Can We Do Without Saudi Oil?

The Weekly Standard ^ | 11/19/2001 | Irwin M. Stelzer

[N00dleN0gg1n]

Even these figures understate our dependence on the Saudis. Enough oil is known to exist in the United States to maintain current production levels for about 10 years, and in Canada for about 8 years...

Plenty of time to build a bunch of breeder reactors, if we just get the government (in the hands of the NIMBYs) out of the way.

but it's safe to assume that engines that run on something other than gasoline will not be significant for a good long while. And this irreplaceable gasoline accounts for about 45 percent of all our oil consumption.

What would our situation look like if 100% of our oil went into transportaion? Assume that anything that's stationary and can hook up to the grid is run by coal, hydro, wind or nuclear.

Bringing back the nuclear industry is now a national security issue - something the French and Japanese have understood for a long time.

[xzins]

When in Germany, their gas was costing the $5 per gallon cited at the end of the article. They are thoroughly addicted to mideast oil, and their foreign policy reflects it.

How to rid the habit is like with smoking. Either you're smoking or you're not. Either you're using oil from the cartel or you're not.

[paul51]

Can We Do Without Saudi Oil?

No better than they can do without our dollars.

[WalterSkinner]

Drill the ANWR!
Gotta go now and change my oil.

[dogbyte12]

We seriously have to think going nuclear and electric as a stop gap measure. By nuclear and electric, I mean, building a sh!t load of nuclear plants, giving tax incentives to businesses and individuals who buy electric powered cars, that are powered from nuclear energy.

Every new bus in this country should be electric. Doesn't even have to be fuel cell. Could be the overhead electric powered buses that are in some cities. If there is a will, there is a way. In addition we tap the Artic and flip the bird at Saudi Arabia.

If we start seriously on the telecommuting, carpooling, converting to electric vehicles (where it's feasable), we can reduce our foreign oil imports.

[SamAdams76]

We could double the gas mileage in cars and we would still use about the same amount of oil. Americans will simply drive more. It's sort of like "low-fat" ice cream, all that means to most Americans is that we can eat twice as much!

Maybe the best thing that can happen to America right now is higher oil prices. Only with higher prices will Americans cut back on their oil usage. More importantly, higher oil prices will provide the necessary economic pressure to develop not only domestic oil production but also alternative forms of energy. We have the basic technology in place for solar heating, hydrogen fuel cells and other forms of energy production. All that is holding these technologies back is the low price of oil. Why invest in solar power when oil is so cheap and plentiful?

The United States has long been known for its inventiveness and ingenuity. I'm sure we will be amazed by just how fast we respond to a full-blown energy crisis with new energy sources and technologies.

[wcbtinman]

"...you can plan on $5.00 at the pump....

You can plan on me just passing the cost right on through to my customers. (trucking co)

[Hamiltonian]

Yes, we can do without foreign oil, but the price would double or even triple.

......A trend that would bode well for the Appalachian economy, not to mention reducing gratuitous traffic around cities.

[Hamiltonian]

On second thought, would a btu of synthetic transportation fuel really cost 2-3X what a btu of exxon costs?

The equivalent of $3+ a gallon? There are plans (Bechtel/Texaco/Sasol) to make diesel fuel from coal that would be close to the current DF price.

Come to think of it, is ethanol 2-3X more expensive?

[Victoria Delsoul]

BUT WHAT ABOUT that oil? If push comes to shove can we do without it? Not a chance. America consumes almost 19 million barrels of oil every day, and produces fewer than 8 million. The balance comes from overseas suppliers, with Canada and Saudi Arabia each providing some 15 percent of our imports, Venezuela 14 percent, Mexico 11 percent, Nigeria about 8 percent, and Iraq about 6 percent.

We are, it should be noted, dependent not only on those countries from which we buy oil directly. Oil is a fungible product, and a shutdown of production in any country, even one from which we buy little oil, will affect the price we pay our own suppliers.

It also leaves us with one overriding strategic imperative: We must make clear that in the event of an upheaval in Saudi Arabia, we will take control of, protect, and run the kingdom's oil fields, which American oil companies originally developed after paying substantial sums for the right to do so. This may be a difficult policy to defend in the post-imperialist era, but that doesn't make planning for this contingency any less necessary. Our State Department is creative; surely, if called upon, it would be able to figure out an arrangement for operating the oilfields that would safeguard our supply and win the blessing of a revenue-hungry regime with a stake in the continued flow of oil. And surely such a regime, if it did not exist, could be invented.

For an immediate solution this makes sense to me.

Bump!

[Francohio]

Did you know that your favorite Hollywood stars who live in Beverly Hills, live with oil wells, in some cases in their back yards and basements (and collect royalties)? There is a massive oil well on the grounds of Beverly Hills High School. 10 to 1 Monica Lewinsky never even noticed it!

Did you know we have oil wells all over Ohio, literally in back yards, cow pastures, parks, woods , and every other place you can think of? ditto Pennsylvania, Western New York State, and God knows where else.

Do these tree hugging clymers actually think a Caribou is going to give a tinker's dam about living next to an oil well? Jeesh, this country has been taken over by the stupidly evil or the evilly stupid!

Drill Anwr, dammit. When the first well comes in, we'll meet at my house for some roast spotted owl and throw darts at Barbra Streisand and Diane Feinstein posters.
(BTW, did you ever notice the same people who want to preserve the environment have no qualms about allowing 10 million illegal aliens crowd into the US and have 10 kids apiece. This certainly hasn't helped the environment in Southern California. Without development, how are we supposed to feed, clothe, house, educate, and employ these Third World Border Bounders who are turning many areas into little Third World Hellholes?)

[Vince Ferrer]

Come to think of it, is ethanol 2-3X more expensive?

I think ethanol is the equivalent of $1.30 - $1.50 gasoline. Ethanol is a good short term substitute, because many cars made in the last couple of years can use E85, (85% ethanol/ 15% gasoline) as well as gasoline, with no modification.

We can increase our use of ethanol, but it can't replace gasoline entirely, because we can't grow enough to make ethanol. Methanol can be made from natural gas, and is also competitive with gasoline. We can make M85 cars too.

While we're talking about nuclear reactors and other long term things, don't forget about simple things like bicycles, and walking.

[Wonder Warthog]

"It would still take years to build all the new nuclear reactors and meanwhile we'd be depended on Saudi oil."

The only reason it takes "years" is due to the obstructionist regulations and constant delaying lawsuits engendered by the anti-nuke "green" nutcases.

"What I don't understand is why no serious effort has been undertaken to develop the technology to control the nuclear fusion reaction for use in power generation."

Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent on fusion research, with no useful results to speak of. It turns out to be REALLY HARD to do fusion on a scale smaller than a star. We will have practical, cheap solar cells and hydrogen power before workable fusion reactors are realized. Two pieces of desert southwest 100 x 100 miles will supply the ENTIRE energy requirement of the US (gas, oil, coal, AND electric).

[R W Reactionairy]

"Every tank in every tank farm is bursting with product looking desperatly for a market right now like an old man with a prostate problem looking for a urinal."

Your are correct. The economy is slowing down, natural gas is once again the preferred boiler fuel and OPEC is cheating on quotas. What a short term oversupply doesn't translate to is an indication of anything long term.

To give some idea, the last estimate I heard of the impact of the collapse of oil prices to around 10 dollars was the permanent loss of about 1 million barells per day from marginal production in the US that could have continued for years, but was totally uneconomic at lower prices. When this type of production gets plugged and abandonned, it is a very good bet that it will never be brought back into production.

Low prices lead to lower production which leads to high prices. The key point however is that either way the low cost producers like Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States increase market share.

BTW, the difference between optimal supplies of crude and products; and current supplies is a lot of oil, but is really only a few days worth of consumption.

[Sabertooth]

"For an immediate solution this makes sense to me.

Bump!"

Bumping your bump!

Here's my energy policy:

1. Build fission nukes, the technology is here now.

2. Open up the American coal reserves that Bill Clinton put off limits in a land-grab that simultaneously appeased Earth Firsters and the proprietors of dirty Indonesioan coal, the Riadys.

3. Explore and develop all American oil reserves, including ANWR, and even those off my California coast and the coast of Florida, among others. That oil in the ground is our strategic reserve, let's get them tapped and ready to open the spigots at our whim.

4. Meanwhile, during peacetime, we consume as much as we can from foriegn sources. Doesn't matter if we're using foriegn oil then, as long as we can rapidly shift to domestic production should the need arise. Then we can wait them out, if necessary. As the Iraqi minister said, what are they going to do, drink their oil?

[Hamiltonian]

All we need to replace is the fraction coming from overseas. ~8 mmbbl/day?

Eliminating traffic jams around cities and getting the northeast to switch from heating oil to natural gas would likely eliminate another big chunk of our import requirements.

Of course the crispy critters in the heating oil business had enough money for x42's release from the SPR last year. And the solution to eliminating traffic jams is relocating office jobs to flyover country. The crooks in the big city real estate business would rather see the traffic jams..........or more tax money redistributed from flyover country to widen the beltways.

[weikel]

Except Opec buys all the patents on any alternative energy(1st we need an act of congress invalidating all opec patents in the US)

[RobbyS]

It also leaves us with one overriding strategic imperative: We must make clear that in the event of an upheaval in Saudi Arabia, we will take control of, protect, and run the kingdom's oil fields, which American oil companies originally developed after paying substantial sums for the right to do so. This may be a difficult policy to defend in the post-imperialist era, but that doesn't make planning for this contingency any less necessary. Our State Department is creative; surely, if called upon, it would be able to figure out an arrangement for operating the oilfields that would safeguard our supply and win the blessing of a revenue-hungry regime with a stake in the continued flow of oil. And surely such a regime, if it did not exist, could be invented.

Surely a regime such as this would distribute its billions among the oppressed masses of the Middle East.

[monkeyshine]

This is nonsense. Let's just call up Venezuela and sign an output contract. We will buy all the oil they can pump at a fixed price per barrel until they can pump no more. They can leave OPEC, know that they will be making money hand over fist, and we don't need to worry about the Saudis so much.

[dennisw]

He's not the first to say, take over the Saudi and Kuwaiti oil fields if push comes to shove. Both these nations have the problem of a lot of oil and no real military.

Iran and Iraq do have oil and do have large militaries. This makes them like hungry foxes at the hen house.