Disturbing noises once again!
In his annual State of the Union address, President Bush for the second year in a row targeted the issue of US oil independence — on the Middle East. Last year also the rhetoric was on the US “oil addiction” and this time again the US dependence on this oil rich region was a major sticking point in the presidential speech. America today is the global “gas guzzler.” And indeed the US needs to mend its ways for the very stability and the continuity of this civilization. The consumption-oriented US economy definitely needs to look at its ways. And when President Bush in his State of the Union address urged the nation’s drivers to cut petrol use by 20 percent in 10 years, every one but welcomed it. That’s the need of the hour. But this rhetoric became unsettling when President Bush started extracting political mileage out of this “sensitive and emotional” issue: “This dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes and to terrorists who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments, raise the price of oil and do great harm to our economy.” Who was he referring to and which regimes were in his mind — it became quite apparent.
There are definite dangers when world leaders start speaking out their minds in that manner. In this world, as imperfect as it may be, “independence” in absolute terms is not something one could aspire for. In real fact, “energy independence” is even more elusive and less rewarding than is generally perceived.
Currently the US consumes about 25 percent of the total global output. The global consumption stands around 84 million barrels a day. The US imports hovers around 10 million barrels per day and these mainly come from governments that President Bush was apparently targeting in his address. Was that a global statesman speaking? Sixty percent of the proven global reserves are in the “unstable” Middle East, 6 percent are in Venezuela 5 percent in Russia. And interestingly 10 percent of global crude reserves are currently in Africa.
But despite the fact that most of the globally proven reserves are in countries that at best could be described as not “good friends of the US,” the question remains can the US live with out these. Only the US motorists, not to speak of the industry and its heating requirements, require about 140 billion gallons of petrol in a year. And hence when President Bush urged carmakers to increase petrol efficiency and make a massive investment in environmentally-friendly fuel, analysts have nothing but to applaud. Not a bad idea at all, however, it needed to be made in the right perspective, in a statesman fashion, so as not to dent the investment sentiments in the sector. But indeed the Texan way is different. President Bus also emphasized boosting production of alternative fuels like ethanol, derived from plants such as corn, sugar cane and wood and he also revealed plans to raise fuel economy standards for cars including 4x4s and wanted investment in other “green” fuels like bio-diesel, methanol, butanol and hydrogen. Yet to what extent all this is implemented is yet to be seen. The president’s history in putting into action such pronouncements in past is indeed not very credible.
Many do not see eye to eye with the presidential rhetoric and differ greatly with his political philosophies especially when seen in the background of the energy dynamics. The US economy will continue to rely on crude oil imports, panelists told a hearing this month. “Barring draconian measures, the United States will depend on imported oil for a significant fraction of its transportation fuel needs for at least several (more) decades,” said Linda Stuntz, an energy attorney and former Energy Department official, citing a Council on Foreign Relations report.
Before the presidential address, some White House officials were quoted as saying that Bush’s planned for over 60 billion gallons (227 billion liters) a year of ethanol to be mixed into US gasoline supplies by 2030 — or about 30 percent of current US gasoline consumption. Energy Department officials say that a conservative limit of ethanol from corn is about 13 billion gallons. But the Bush administration wants to make ethanol production from cellulosic materials like wood chips cost-competitive with corn-based ethanol by 2012, allowing for greater renewable fuel use. No one should indeed contest that. America has to take a lead, and if it is ready, it is a welcome change. On the other hand the US Senate Energy Committee dominated by the Democrats last week also unveiled their own five-part energy bill, which aimed at reducing US petroleum imports by 40 percent by 2020 through more efficient vehicles, renewable fuel sources like ethanol, and requiring 15 percent of US electric supplies to come from renewable sources by then. With the US constituting about 8 percent of the global population and yet consuming almost 30 percent of the total global crude output, any change in that direction would help assuage the energy dynamics all around. The world would be much at ease with these developments and perhaps the number of conflicts in the world, undertaken, explicitly or implicitly, for the sake of securing energy supplies would hopefully be less too.
Unilateralism has not worked in the past, in this “interdependent world” even if the sole superpower of the world wanted to be so and it won’t work in future too, one perhaps has to grudgingly accept. America some how will have to interact and sit down with the countries of the Middle East for its own sake and for the sake of the common civilization. After all, in this world, Middle East needs also a lot many things from the US and the rest of the world.