Oil dependence decreases military readiness
Dr. John Scire-2006
Dr. John Scire is an Adjunct Professor of Political Science at UNR, where he has taught an energy policy course for the last 10 years. Ricardo Lopez a UNR journalism student who acts as a research assistant for Dr. Scire.
DoD's dependency on oil as a primary motor fuel makes military operations much more costly than if it had alternative fuels. Oil dependency also requires that we dedicate military forces to the Persian Gulf area, reducing our ability to use those forces in other places. Furthermore, the U.S. military presence in the Middle East raises the potential for military conflicts with other importing nations as world demand increases and supplies decrease. Our oil dependency also strains military alliances, such as NATO, as members compete for oil. Witness the French and Germans working with the Iranians to increase oil production and Pakistan building a port to import Iranian natural gas while we are trying to stop the Iranian nuclear program. Their need for oil and gas trumps our need to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. The last and perhaps most serious impact on national security of our oil dependency is that the chronic weakening of the U.S. economic base will inevitably weaken our military; we cannot sustain a strong military with a weak economy.
Oil dependence hinders military readiness
Brookings Institute 1-22-07 David Sandalow, Energy and Environment Scholar, “Ending Oil Dependence” http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/fellows/sandalow20070122.pdf
Oil wealth also corrodes democratic institutions. This dynamic is not inevitable, but it is widespread. A growing body of scholarly work explores this topic, concluding that oil wealth is strongly associated with corruption and authoritarian rule.7
A few examples underscore this trend. Bahrain, the Persian Gulf country with the smallest oil reserves, was also the first to hold free elections.8 As oil prices climbed in recent years, both Vladmir Putin and Hugo Chavez moved away from democratic institutions and toward more authoritarian rule. In Nigeria, oil abundance contributes to widespread corruption.
A final point – oil dependence jeopardizes the safety of our men and women in uniform. Fuel convoys are often highly vulnerable to ambush. Diesel generators display a heat signature easily detected by some enemies. In many Army deployments, oil makes up a staggering 70% of the tonnage transported to the front lines.9
In June 2006, Major General Richard Zilmer, head of the Multi-National Force in Al-Anbar Province, made a “Priority 1” request for renewable energy technologies on the front lines. Zilmer wrote “[w]ithout a self-sustainable energy solution, the U.S. Army will continue to accrue preventable serious and grave casualties.”
Impact-Global Warming
U.S. high demand for oil increases global warming
Brookings Institute 1-22-07 David Sandalow, Energy and Environment Scholar, “Ending Oil Dependence” http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/fellows/sandalow20070122.pdf
Oil is one of Earth’s principal reservoirs of carbon. When oil is burned, this carbon is transformed into carbon dioxide, which stays in atmosphere -- trapping heat -- for more than a century.
Today, oil accounts for 42% of the world’s energy-related carbon dioxide emissions (more than coal).11 The average car in the U.S. puts more than 1.5 tons of carbon into the air every year. Total emissions from oil use are climbing sharply, both in the United States and around the world. 12 In June 2005, the U.S. National Academy of Science joined with ten other national academies from around the world in declaring that
“The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action. It is vital that all nations identify cost-effective steps that they can take now, to contribute to substantial and long-term reductions in net global greenhouse gas emissions.”12
When it comes to fighting global warming, not all ways of reducing oil dependence are created equal.
• Technologies that improve fuel efficiency are best, since all existing fuels produce at least some heat-trapping gases.
• Biofuels are an improvement over oil, since the carbon released when biofuels burn is simply being returned to the atmosphere after briefly being sequestered in plants through photosynthesis. (Burning oil, in contrast, adds to the atmosphere carbon stored underground for millions of years.) Among biofuels, ethanol from cellulose or sugar is best, since making ethanol from these feedstocks requires relatively little fossil energy. Corn-based ethanol also helps, though only slightly, since growing corn typically involves substantial fossil energy and fertilizer. Life-cycle emissions of corn-based ethanol are slightly lower than those from oil.
• Replacing oil with electricity using plug-in hybrid vehicles is also an improvement. The extent of the improvement depends on how the electricity is generated. Significantly, however, even when a plug-in vehicle runs on electricity from a conventional pulverized coal plant, emissions of heat-trapping gases are less than when a similar vehicle runs on oil in an internal combustion engine.13
• The worst fuel from a global warming standpoint – considerably worse than oil – is liquefied coal. Although the global warming impacts of liquefied coal can be partially mitigated if carbon is sequestered at production facilities, the resulting fuel is still rich in carbon. At present there is no way to use liquid coal in a way that produces fewer heat-trapping gases on a life-cycle basis than oil. This fact has important implications for the nation’s oil dependence policies. Policymakers should make sure that such policies play an important role in helping – and certainly do not hinder – the fight against global warming.
Oil is also a major cause of urban smog and, as a result, of asthma and heart disease. Oil spills have damaged marine ecosystems around the world.
Impact-Deforestation
Oil dependence hurts forests
The Sunday Times (London) April 15, 2007
FOOD-PRICE inflation so severe that central banks are forced to raise interest rates to growth-stifling levels; corn prices so high that poor Mexicans can't afford their tortillas; massive deforestation to make way for more corn and palm oil; poor farmers pushed off their land to make room for carbon-offsetting plantings paid for by rich jet-setters; and Al Gore for president.
These are some of the unintended consequences of hastily conceived environmental policies. In America, President George Bush has decided that we can plant our way out of dependence on foreign oil. He envisages a future in which America's fuel will come from planting above ground rather than drilling below it. In Europe, Angela Merkel and Tony Blair have hit upon carbon trading as the solution to global warming, and the man whose mirror assures him that he is the greenest of them all, David Cameron, has a wind turbine on his roof to generate enough electricity to power his hairdryer.
Oil dependence will trigger a climate bomb
Telegraph.co.uk 8-11-07 Newspaper http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/11/08/eapalm108.xml
Big international companies are fuelling the wholesale destruction of critically important rainforests and peatlands in Indonesia in their search for cheap palm oil, a hard-hitting report claims. Vast swathes of pristine forest are disappearing in a slash-and-burn policy creating palm oil plantations to feed the demand of multi-nationals who accept no responsibility for the resulting degradation, according to Greenpeace. It says unless steps are taken to halt the destruction, emissions from the plundered areas may trigger a 'climate bomb'.
Greenpeace investigations centred on the tiny Indonesian province of Riau on the island of Sumatra which contains 25 per cent of Indonesia's palm oil plantations. Its peat swamps and forests are among the world's most concentrated carbon stores.
They contain an estimated 14.6bn tonnes of carbon and their destruction would release the equivalent of total global greenhouse gas emissions for a year.
U.S. can’t decrease oil dependence by diversifying its sources beyond the region
Luft ‘05
DR. GAL LUFT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR INSTITUTE FOR THE ANALYSIS OF GLOBAL SECURITY (IAGS) CO-CHAIR SET AMERICA FREE COALITION 0ct. 20th, 2005
Since oil is a fungible commodity, it does not matter what proportion of the oil the U.S. imports comes from the Middle East, what matters is the share of Middle East producers in overall supply. The oil market is like a huge pool: producers pour in oil while consumers draw it out. Prices and supply levels are determined in the international markets. If all we do is shuffle around our sources of oil supply, but demand for oil does not drop, the influx of petrodollars to proliferators and apologists for radical Islam as well as the vulnerability of the U.S. to international oil terrorism would remain the same even if the U.S. did not import a drop of oil from the Middle East.
U.S. can’t drill its way out of its energy problem- it’s a myth.
Luft ‘05
DR. GAL LUFT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR INSTITUTE FOR THE ANALYSIS OF GLOBAL SECURITY (IAGS) CO-CHAIR SET AMERICA FREE COALITION 0ct. 20th, 2005
Tapping our domestic reserves which, all included, amount to less than 3% of the world’s
reserves, is no more than a stopgap solution. Considering America's vast long term needs
our domestic reserves are a drop in the bucket. Assuming that all the oil that is claimed to
be in Alaska is indeed there, the U.S.’ share of world oil would increase by less than half
of a percent. No doubt unconventional petroleum sources available in the Western
Hemisphere like Canadian tar sands and Venezuelan extra heavy crude could provide
some relief but by no means can they significantly reduce America’s dependence on the Middle East.
Share with your friends: |
