't- it's the fault of US/ Bush. I guess it's Bush's fault that the dinosaurs are extinct too.

Answer 5

If we didn't rely on OPEC, where would Bush's buddies get their money?

Answer 6

Maybe because the U.S. is one of the world's greatest oil
consumers and there isn't enough of it within American borders
to supply the demand.

Answer 7

All hail Chavez, the hitler of the future!

Answer 8

I would love to know the same answer myself.

Answer 9

That's a good question. And the answer is.......................FOREIGN INTERESTS WHICH TRANSLATE TO M.O.N. E. Y!!!!!

Answer 10

BECAUSE THATS WHERE MOST OF IT IS.