This week, the US Senate is expected to adopt a bill that would divert $14 billion in taxes from oil companies to alternative fuel companies over a period of ten years. The Senate, with a slim Democrat majority, could also support a bill to pull an additional $10 billion from “companies that drill for oil and gas in federal waters but do not currently pay royalties to the government”. [Article in NY Times, Edmund L. Andrews]
I know what you’re thinking: This is boring. Yes, it’s true that information about American politics can be a boring read, and I normally strive to keep any mention of US politics off of this site. After all, aren’t there enough political blogs in the world already? I’m not intending to be one of them. However, the energy policy in this country most definitely affects us, and certainly affects those abroad, either directly or indirectly. And, since the last time I checked most of us breathe air, this country’s monstrously disproportioned use of fossil fuels compared to the rest of the world is a factor in air quality, especially as industrializing countries such as China are upping their fossil fuel use in pursuit of reaching American-sized industrial goals.
Okay, okay, still boring. But the seemingly constant back-and-forth legislation between Republicans and Democrats on energy issues shows that our country’s energy discussion is split between the Left’s support of alternative fuel development and the Right’s loyalties to the oil and coal industries, and that should matter to all of us. I’m not trying to make the point that the Democrats have it all right by any means; in fact, in this very piece of legislation they’re supposed to adopt, there are specific provisions for tax-free “clean coal bonds”, $1.5 billion worth, to support coal-powered electricity plants. Really, is there ANYONE the coal industry isn’t sucking up to?
Also, there’s the question of how the diverted monies would be spent. Many alternative fuel technologies, such as ethanol, aren’t far enough ahead in their research and development to be able to support all of America’s automotive needs anytime soon. And how will the spending of the companies developing alternative fuel technololgies be held accountable to taxpayers? I suppose I’m a pessimist about the condition of morality in modern big business, but as fas as I know history has yet to prove me wrong.
Of course, despite a majority in the Senate, Democrats will have quite a challenge to overcome the powerful oil lobby in Washington. The oil industry is already busy at work casting doubt upon the wisdom of this bill. In describing the reaction of executives in the oil industry to the proposed bill, the NY Times article states, “Oil executives are protesting loudly, saying that the proposed changes would take money away from exploring and drilling in the United States and increase the nation’s dependence on imported foreign oil.” Hey, you know what else would reduce our country’s dependence on imported foreign oil? DEVELOPING ALTERNATIVE FUELS.
In lieu of all of these complications, I propose buying a diesel car and converting it to run on straight vegetable oil. Of course, this brings its own complications, especially for those of us living in California. Currently Californians cannot register a diesel car in the state without paying exorbitant fees to the tune of thousands of dollars, and it’s nearly impossible to find a newer diesel car for sale here. Many have taken to buying and converting older diesel Mercedes, though the upkeep of these cars can cause a lot of headaches, nevermind the matter of the driver’s perceived status as a hopeless hippie-type, deserved or no. If you choose to buy a diesel car and you don’t have the time (or the cash) to convert it to run on straight vegetable oil, you can always run your car on Biodiesel, though the rating system for Biodiesel has never quite been worked out in legislation, leaving consumers confused about which grade to use in their engine. Ack.
Still, there’s a lot to be said for driving one of these diesel machines as Rudolf Diesel intended. In fact, the modern diesel fuel we’ve come to know and despise was only brought to market in the 1920s as a byproduct of gasoline. And, rather interestingly, the diesel engine came to be marketed as being run on petroleum products exclusively… only after Rudolf Diesel’s mysterious and much-conjectured death. The fact that his supposed suicide happened to greatly benefit the oil industry may have just been a coincidence. Or not.
Before his death, Diesel said, “The use of vegetable oils for engine fuels may seem insignificant today. But such oils may become in course of time as important as petroleum and the coal tar products of the present time.” And in 2007, his statement still holds true. The use of vegetable oils as engine fuel DOES seem insignificant to most Americans, and we still rely largely on petroleum and coal to keep our economy going. My hope for the future of fuel in America is that at some point our collective distaste for the agenda of wealthy oil companies will overcome our desire for convenience, and our unwillingness to change will diminish. Whether we come to this conclusion on our own or if it’s brought about by relentlessly increasing gas prices, who knows. But this nation’s dependence on petroleum, whether domestic or foreign, is definitely NOT sustainable. Let’s hope our legislators, and our people, can come to a consensus soon.
{ 0 comments… add one now }