We Need To Wean Ourselves From Our Dirty Oil Addiction

In order to halt global warming, greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced, and that means transitioning from the use of fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy. The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is proof positive that fossil fuels are dangerous, as is the break in a Chevron oil pipeline near Salt Lake City that occurred over a week ago. Many people say this is impossible. They look solely at the time it will take to transition. Bill McKibben believes that nevertheless, Obama needs to seize the moment and issue a ‘stirring’ call for Americans to wean themselves from fossil fuels.

There are things the U.S. government can do to transition away from fossil fuels, and among them is eliminating subsidies to fossil fuel companies, including oil companies.

While speaking to an audience of around 300 people at Carnegie Mellon University earlier this month, President Obama said part of transitioning to a clean energy economy is rolling back the tax breaks oil companies receive so investments can be made in clean energy research and development.

The Organisation for Economic Development (OECD) agrees with Obama. Recently, the OECD released a report that said phasing out subsidies for fossil fuels, which amount to $557 billion worldwide, could reduce GHG emissions by as much as 10 percent. The International Energy Agency (IEA) released analysis two weeks ago that found phasing out subsidies would cut global oil demand by 6.5 million barrels per day in 2020, about one-third of current U.S. demand.

There other ways the U.S. can transition away from petroleum. The IEA outline for reducing American oil consumption by 29 percent between 2007 and 2030 includes increasing public transportation, shifting to hybrid and plug in hybrid vehicles, using more biofuels, increasing conservation in heating homes, and almost eliminating oil use in electricity generation.

A phased-in oil tax that reached the equivalent of about $1.70 per gallon of gasoline by 2030 would reduce oil consumption by around 10 to 15 percent, says Ian Parry, senior fellow at Resources for the Future.

The U.S. could reduce oil-powered transportation in the U.S. by 40 percent between 2010 and 2025 by shifting around half of car transportation to public transportation and one-third of domestic flying to high-speed trains, according to Anthony Perl, director of the Urban Studies Program at Simon Fraser University.

Read more: fossil fuels, global warming, subsidies

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Bob A.

11:54AM PDT on Mar 19, 2012

Joanne e: Forcing businesses to spend money they might not have is not a practical approach in my opinion. But cutting oil subsidies is, and it differentially affects those who use more energy, thus providing businesses with an incentive to switch to solar.

Tony C - We already know how to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen. The unfortunate problem is that it takes just as much energy to separate it as it gives back when it recombines. There is no free lunch. Check out the law of conservation of energy in Wikipedia: "A consequence of the law of conservation of energy is that no intended "perpetual motion machine" can perpetually deliver energy to its surroundings"

That said, there are US companies that use solar power to effect the separation. The resulting hydrogen can then regenerate the electricity if and when it is needed. Your objective of "kissing the oil-producing ..." can be met, and I don't disagree with your comments about how little they have done ....

send a green star

joanna e.

11:52AM PDT on Apr 22, 2011

We could force business to make every bldg that they own use solar energy and cut huge energy bills in the cities.

Deborah W.

4:35AM PST on Jan 31, 2011

Oh we still dont know everything about green energy to make a reasonable decision to change over.

But the world needs to know and do it fast.

Allaiyah W.

9:18PM PDT on Aug 10, 2010

I'm doing fairly good. I have no car so no gas or car oil is purchaced.

Things I used to need vaseline for are now done with cocoa butter solids.

Vanessa S.

6:23PM PDT on Jul 24, 2010

I have been wanting to make many changes to reduce the ecological footprint of our family. A few things that we already do on a regular basis is to buy used clothing from thrift stores and yard sales, donate clothes that are still in good shape to thrift stores, donate clothing, shoes, stuffed animals, and purses that are no longer in usable condition to a local homeless shelter that puts these items into a baler. They then recycle the bales and use the money from that to pay utility bills and other expenses.

Beng Kiat L.

9:07PM PDT on Jul 22, 2010

thanks

Bernadette K.

5:59AM PDT on Jul 5, 2010

If they phase out the subsidies to the fossil fuel industries the money could be put to much better use. $557 thousand million would buy a lot of clean energy research and stimulus loans as well as a lot of transit.

Moertl M.

3:22AM PDT on Jul 5, 2010

I propose we should use our legs a little more. And then do everything to promote public transports. And then no central heating and no air conditioning. Only these little measures would get our energy need down

Tony C.

7:33PM PDT on Jun 29, 2010

I propose we switch to hydrogen fuel. Water is composed of 2 molecules of hydrogen & 1 oxygen. If we invest R&D $$ into a system that separates water into its basic components, then feed each separate component into an engine, hydrogen as combustible fuel and oxygen to aid its combustion, then we can kiss the oil-producing nations goodbye & good riddance. They've reaped billion$$ for the past decades since oil was discovered in their backyard, yet they had done little to improve the lives of their own citizens. Imagine, an engine that takes water for fuel by breaking it down to its basic molecular components and feeding each element into the combustion chamber.