The Fuel Value of Paper
Published in Süddeutsche Zeitung
(Germany) on 31 March 2011
by Christian Wernicke (link to
original)
Obama’s energy conservation plans are ambitious. Despite that, many of his thoroughly pragmatic suggestions are doomed to a quick death because the red pencil rules Congress.
The speeches are legendary. It has been almost four decades since Republican Richard Nixon promised to free the U.S. from oil imports in his “Project Independence.” Four years later, a Democrat was tooting the same horn as Jimmy Carter promised to cure America’s thirst for cheap energy, something he described as the moral equivalent of war. Even George W. Bush, scion of a family enriched by profits from crude oil, said in his 2006 State of the Union speech, “America is addicted to oil.”
Now it’s Barack Obama’s turn to denounce his nation’s oil mania. He also wants to end America’s dependence on oil imports (this time, by one-third over 14 years) and more clearly than most of his countrymen he makes the energy issue one of crucial national importance. He vowed not to leave this challenge to future presidents nor to his children. In a speech to thousands of Georgetown University students last Wednesday, he promised to tackle the problem with the usual mixture of American scientific curiosity and patriotic spirit of invention. He told his audience, “That’s your birthright. There is no problem that you can’t solve.”*
Great words. But most of what the president said reads like the fine print in a deputy secretary’s PowerPoint presentation. More insulation at home, less fuel consumption on the roads, more use of bio-fuels, even in America’s fighter jets — all that is as well-meaning as his call for increased use of renewable energies. Even his decree that in these times of climate change people can’t do without domestic nuclear energy was thoughtful and balanced.
And yet, Obama’s energy plan is barely worth the paper it’s printed on. Many of his thoroughly pragmatic suggestions will die a quick death. The red pencil rules Congress, and because there are more Republicans than Democrats there, deep ideological cuts will be made in Obama’s plans. Programs that deal with environmental policies stand high on the Congressional hit list.
At the same time, Obama’s speech reveals just how much he has scaled back his expectations. The former candidate of hope and change knows full well that without an increase in the price of fossil fuels, he can never hope to cure America’s addiction to oil. Still, he failed to embrace his bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility’s advice to raise the gasoline tax by a laughable (by European standards) 3 Euro cents per liter (about $0.16 per U.S. gallon).
He’s even silent on a new emissions trading law. Nonetheless, if the wars for liberation in the Arab world continue to drive oil prices upward, Obama need only look to the archives. It’s all there, right next to Nixon’s and Carter’s yellowing manuscripts.
*Editor's note: The quote, although accurately translated, could not be independently verified.
The speeches are legendary. It has been almost four decades since Republican Richard Nixon promised to free the U.S. from oil imports in his “Project Independence.” Four years later, a Democrat was tooting the same horn as Jimmy Carter promised to cure America’s thirst for cheap energy, something he described as the moral equivalent of war. Even George W. Bush, scion of a family enriched by profits from crude oil, said in his 2006 State of the Union speech, “America is addicted to oil.”
Now it’s Barack Obama’s turn to denounce his nation’s oil mania. He also wants to end America’s dependence on oil imports (this time, by one-third over 14 years) and more clearly than most of his countrymen he makes the energy issue one of crucial national importance. He vowed not to leave this challenge to future presidents nor to his children. In a speech to thousands of Georgetown University students last Wednesday, he promised to tackle the problem with the usual mixture of American scientific curiosity and patriotic spirit of invention. He told his audience, “That’s your birthright. There is no problem that you can’t solve.”*
Great words. But most of what the president said reads like the fine print in a deputy secretary’s PowerPoint presentation. More insulation at home, less fuel consumption on the roads, more use of bio-fuels, even in America’s fighter jets — all that is as well-meaning as his call for increased use of renewable energies. Even his decree that in these times of climate change people can’t do without domestic nuclear energy was thoughtful and balanced.
And yet, Obama’s energy plan is barely worth the paper it’s printed on. Many of his thoroughly pragmatic suggestions will die a quick death. The red pencil rules Congress, and because there are more Republicans than Democrats there, deep ideological cuts will be made in Obama’s plans. Programs that deal with environmental policies stand high on the Congressional hit list.
At the same time, Obama’s speech reveals just how much he has scaled back his expectations. The former candidate of hope and change knows full well that without an increase in the price of fossil fuels, he can never hope to cure America’s addiction to oil. Still, he failed to embrace his bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility’s advice to raise the gasoline tax by a laughable (by European standards) 3 Euro cents per liter (about $0.16 per U.S. gallon).
He’s even silent on a new emissions trading law. Nonetheless, if the wars for liberation in the Arab world continue to drive oil prices upward, Obama need only look to the archives. It’s all there, right next to Nixon’s and Carter’s yellowing manuscripts.
*Editor's note: The quote, although accurately translated, could not be independently verified.