Solutions to Foreign Oil Dependency

The United States has chosen a hard path for energy security. There are a number of alternatives that could reduce this foreign dependency, but it will require significant changes in policy and opinion. Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on imported Petroleum, By Michael Klare, discusses the merits of change in geopolitical thinking and suggests alternatives to the current system. While Klare does not provide any revolutionary new ideas to change American policy, he does fairly accurately summarize the choices at hand and presents simple solutions to a complex problem. Thomson Reuters provides an update on the United States situation as of 2011 in the report U.S. Oil Dependency Drops Below 50 Percent, Energy Department Reports.

Klare’s primary argument throughout this book has been that America’s foreign energy policy is inadequate to satisfy the needs of the U.S. and will only lead to wasting resources and human lives. There is not enough oil on the planet anymore to support this type of policy. The title of the book is well represented in the last chapter in the claim that “Ultimately, the cost of oil will be measured in Blood: the blood of American soldiers who die in combat, and the blood of the many other casualties of oil related violence, including victims of terrorism” (Klare, 2005, p. 183). Klare even goes as far as to call American deaths for petroleum a tax that better reflects the true impact of American dependency on oil from unstable regions. While this may be the ultimate cost there are plenty of other costs as well. Financially, it may cost over 150 billion per year and even after that, money and human sacrifice will not be enough to guarantee the continue flow of oil (Klare, 2005). No matter how long this policy does keep oil flowing, the costs are not worth it and the petroleum will not last any longer than it is already predicted to.

The first solution discussed in the text is simple. The problem is the United State’s interaction abroad involving energy policy. The logical solution is to reign the US back in and focus on energy independence. This can only effectively come from the exploitation of domestic resources and must include all available energy systems including the continued use of oil (Klare, 2005). However, Klare goes on to say that drilling in places like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will barely accomplish any real gain in energy independence (2005). It is impractical for the United States to completely stop using oil immediately so new policy is needed for relations abroad. This leads to the call for a full paradigm shift in how energy in the United States is approached and calls for “a national energy policy of autonomy and integrity” (Klare, 2005, p.186). Integrity refers to supporting true American values in American Policy including long-term interests and environmental protection. Autonomy refers to the acquisition of oil abroad without special favors or conditions to oil producing regions (Klare, 2005). This autonomy and integrity will be based on reducing foreign oil dependence, extricating the country from its negative and often hypocritical agreements abroad, and transitioning to a postpetroleum economy (Klare, 2005). Postpetroleum economy just refers to an economy that is not centered and completely dependent on oil. The rest of the book briefly skims over self-restraint, efficiency, hybrid technologies, hydrogen as a fuel source and the introduction of mass transit systems. This collection of solutions is already being used in other countries and will help the overall situation in ways that a single solution could not address.

As of 2011, it has been reported that oil dependence in the U.S. fell below 50 percent for the first time in over a decade in 2010 (Reuters, 2011). The U.S. did however import 49.3 percent in that year which is not overly heartening even though it was reported to be 60.3 percent in 2005 (Reuters, 2011). According to Reuter, this is the lowest petroleum import level since 1973 (2011). This is undoubtedly a positive step forward, but most of the decrease in imports is due to increased production within the U.S.   Since oil production peaked in the U.S. in 1972 (Klare, 2005), there is only some much oil left so the decrease in dependence may be short-lived. While the U.S. has been making changes, oil continues to be a primary energy source for the U.S. and it is hard to see a “postpetroleum economy” in sight.

The U.S. has not heeded Klare’s advice and continues to be an invasive presence in the Gulf region. More interest is now being placed on other regions of the world, but it is likely that the U.S. will approach them in the same way as the Gulf if history is any indication. Klares solutions are a necessary step towards a better system, but petroleum still has too strong a grip on the economy for change to occur. The tax on oil is still in blood. With any hope this will not always be the case.

References

Klare, M. T. (2005). Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Holt Paperbacks.

Reuters, T. (2011, May 25). U.S. Oil Dependency Drops Below 50 Percent, Energy Department Reports. Huffington Post. Retrieved September 25, 2012, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/25/us-oil-dependency-drops-energy-department_n_867131.html

World Dominance

World power struggles have not ceased even after the bloody aftermath of World War I, World War II, and the Cold War. It would appear, that while the major powers of the world have no desire to fight each other outright, they do feel that it is necessary to maneuver in ways that insure others do not have as much power over them. The world’s energy supplies are the next great battleground for the great powers of the world. It appears that keeping oil flowing is not the only goal for these great powers. They seem to feel the need to control regions even if oil is flowing freely to their markets. This is thoroughly documented in Michael Klare’s Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on imported Petroleum. Russia, China, and the United States are all locked into an energy market struggle that threatens the entire world.

Energy sources were key components of World War I, World War II, and the Cold War. Great Britain, France, and the United States sought out foreign access to reserves to fuel WWI’s growing ranks of tanks, planes, and other necessary vehicles. According to Klare, Japan’s preemptive attack on Pearl Harbor was made because Japan new that if it made moves to secure foreign oil fields, the U.S. would enter WWII in retaliation against them (2005). Whether this is the entire reason for the attack on Pearl Harbor is not established in Klare’s book. Despite this oil had a huge role in WWII because part of Germany’s campaign against Russia was to gain control oil reserves in Baku (Klare, 2005).  Oil Fueled WWII and, according to Klare, was one of the reasons for the United State’s fight against communism during the Cold War  (2005). Klare does not go much farther than the arguments for causes that deal with oil in his book, so it is sometimes unclear how integral oil was to a situation without more context.

As of 2002, oil and gas made up fifty-five percent of Russia’s export Revenue and made up forty percent of their government income (Klare, 2005). This has led them to secure certain positions in geopolitics to protect their economic wellbeing. Russia, like the United States, uses military supplies as an inroad to energy security in different regions. The Caspian Sea oil is very important to Russia and the United States, but Russia has also had a hand in the armament of Iraq, Iran, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan (Klare, 2005). This includes military training, Russian forces on the ground, weapons, and combat vehicles. The Cold War has now been translated into a geopolitical contest that appears to use many of the same tactics of the Cold War with less overall tension.

China will also be a huge competitor for energy now that it has grown to be a crucial player. While late to the game, China will likely go after the same reserves as the United States and Russia. China was able to support its own energy needs through the Cold War and up to 1993, but its rapidly expanding economy has lead it to seek oil in the Persian Gulf, Caspian Sea Basin, and North Africa (Klare, 2005) According to Klare, “As of 2003, these [Chinese] firms had secured important ties with energy enterprises in more than a dozen countries, including Angola, Burma, Ecuador, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Oman, Peru, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Thailand, Venezuela, and Yemen” (2005, p. 169). Just as the United States and Russia have done, China is supplying countries with weapons to get what it wants. Iran, Sudan, and Saudi Arabia are among those receiving various forms of military support from China (Klare, 2005).

The tone of Klare’s book leads to some frightening realizations. These three huge nations, not to mention other developed countries not mentioned in this book, have well exceeded their boarders and influenced powers in oil regions by supplying weapons and armament. To some extent arming one country with some technology may not be such a big deal, but when other countries are doing it too massive amounts of weapons are finding there way into regions that are flagged as being very unstable. While it is not Klare’s job to examine the moral implications of this kind of extended control, it should worry readers. If Economic systems can control other countries than were does it end and how can weaker countries safeguard themselves against larger powers. It is like the United Nations does not even exist. Klare describes Russia, the United States, and China as if they were countries without boarders. Very little is said about what is being done in country and everyone’s national security seems to depend on things that are completely outside their boarders. Apparently the only justification needed to influence other countries is to make it a matter of your own security. It becomes all about what could happen instead of what is happening. The implications for the future are also grim. With so many countries all going for the same energy sources, the reserves will not last nearly as long as any individual’s country has estimated. When reserves do go down it also seems unlikely that the countries with oil will share it indefinitely until they run out. It would make sense if developing countries eventually decided that there was only enough oil left for their own use once reserves have been depleted enough.  Because of this, major powers of the world cannot even guarantee that supplies will stay open until reserves are exhausted. Not only does this whole situation destabilize the region that the United States is determined to stabilize, it could lead to global conflicts that amass themselves in the form of a third world war. The boarders of countries and commerce need to be redefined to protect smaller countries. The larger countries are taking advantage and providing exorbitant gifts that are impossible to refuse for countries that have so little. The way this global economic system of powerful companies has taken over the interests of country governments is out of control. There need to be institutions that keep this kind of economic imperialism in check. These ideas are incredibly controversial and nearly impossible to implement in the current system, but it is at least important to think about them. The only thing that is certain is that somehow on some level what is being justified abroad is wrong. The strong are profiting from the weak and draining any resilience they might have had for the future. While the playing field may never be level for the players involved, there should at least be some lines that are defined enough to protect those who cannot protect themselves.

References

Klare, M. T. (2005). Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Holt Paperbacks.

Satisfying a Thirsty World

           In the Preface of Michael Klare’s book Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum, Klare disagrees with Samuel Huntington’s A Clash of Civilizations. Huntington’s well known idea was that most of the conflicts that have occurred in recent times are because of religious and ethnic differences that prevent nations or different groups of people from seeing eye to eye (Klare, 2005). While there is a degree of truth in this, Klare argues that not all conflicts can be accounted for by examining differences in culture. He believes that the evidence provided throughout his book confirms his theory that resources are at the center of most conflicts. While Klare’s book mainly focuses on oil, there are plenty of other resources that civilizations are going to war for. One of the biggest resource conflicts besides those revolving around oil are those involving water. This is confirmed by news articles from the last few months including U.S. Intelligence Report Warns of Global Water Tensions, by Steven Myers, Are Water Wars Coming?, by Chris Arsenault, and Struggle for Water in Colorado with Rise in Fracking, by Jack Healy.

            There is no question that having access to water is a requirement for life. It may seem like there is a lot of water on the surface of the earth, but not all of that water is drinkable or useable. Arsenault says that according to the United Nations, “Internationally, 780 million people lack access to safe drinking water” (2012). This is mainly due to the fact that the world only holds three percent of fresh water of which only one percent is easy to gain access to (Arsenault, 2012). The rest of the water on earth is salt water. Issues around water also inevitably include “population growth, increasing food Prices, and global warming” (Arsenault, 2012). Arsenault also mentions cultural differences as an overall contributor to water conflicts. Water could feasibly be connected to a number of issues that have not been mentioned here because water is a staple for life. If the overall problem is not dealt with than every aspect of daily life could be afflicted.

            The State Department’s classified National Intelligence Estimate has led the intelligence community in the U.S. to acknowledge that water problems will likely surface in the next ten years in the Middle East, South Asia, and North Africa (Myers, 2012). This acknowledgement is reinforced by United Nation studies that indicate that by 2025, thirty nations will lack adequate access to water (Arsenault, 2012). This is not just a problem the world faces in the future. According to Myers, there are already problems along the Tigris and Euphrates where the headwaters have been harnessed (2012). Yemen and places along the Nile River are expected to be the future location of water conflicts (Arsenault, 2012). Arsenault says that, according to Maude Barlow, South Africa, India, Mexico, Botswana, Bolivia and parts of the United States have already had water protests and it will only get worse (2012).

Fresh water access has also been a problem in the United States of America, especially in the west. Seventy percent of the worlds water is used for agricultural purposes (Myers, 2012). This has been a major problem for American farmers in recent weeks do to Fracking in the western United States. Oil and gas extraction wells can require over five million gallons of water a piece and the water is being taken from anywhere energy companies can get access (Healy, 2012). With more bids on water sources, prices are going up in relation to the level of scarcity. This may increase food production costs and drive up prices for consumers assuming that there is enough for both farms and energy companies to continue using water at this rate. While many farmers do not believe they can compete with big energy companies, critics are saying that it is not as easy for the energy companies to get water as the farmers say it is (Healy, 2012). Whether this is true or not, this level of water use would be hard to continue unnoticed.

            The water wars that the world is primed for just so happen to be in many of the regions Klare mentions in his book as being of special interest to the United States for feeding its dependency on oil. The instability of foreign regimes that has led to so much U.S. involvement may now be added to by yet another threat. Any conflicts over water will destabilize oil producing regions and directly affect the American economy. Since stability has appeared to require American policing efforts, it would seem that in order to protect the flow of oil, the U.S. will have to find a way to solve the world’s water problems. If the United States is committed to keeping these regions stable indefinitely until they are drained dry of petroleum, they have an immense amount of work cut out for them. A future energy crisis could possibly result from a future water crisis.

References

Arsenault, C. (2012, August 28). Are the Water Wars Coming? AlterNet. Retrieved from http://www.alternet.org/water/are-water-wars-coming?akid=9309.29753.Jrsinm&rd=1&src=newsletter702769&t=26&paging=off

Healy, J. (2012, September 5). Struggle for Water in Colorado With Rise in Fracking. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/06/us/struggle-for-water-in-colorado-with-rise-in-fracking.html

Klare, M. T. (2005). Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Holt Paperbacks.

Myers, S. L. (2012, March 22). U.S. Intelligence Report Predicts Tensions on Water. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/world/us-intelligence-report-warns-of-global-water-tensions.html