Initially intrigued by an article that began “energy independence is in fact not possible to secure in the United States in the foreseeable future, and is of doubtful utility in any country that might be in a position to achieve it.” Peter Kiernan, in World Politics Review seemed to indicate that significant revelations were forthcoming. But it turned out to be just a little wordplay to argue for realism in energy policy. He simply wanted make a “credible case for the need to reduce oil consumption without arguing for energy independence as a goal.”

He makes his points by easily knocking down a number of “myths” he presents about US dependence on Middle East for oil.

• U.S. “not as dependent on Middle East producers for its oil as is sometimes implied” - Approx 21% of oil from Persian Gulf in 2007. OK - good to know.
• U.S. is the world’s largest oil market. It consumes 20.7 million barrels per day, 1 in 4 barrels used in the World each day. The author argues that reversal of oil consumption would require “drastic measures.” However, simple energy efficiency is directly effecting bottom line of a number of large corporations today. And, attention to better engineering would greatly change how many basic systems run, significantly lowering overall operational costs and once again directly effecting corporate revenues. How is this drastic?
• Most terrorists do not rely on oil money therefore change in oil use would not affect terrorism. However, oil is one of the primary reasons we are entangled in Middle Eastern politics. Once again, ok, but who is arguing that “most terrorists rely on oil money?”
• Curtailing oil consumption would have no effect on relations with Iran, Russia, Venezuela and others. “Reducing oil import dependence may be worthwhile in the long term, but it won’t make an immediate impact on regimes seen today to be problematic.” Don’t agree. There are always implications to change, whether direct or indirect. Policies that encourage alternative energy technologies, make us more flexible in supplying our energy needs, and provide even limited freedom from competition for available oil would have to impact both our competitive position in the global market as well as our political relations with oil producing countries.
• Middle East contains just over 60 percent of the world’s known oil reserves, with Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, and Kuwait alone having just over half of the world’s total reserves. Output growth from non-OPEC producers will not change the fact that the world will be largely dependent on the Middle East for the bulk of its supplies for the foreseeable future, and that Middle East producers are well-placed to supply the oil hungry markets of Asia. Once again, good to know but the U.S. can improve its competitive position if it chooses to do so.

Mr. Kiernan promised more in his opening statement but, in my humble opinion, failed to deliver.

Source: World Politics Review