More

Obama Sets Ambitious Goal To Reduce U.S. Oil Imports

Obama Energy Strategy

JULIE PACE   03/30/11 06:06 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Wednesday called for a one-third reduction in U.S. oil imports by 2025, reviving a long-elusive goal of reducing America's dependence on foreign supplies as political unrest rocks the Middle East and gasoline prices rise at home.

Tackling an issue that has vexed nearly every U.S. president since Richard Nixon, Obama said the country can't solve the problem with quick fixes and political gimmicks. But he offered little in the way of new initiatives, relying instead on a litany of energy proposals he's already called for, including boosting domestic oil production, increasing the use of biofuels and natural gas, and making vehicles more energy efficient.

Obama also embraced nuclear power as a critical part of America's energy future, despite increased safety concerns following the earthquake and tsunami in Japan that severely damaged a nuclear power plant there. He vowed a thorough safety review of all U.S. plants, incorporating lessons learned from Japan, but said nuclear power still holds enormous potential for the U.S.

"We can't simply take it off the table," Obama said during a nearly hour-long speech at Georgetown University.

Moving the U.S. away from its dependence on foreign oil and toward clean energy technologies was a key part of the domestic agenda Obama outlined in his January State of the Union address. That agenda has since been overshadowed by events around the world, from the uprisings in the Middle East and subsequent U.S. military intervention in Libya to the humanitarian and nuclear crisis in Japan.

But with gas prices on the rise as the president readies his reelection bid, the White House wants to regain its footing on domestic issues before public anger over the spike in energy costs take hold. Gas prices have jumped more than 50 cents a gallon this year, reaching a national average of $3.58 a gallon last week, according to AAA's daily survey.

Republicans have placed the blame for the spike in prices on Obama's policies, arguing that the administration has been too slow in approving new permits for oil drilling and calling on the president to open up areas along the Atlantic Coast and near Alaska, where drilling its currently banned.

"The problem is that Democrats don't want us to use the energy we have," Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday. "It's enough to make you wonder whether anybody in the White House has driven by a gas station lately."

The president struck back at that criticism during his speech, noting that his administration has approved 39 shallow-water drilling permits since new standards were put in place last year following the Gulf oil spill, and seven new deep-water drilling permits in recent weeks.

"So any claim that my administration is responsible for gas prices because we've shut down oil production might make for a useful political sound bite, but doesn't track with reality," Obama said.

Even if Obama's efforts can reduce U.S. demand for foreign oil, experts say they're unlikely to bring down the cost of gasoline, since oil is priced globally and increased demand from China and other developing nations continues to push prices up.

Obama acknowledged that he's far from the first U.S. president who has set out to put the U.S. on a path toward energy independence. Richard Nixon made the case for energy independence in 1973 after Arab oil producers cut off supplies in response to U.S. support of Israel in the Mideast war.

"Presidents and politicians of every stripe have promised energy independence but that promise has so far gone unmet," Obama said. "That has to change. We cannot keep going from shock to trance on the issue of energy security, rushing to propose action when gas prices rise, then hitting the snooze button when they fall again."

Energy Secretary Steven Chu, seeking to explain why Obama's push for energy independence would succeed where others had failed, said Obama's timeline is realistic given recent advances in the clean energy sector.

"I think technologically, we're much closer than we ever were," he told reporters at the White House.

However, David Pumphrey, deputy director of the Energy and National Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the prospect of Obama making good on his energy independence goals are much about politics as it is about technology.

"I don't think that the political nexus has yet changed enough," Pumphrey said. "What we've needed to do in terms of increased domestic production and greater efficiency has been pretty clear since Nixon's days."

Obama's proposal for boosting domestic oil relies in part on offering incentives to companies that hold leases for offshore and onshore drilling to speed up production. An Interior Department report released Tuesday said more than two-thirds of offshore leases in the Gulf of Mexico are sitting idle, neither producing oil and gas nor being actively explored by the companies who hold the leases. The department said those leases could potentially hold more than 11 billion barrels of oil and 50 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

Obama also called for expanding the development of oil alternatives, including natural gas and advanced biofuels, which are fuels made from non-food sources such as wood chips, switch grass or plant waste. Advanced biofuels, however, are still in their infancy and cannot yet be made in amounts similar to corn ethanol.

The president also ordered government agencies to ensure that by 2015, all new vehicles they purchase are alternative-fuel vehicles, including hybrid and electric. Obama has previously set a goal of putting 1 million electric vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015.

Administration officials said Obama's plans would require significant spending on research and development, though they offered no cost estimates

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Wednesday called for a one-third reduction in U.S. oil imports by 2025, reviving a long-elusive goal of reducing America's dependence on foreign supplies a...
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Wednesday called for a one-third reduction in U.S. oil imports by 2025, reviving a long-elusive goal of reducing America's dependence on foreign supplies a...
Filed by Elyse Siegel  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,338
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (26 total)
  1 of 1  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
PharmaCan 03:15 PM on 03/30/2011
Soooo....

More drilling in the Gulf

More fracking

More nuclear

More corporate welfare for the oil companies.

How about this instead, Mr. President.

Strict regulations to stop speculation in the petroleum market

Legalize hemp so that we can grow an inexpensive crop that can be made into fuel

A concerted effort to develop solar and wind energy so  Read More...
10:42 PM on 04/02/2011
MacQ- I agree the government needs to stop telling farmers what to grow and screwing with what ought to be a marketplace of producers and consumers without a million middle-men causing issues.

I promote home and local food production because it gives the consumer more influence and knowledge in the process of food production, keeps it less proccessed and healthier, and helps insulate against these crazy global commodities markets. A backyard garden and knowing a local farmer is how families on food stamps can stay alive when times like these happen.
02:02 PM on 04/02/2011
The perfect solution the Prez forgot is HOT DRY ROCK GEOTHERMAL ENERGY. (Google "HDR" or "EGS" -- and see google.org's YouTube videos on the "killer app of alternative energy" starring MIT's Dr. Jeff Tester, among others).

Hot dry rock is 2 to 6 miles below our feet everywhere. It is a safe, clean and essentially unlimited source of environmentally friendly BASELOAD power. A system for tapping into HDR with today's well drilling technology was patented at Los Alamos Lab in the 1970s and proven there with a small electric plant during the '80s -- until the USDOE cut off all funding.

An Manhattan Project to convert the country to earth heat and rapidly replace all fossil fuel and nuclear power plants with HDR will put tens of thousands of Americans to work; cleanly charge the U.S. electric grid day and night for 100,000 years (MIT studies); support an electric (or hydrogen) transportation system; erase foreign debt; liberate foreign policy, produce real energy independence for the country and save the planet. Not bad for two or three decades' work.

A generation has been squandered. Time to get off our butts and get started...

Pssst! HDR/EGS is actually perfect nuclear power!! Deep rock is hot because of endless radioactive decay below it within the Earth's mantle and core -- far away from the surface where we all live. Dabbling in dangerous fission up here in the biosphere is the "dumb way" to boil water. Safe HDR/EGS is the brilliant way.
photo
rickroland
Two Parties, Same Crap
05:43 AM on 04/02/2011
One can set all the "ambitious goals" one wants. But attaining such goals also includes sound planning and economical use of existing resources AND effective action to make them a reality.

I have absolutely no confidence in the President or this Administration of being able to do so at all, as the President has proven, time and again, that he is more interested in rapidly increasing spending and adding to the national debt, further eroding the value of the U.S. dollar, then he is in actually fixing the economic disaster where he is actively fanning the flames.

Unless and until Congress (both chambers) grows a collective pair, and stops the completely irresponsible out-of-control government spending, this country is absolutely doomed, economically, within five years time.
02:41 PM on 04/01/2011
Dean- Your scenario is rather poorly thought out.

Have you ever seen a bus at a gas station? I doubt it. They refuel at the bus depot.

So why would so many entire fuel stations need to be constructed for refueling public transport vehicles?

Using biodiesel doesn't require any expensive conversions for diesel vehicles. Most public transportion utilizes diesel engines.

Hydraulic fracturing for natural gas pollutes nearby potable water supplies. Not really a great economic incentive for local communities in which fracking occurs.
07:34 PM on 04/01/2011
I would like to correct you on one point. Tour busses and chater buses when on the road generally
fill up at truck stops whic are oversized gas stations that have a plethora of diesel fuel. City buses most definitely fuel up at the bus garage. I was around buses all of my early years and part of my teen years. My dad dove a bus foe thirty one years.
09:45 PM on 04/02/2011
jespusspuss- Tour buses and charter buses aren't the same as municipal public transport.

Tour-Charter buses : Public transport

Limo : Cab

Same difference.

But I understand and accept your correction.
11:48 AM on 04/01/2011
Galong- Arizona isn't a wasteland. It would be entirely impossible to cover every square inch of that state with PV panels. Plus it would still require a separate constant energy source to transfer all the power to the rest of the country. What is this other source of constant energy which powers the transfer stations across the entire country?

And the amount of people maintaining this system would be huge. Where do the people live who service this monstrosity of an energy plant if the entire state is covered in giant solar panels?

Not to mention the incredible ecosystem destruction that would occur. Do desert ecosystems not count?

And what happens at night? Where and how is all this energy stored?

Such a scenario is incredibly costly and logistically impossible.

Decentralized on-site energy production is more efficient, and actually possible.
11:33 AM on 04/01/2011
leah09- Algae biodiesel (aka vegetable oil) has been around for a long time. It's not some new thing invented in Spain. The US Energy Department proposed alage-based fuel production back in the 70s. A method has been developed in the US in 2010 to produce algae biodiesel only $0.10/gallon more than crude diesel.

This is old tech that has been suppressed and is coming back.
11:16 AM on 04/01/2011
The land required to grow the corn that feeds the cow which feeds the people could have produced more food directly for people than the cow would produce.

That's the point he was trying to make. Beef production is one of the most inefficient methods of food energy production.
11:11 AM on 04/01/2011
MacQ- I've done my research. The fact you continue to reiterate corn ethanol production as the reason worldwide food prices are skyrocketing reveals your ignorance of how speculation in the commodities markets affects the prices of said commodities far greater than the effects of supply and demand.

You're not paying me to be your professor so I'll leave the lesson there. Buy some books and do your own research about the effect of speculation by hedge funds and (more importantly) sovereign wealth funds in commodities markets before relying on a news article by some pontificating journalist who probably knows nothing about the subject.
11:09 AM on 04/01/2011
Finding an alternative to oil is crucial. The latest fuel innovation from Spain is a curious algae-based liquid named "algo-fuel." http://ecomobility.tv/2011/03/29/fill-up-tank-algo-fuel/
10:51 AM on 04/01/2011
Galong- I advocate for renewable energy, however wind and solar aren't really directly competing against oil, but rather coal and nuclear. And they don't quite stand up on their own just yet.

Tidal/wave, geothermal, and river energy provide baseload-capable renewable energy. Solar and wind are not currently baseload-capable on a mass scale.

Crude oil is mainly used for transportation, lubricant, chemical production, and plastics. Solar and wind don't have any real applications in those areas.

The oil industry doesn't want cannabis to be legalized more than it fears solar and wind encroaching on it's business because while hemp could upend crude oil, solar and wind cannot due to their inherently different nature. Hemp stalks can be used produce ethanol and plastics efficiently, while the oil in hempseed can be used as a cooking oil, lubricant, polish, or made into biodiesel.

Not all energy is the same. Electrical energy applications can't always replace chemical energy applications. Wind and solar are coming along, and eventually will likely be baseload-capable on a mass scale, but replacing crude oil is going to require biofuels, not solar panels.
09:54 AM on 04/01/2011
MacQ- Food prices are rising due to speculation in the market.

Corn is one of the worst crops humans could grow for food. It is only in 'everything' at the supermarket if you're buying food products stuffed to the gills with high fructose corn syrup. Cornstarch isn't extremely common in baking recipies. Corn doesn't actually add any nutrition to almost all of the food it's in.

Corn could disappear tomorrow and nobody would go hungry- unless of course your diet consists of popcorn, candy, tortilla chips, soda, taco shells, and corn on the cob.

Cornbread is the only food of semi-worth it can produce. I don't know a single human who eats cornbread every day, once a week, or even consistently once a month.

Corn ethanol is a scam, but it doesn't make people go hungry.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Galong
Sacrifice, the future has its price.
10:19 AM on 04/01/2011
Completely accurate and well-stated. The corn lobbyists are a powerful bunch as well. They don't want people to know the facts and corn is so ingrained into the American mind that people think they can't live without it. Faved...
09:14 PM on 03/31/2011
MLukhman- I was referring to German consumers, not the ruling political body.

Based on the Germans I know, they love their diesel engines and consider it a matter of pride to drive with them. Electric vehicles don't feel the same while driving. Diesel engines and the autobahn are German, after all.

Germany already has robust public transportation and heavily accomodates cycling. All of their diesel engine motor vehicles can run biodiesel without any modifications.

My personal experience with Germans (a very small opinion pool considering the country's population), the fact their cars are biodiesel-ready, and the fact they doesn't rely on passenger vehicles the way Americans do leads me to believe German consumers won't embrace expensive electric-vehicle technology as much as some people think.

They already have a low-carbon infrastructure ready, and don't need the gains in efficiency as much as America does.

That's certainly not to say electric vehicles don't have support in Germany. The mass deployment of rooftop PV in the country makes home-charging electric vehicles very appealing to some German consumers.

Electric vehicles aren't all bad. They're just needlessly expensive and composed of rare earth metals owned by China. Highly efficient motor vehicles running on sustainably produced biofuels are just a cheaper and less resource-intensive option, which I consider to be a better situation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MLukhman
To err is human to screw up takes a Republican min
10:36 AM on 04/02/2011
The Germans I know take a different view as shown by the fact that none of them own a diesel.

Your faith in biodiesel is misplaced as the industry is closing down plants.
10:28 PM on 04/02/2011
MLukhman- Biodiesel production is still evolving and production is best coupled with a municipal biodigestion facility. Some is government-subsidized, but the newest and best paradigms for profitable biodiesel production are facilities located at or near municipal waste facilities which utilize anaerobic digestion to process fecal and food waste. The fertilizer byproduct of digestion is used in algae growth, and the biogas and methane power biodiesel production.

This model works small-scale on many farms. It's application with municipal waste facilities help mitigate cost.

Biodiesel could never replace gasoline as the single ubiquitous passenger vehicle fuel, but it has the potential to replace crude diesel in farm equipment, public transportation, and to a limited degree in passenger diesel vehicles.

Electric vehicles are expensive and resource-intensive, and moving away from each individual requiring their own passenger vehicle into a more local, mass transit-oriented community planning paradigm is the cure to the transportation issue.

The reality of electric cars is that they rely on rare materials controlled by a nationalistic foreign government willing to cut off supplies for political reasons and require hours to charge on a power grid which is sometimes damaged and temporarily non-functioning due to extreme weather. In the US in particular the grid is the oldest in the world and regularly experiences brownouts and blackouts in already energy-intensive areas. Adding electric cars to an aging grid in need of over a $1,000,000,000,000 of upgrades isn't going to help anybody get around for very long. And it doesn't seem like any
02:01 PM on 03/31/2011
Botany5000- The story is not still out on biofuels.

Brazil has found success using sugar cane to produce ethanol.

Biodiesel is becoming more common in Europe, and has been used in Germany since the 90s.

A method of producing algae biodiesel has been developed in the US that costs only $0.10 more per gallon than producing crude diesel.

For those who don't understand-

Diesel engines were originally designed to run on vegetable oil. All diesel engines can still run on vegetable oil. The problem comes in the fuel injector. Crude diesel is more viscous than vegetable oil, so vegetable oil must be mixed with alcohol (methanol) in order for it to pass properly through a fuel injector designed for crude diesel. Vegetable oil also freezes at a much lower temperature than crude oil products. Heaters must be attached to the fuel lines to prevent freezing in colder areas, but there is no expensive conversion neccessary.

Biofuels are proven technology if you look at their use on continents aside from North America.
10:51 AM on 03/31/2011
MacQ- Unless you eat only organic food, some of that slime from deep places is going in your stomach in the form of petrochemical herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers.

'Biofuel' is a blanket term like 'fossil fuel'. It includes all manner of energy derived from life (and life is just a solar battery).

Ethanol does not generate a net energy gain in it's production. Ethanol derived from waste material has a 1:1 energy ratio.

Corn ethanol is actually a net energy loss.

Biodiesel (aka vegetable oil) generates a net energy gain in which a single unit of energy put in generates three units of usable energy out.

Many crops are currently grown to produce vegetable oil. After the oil is used in cooking, it can be processed into biodiesel.

So while corn ethanol biofuel causes issues, waste vegetable oil biodiesel does not. No additional crop space is required to put waste biodiesel into immediate production. It can be made from currently existing waste derived from currently existing crops.

There needs to be a clearer understanding of what 'biofuel' means. Wood is biofuel. Try stuffing a log in your gastank.
10:26 AM on 03/31/2011
devildog21- Rooftop PV works for some people, but it's still too expensive for mass deployment and the systems do not efficiently store electricity. The technology is coming along and hopefully soon it will be viable for average household energy consumers to purchase PV systems cost effectively.

Solar thermal has been ready and waiting for about a century in the US for mass deployment. Solar water heaters were becoming common in Florida and California back in the 1920s, before cheap oil and the infrastructure to use it was promoted for use. Israel and China currently dominate the usage of solar thermal furnaces and water heaters.