Compact fluorescent light bulb

History

Jonah Sperm Oil, an old label

Coal provided the bulk of the US energy needs well into the 20th century. Most urban homes had a coal bin and a coal fired furnace. Over the years these were replaced with oil furnaces, not because of it being cheaper but because it was easier and safer.^[6] Coal remains far cheaper than oil. The biggest use of oil has come from the development of the automobile.

US oil reserves increased until 1970, and then began to decline.

Grand Coulee Dam

Energy Independence and Resilience

United States oil production peaked in 1970 and began to decline. By 2005 imports were about twice as great as production.

The United States receives approximately 84% of its energy from fossil fuels.^[15] This energy is used for transport, industry, and domestic use. The remaining portion comes primarily from Hydro and Nuclear stations.^[16] Americans constitute less than 5% of the world's population, but consume 26% of the world's energy.^[17] They account for about 25% of the world's petroleum consumption, while producing only 6% of the world's annual petroleum supply^[18] and having only 3% of the world?s known oil reserves.^[19]

In the United States, oil is primarily consumed as fuel for cars, buses, trucks and airplanes (in the form of gasoline, diesel and jet fuel). Two-thirds of U.S. oil consumption is due to the transportation sector.^[20] The US - an important export country for food stocks - will convert 18% of its grain output to ethanol in 2008. Across the US, 25% of the whole corn crop went to ethanol in 2007.^[21] The percentage of corn going to biofuel is expected to go up.^[22] In 2006, U.S. Senators introduced the BioFuels Security Act.^[23]

The proposal has been made for a hydrogen economy, where cars and factories are powered by fuel cells, although the hydrogen would still have to be produced at an energy cost, and hydrogen cars have been called one of the least efficient, most expensive ways to reduce greenhouse gases.^[24][25] Other plans include making society carbon neutral and using renewable energy, including solar, wind and methane sources.

Automobiles, on the other hand, possibly could be powered 60% by grid electricity, 20% by biofuels and 20% direct solar. Re-design of cities, telecommuting, transit, higher housing density and walking could also reduce automobile fuel consumption and obesity.^[26] Carpooling, flexcars, Smart cars, and shorter commutes could all reduce fuel use.^[27][28]

It should be noted that between 1950 and 1984, as the Green Revolution transformed agriculture around the globe, world grain production increased by 250%. The energy for the Green Revolution was provided by fossil fuels in the form of fertilizers (natural gas), pesticides (oil), and hydrocarbon fueled irrigation.^[29] The peaking of world hydrocarbon production (Peak oil) may test Malthus' critics.^[30]

United States' relationships with oil-producing countries

The US imports petroleum from many countries. Canada is the biggest source, followed by Mexico, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela

To date, the Saudis alone have invested approximately 70 billion dollars around the globe, 60% of which was invested in the United States. Saudi Arabian investments in the United States have traditionally been a welcome counterweight to the systemic U.S. trade deficit with the Kingdom. As American demand for Saudi oil continues at per day, U.S. service and merchandise exports revenues to the Kingdom cover nowhere near the level of expenditures for petroleum. One enabler of U.S. consumption has been the historic Saudi Arabian willingness to finance this trade deficit by investing in the United States. This relationship, while symbiotic, and necessary to a U.S. economy addicted to consumption, is viewed by many as "golden hand-cuffs" voluntarily worn by the United States.

The current account is the broadest measure of a nation?s balance of income payments with the rest of the world, and it is the difference between a nation?s receipts (exports and returns on domestic holdings of foreign investment) and its payments (imports and returns on foreign holdings of domestic investment). Just like a household that spends more than it earns, a nation must finance its current account deficit through borrowing. The balance of payments is one reflection of a nation's financial economic stability. The current U.S. account balance is a 'negative value.' As of 2004, the account balance in the U.S. was minus (-) 665.5 billion dollars. This borrowing on the part of the United States has, predictably, led to an enormous foreign debt. In contrast, Saudi affluence is soaring, with a record 70 billion dollar budget surplus for 2006.^[31]

The U.S. House Financial Services Committee is considering legislation that would require all U.S.-listed oil, natural-gas and mining companies to publicly disclose payments to governments where they are exploring and producing.^[32]

The Solar Two 10 MW solar power facility, showing the power tower (left) surrounded by the sun-tracking mirrors.

Energy Resilience

Andy Grove argues that energy independence is a flawed and infeasible objective, particularly in a network of integrated global exchange. He suggests instead that the objective should be energy resilience: resilience goes hand in hand with adaptability, and it also is reflected in important market ideas like substitutability. In fact, resilience is one of the best features of market processes; the information transmission function of prices means that individual buyers and sellers can adapt to changes in supply and demand conditions in a decentralized way. His suggestion for how to increase the resilience of the U.S. energy economy is to shift use from petroleum to electricity (electrification), that is sticky and can be produced using multiple sources of energy, including renewables.^[33]

Energy Consumption

US energy consumption by primary consuming sector

When President Carter created the U.S. Department of Energy in 1977, one of their first successful projects was the Weatherization Assistance Program.^[35] During the last 30 years, this program has provided services to more than 5.5 million low-income families. On average, low-cost weatherization reduces heating bills by 31% and overall energy bills by $358 per year at current prices. 2008 Presidential candidates are calling for increased energy efficiency and weatherization spending, which has a high return on investment.^[36]

The ?Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007? has a significant impact on U.S. Energy Policy. It includes funding to help improve building codes, and will make it illegal to sell incandescent light bulbs, as they are less efficient than fluorescents and LEDs.^[3]

Technologies such as passive solar building design and zero energy buildings (ZEB) have demonstrated significant new-construction energy bill reductions. The ?Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007? includes funding to increase the popularity of ZEBs, photovoltaics, and even a new solar air conditioning program. Many energy-saving measures can be added to existing buildings as retrofits, but others are only cost-effective in new construction, which is why building code improvements are being encouraged. The solution requires both improved incentives for energy conservation, and new energy sources.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 increases average gas mileage to 35 mpg by 2020. The current administration and 2007 legislation are encouraging the near-term use of plug-in electric cars, and hydrogen cars by 2020. Toyota has suggested that their third-generation 2009 Prius^[37] may cost much less than the current model.^[38] Larger advanced-technology batteries have been suggested to make it plug-in rechargeable. Photovoltaics are an option being discussed to extend its daytime electric driving range. Improving solar cell efficiency factors will continue to make this a progressively more-cost-effective option.

Sources

US energy consumption by primary source

An offshore oil platform

Petroleum

The US consumes of petroleum a day,^[40] of which is motor gasoline. Transportation has the highest consumption rates, accounting for approximately 68.9% of the oil used in the United States in 2006,^[41] and 55% of oil use worldwide as documented in the Hirsch report. Automobiles are the single largest consumer of oil,^[42] consuming 40%, and are also the source of 20% of the nation's greenhouse gas emissions.^[43]

The USA has about reserves while consuming about per year.^[40] This has created pressure for previously reserved locations in places such as Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or ANWR, to be opened up for drilling. During the 2008 presidential election, one of the leading topics were the opening of new offshore oilfields. New oilfields would not solve the oil crisis however, but only delay it.^[44] The average U.S. car gets 20.4 mpg., while the average European car gets 40 mpg. Improving fuel economy is seen as a superior route to energy security.^[45][44][46] European gasoline prices were artificially raised to $4 per gallon through taxation long before they reached $4/gallon in the U.S., leading to better fuel economy.^[47][48]

Problems associated with oil supply include volatile oil prices, increasing world and domestic petroleum product demand, dependence on unstable imported foreign oil, falling domestic production (peak oil), and declining infrastructure, like the Alaska pipeline and oil refineries.

American dependence on imports grew from 10% in 1970 to 65% by the end of 2004. At the current rate of unchecked import growth, the US will be 70% to 75% reliant on foreign oil by the middle of the next decade.^[49]

Coal

US coal regions

Coal in transit in Ohio

Most electricity (52% in 2000) in the country is generated from coal-fired power plants:^[5] in 2006, more than 90% of coal consumed was used to generate electricity. In 1950, about 19% percent of the coal consumed was for electricity generation.^[56]

In terms of the production of energy from domestic sources, from 1885 through 1951, coal was the leading source of energy in the United States. Crude oil and natural gas then vied for that role until 1982. Coal regained the position of the top domestic resource that year and again in 1984, and has retained it since.^[57] The US burns 1 billion tons of coal every year.

Concern for global warming has led to a call for a moratorium on all coal consumption, unless carbon capture is utilized. Coal is the largest potential source of CO₂ emissions.^[58][59][60]

Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) is the cleanest currently-operational coal-fired electricity generation technology. FutureGen is an experimental U.S. research project to investigate the possibility of sequestering IGCC CO₂ emissions underground.

Nuclear Power

Aerial view of cooling towers and nuclear plant.

Although expensive to build, nuclear power plants can yield large quantities of electricity with relatively low operating costs, and with the emission of low levels of greenhouse gases. With political intervention, a larger percentage of the nation's electricity production could be generated by nuclear power, as in France, where nuclear power provides about 78% of the electricity.^[61]

Nuclear power plants produce large quantities of steam which is exhausted through their tall cooling towers. Collocation of plants that can take advantage of this thermal energy has been suggested by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) as a way to exploit process synergy for added energy efficiency. One example would be to use the power plant steam to produce hydrogen from water.^[62] The hydrogen would cost less, and the nuclear power plant would exhaust less heat into the atmosphere and water vapor (which is a greenhouse gas).

Renewable energy

A 21st century windfarm in the California Central Valley

Sketch of a Parabolic Trough Collector

Renewable energy accounted for more than 10 percent of the domestically-produced energy used in the United States in the first half of 2008.^[63] The United States' hydroelectric plants produce 300,000 MW, making the largest contribution to the country's renewable energy.^[64] However, wind power in the United States is a growing industry.

At the end of March 2008, the US wind power capacity was 18,302 MW, which is enough to serve 4.5 million average households. American wind farms will generate an estimated 48 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) of wind energy in 2008, just over 1% of U.S. electricity supply.^[65] Texas is firmly established as the leader in wind power development in the U.S., followed by California.^[66] The Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center in Texas is the world's largest wind farm at 735.5 MW capacity.^[67] Available wind resources exceed 1 Million GWh/year in each of five states.^[68]

Several solar thermal power stations, including the new 64 MW Nevada Solar One, have also been built. Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) is the name given to nine solar power plants in the Mojave Desert, which were commissioned between 1984 and 1991.^[69] The SEGS installation uses parabolic trough solar thermal technology along with natural gas to generate electricity. The plants have a total generating capacity of 354 MW, making the system the largest solar plant of any kind in the world.^[69] This years annual Solar Home Competition on the National Mall, for groups of students to build an energy efficient home which also generates enough extra electricity to power an electric car was won by a team from Germany.^[70] Solar is by far the greatest potential energy source in the U.S.^[71]

With 2,957 MW of installed geothermal capacity, the United States remains the world leader with 30% of the online capacity total. As of August 2008, 103 new projects are underway in 13 U.S. states. When developed, these projects could potentially supply up to 3,979 MW of power, meeting the needs of about 4 million homes. At this rate of development, geothermal production in the United States could exceed 15,000 MW by 2025.^[72]

Biofuels

In recent years there has been an increased interest in biofuels - bioethanol and biodiesel - derived from common agricultural staples or waste. Weed is also a biofuel. Increased domestic production of these fuels could reduce US expenditure on foreign oil and improve energy security if methods of producing and transporting the fuels do not involve heavy inputs of fossil fuels, as current agriculture does.

Most cars on the road today in the U.S. can run on blends of up to 10% ethanol, and motor vehicle manufacturers already produce vehicles designed to run on much higher ethanol blends. Portland, Oregon, recently became the first city in the United States to require all gasoline sold within city limits to contain at least 10% ethanol.^[73] Ford, DaimlerChrysler, and GM are among the automobile companies that sell ?flexible-fuel? cars, trucks, and minivans that can use gasoline and ethanol blends ranging from pure gasoline up to 85% ethanol (E85). By mid-2006, there were approximately six million E85-compatible vehicles on U.S. roads.^[74]

The Renewable Fuels Association counts 113 U.S. ethanol distilleries in operation and another 78 under construction, with capacity to produce 11.8 billion gallons within the next few years. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) predicts in its Annual Energy Outlook 2007 that ethanol consumption will reach 11.2 billion gallons by 2012, outstripping the 7.5 billion gallons required in the Renewable Fuel Standard that was enacted as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.^[75]

Expanding ethanol fuel (and biodiesel) industries provide jobs in plant construction, operations, and maintenance, mostly in rural communities. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, the ethanol industry created almost 154,000 U.S. jobs in 2005 alone, boosting household income by $5.7 billion. It also contributed about $3.5 billion in tax revenues at the local, state, and federal levels.^[74]

In recent years, there has been criticism about the production of ethanol fuel from food crops.^{[76][77][78][79][80][81]} However, second generation biofuels are now being produced from a much broader range of feedstocks including the cellulose in dedicated energy crops (perennial grasses such as switchgrass and Miscanthus giganteus), forestry materials, the co-products from food production, and domestic vegetable waste.^[82] Produced responsibly they are sustainable energy sources that need not divert any land from growing food, nor damage the environment.^[83][84]

Energy efficiency

The Tesla Roadster, the first 500 of which are scheduled for delivery in early 2008 uses Li-Ion batteries to achieve 220 miles per charge, while also capable of going 0-60 in under 4 seconds.

Several states, including California, New York, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, have consistently deployed energy efficiency innovations. Their state planners officials, citizens, and industry leaders, have found these to be very cost-effective, often providing greater service at lower personal and social cost than simply adding more fossil-fuel based supply technologies. This is the case for several reasons. Energy efficient technologies often represent upgrades in service through superior performance (e.g. higher quality lighting, heating and cooling with greater controls, or improved reliability of service through greater ability of utilities to respond to time of peak demand). So these innovations can provide a better, less expensive, service.^[85]

A wide range of energy efficient technologies have ancillary benefits of improved quality of life, such as advanced windows that not only save on heating and cooling expenses, but also make the work-place or home more comfortable. Another example is more efficient vehicles, which not only save immediately on fuel purchases, but also emit less pollutants, improving health and saving on medical costs to the individual and to society.^[85]

Energy Efficiency Action Plan for States

DOE and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have released an updated version of the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency "Vision for 2025: A Framework for Change", which lays out a proposed energy efficiency action plan for state policy makers. If implemented by all states, the plan could lower energy demand across the country by 50%, achieve more than $500 billion in net savings over the next 20 years, and reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to those from 90 million vehicles. The report, which was released under the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency initiative, was produced by more than 60 energy, environmental, and state policy leaders from across the country. The updated action plan encourages investment in low-cost energy efficiency programs and shows the progress that the states are making toward their goals, while identifying areas for additional progress. The report is accompanied by two technical assistance documents that offer cost-effectiveness tests for energy efficiency programs and best practices for providing data to businesses ^[86].

Carbon emissions

CO₂ emission per capita per year per country

Despite signing the Kyoto Protocol, the United States has neither ratified nor withdrawn from it. In the absence of ratification it remains non-binding on the US. President Bush has indicated that he does not intend to submit the treaty to the Senate for ratification, not because he does not support the Kyoto principles, but because of the exemption granted to China (the world's second largest emitter of carbon dioxide).^[90] Bush also opposes the treaty because of the strain he believes the treaty would put on the economy; he emphasizes the uncertainties which are present in the climate change issue.^[91] Furthermore, the U.S. is concerned with broader exemptions of the treaty. For example, the U.S. does not support the split between Annex I countries and others.

The Bush Administration has taken no specific actions towards mitigation of climate change. At state and local levels, however, there are currently a number of initiatives. As of January 18, 2007, eight Northeastern US states are involved in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI),^[92] a state level emissions capping and trading program.

On August 31, 2006, the California Legislature reached an agreement with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to reduce the state's greenhouse-gas emissions, which rank at 12th-largest carbon emitter in the world,^[93] by 25 percent by the year 2020. This resulted in the Global Warming Solutions Act which effectively puts California in line with the Kyoto limitations, but at a date later than the 2008?2012 Kyoto commitment period.

As of March 11, 2007, 418 US cities in 50 states, representing more than 60 million Americans support Kyoto after Mayor Greg Nickels of Seattle started a nationwide effort to get cities to agree to the protocol.^[94]

In the non-binding 'Washington Declaration' agreed on February 16, 2007, the United States, together with Presidents or Prime Ministers from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom, Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa agreed in principle on the outline of a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. They envisage a global cap-and-trade system that would apply to both industrialized nations and developing countries, and hoped that this would be in place by 2009.^[95][96]

Chemistry Professor Nathan Lewis at Caltech estimates that to keep atmospheric carbon levels below 750 ppm, a level at which serious climate change would occur, by the year 2050, the United States would need to generate twice as much energy from renewable sources as is generated by all power sources combined today.^[97] However, current research indicates that even carbon dioxide concentrations in excess of 450 ppm would result in irreversible global climate change.^[98]

The book, Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free, A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy,^[99] by Arjun Makhijani, argues that in order to meet goals of limiting global warming to 2 °C, the world will need to reduce CO₂ emissions by 85% and the U.S. will need to reduce emissions by 95%, which can be extended to within a few percent plus or minus of carbon free with little additional change.^[100] The book calls for phasing out use of oil, natural gas, and coal which does not use carbon sequestration by the year 2050.^[101] Effective delivered energy is projected to increase from about 75 Quadrillion Btu in 2005 to about 125 Quadrillion in 2050,^[102] but due to efficiency increases, the actual energy input is projected to increase from about 99 Quadrillion Btu in 2005 to about 103 Quadrillion in 2010 and then to decrease to about 77 Quadrillion in 2050.^[103] Petroleum use is projected to increase until 2010 and then linearly decrease to zero by 2050. The roadmap calls for nuclear power to decrease to zero at the same time, with the reduction also beginning in 2010.^[104]

In his book Hell and High Water, author Joseph Romm calls for the rapid deployment of existing technologies to decrease carbon emissions. In a follow-up article in Nature.com in June 2008, he argues that "If we are to have confidence in our ability to stabilize carbon dioxide levels below 450 p.p.m. emissions must average less than [5 billion metric tons of carbon] per year over the century. This means accelerating the deployment of the 11 wedges so they begin to take effect in 2015 and are completely operational in much less time than originally modelled by Socolow and Pacala."^[105]

Texas Billionaire T. Boone Pickens has thrown his hat into the Energy Policy ring with a television advertisement campaign questioning the current state of energy in the US. He is an advocate of renewable energy sources and is currently developing a 4000 MW wind farm in the state of Texas.

Distribution

Long distance electric power transmission results in energy loss, through electrical resistance, heat generation, electromagnetic induction and less-than-perfect electrical insulation.^[106] In 1995, these losses were estimated at 7.2%.^[107] Energy generation and distribution can be more efficient the closer it is to the point of use, if conducted in a high-efficiency generator, such as a CHP. In the generation and delivery of electrical power, system losses along the delivery chain are pronounced. Of five units of energy going into most large power plants, only about one unit of energy is delivered to the consumer in a usable form.^[108] A similar situation exists in gas transport, where compressor stations along pipelines use energy to keep the gas moving, or where gas liquefaction/cooling/regasification in the liquiefied natural gas supply chain uses a substantial amount of energy, even though the scale of the loss is not as pronounced as it is in electricity.

Distributed generation is a means of reducing total and transmission losses.

Statistics

Electricity:

US Energy Use: Quad BTU. (1 Quad/s=1 trillion MW; 1 Quad/year = 7.5 Gigawatts)

• production 3.979 trillion kWh produced in 2004 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html#Econ

Electricity - production by source:

• fossil fuel: 71.4%
• hydro: 5.6%
• nuclear: 20.7%
• other: 2.3% (2001)

Oil:

• production: 7.61 million barrel/day (2005 est.)
• consumption: 20.03 million barrel/day (2003 est.)

Heat Engines are only 20% efficient at converting raw energy (oil) into work.^[109][110] Electric transmission (production to consumer) loses over 23% of the energy due to generation, transmission, and distribution^[111]

Carbon emissions

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide versus Time

Public opinion

The US results from the 1st Annual World Environment Review, published on June 5, 2007 revealed that:^[113]

• 74% are concerned about climate change.
• 80% think their Government should do more to tackle global warming.
• 84% think that the US is too dependent on fossil fuels.
• 72% think that the US is too reliant on foreign oil.
• 79% think that the US Government should do more to increase the number of hybrid cars that are sold.

An April CBS News/New York Times poll collected a wide range of data that demonstrates the public?s desire for serious action on global warming. By an almost two-to-one margin (63 percent to 32 percent), the public endorses the idea that protecting the environment is so important that ?requirements and standards cannot be too high? and that ?continuing environmental improvements must be made regardless of cost.?

The public is also quite clear on its priorities when it comes to promoting energy conservation versus increasing the supply of oil, coal, and natural gas. When asked which of these should be the higher priority, the public chooses energy conservation by a very wide 68 percent-to-21 percent margin.^[114]

The public also predominantly believes that the need to cut down on energy consumption and protect the environment means increased energy efficiency should be mandated for certain products. Ninety-two percent of Americans now support such requirements.^[115]

General Legislative Policy, Legislation and Plans

President Bush's Energy Policy has been named as ?drill and veto? by Speaker Nancy Pelosi.^[116]

Legislation

• In December 2007, President Bush signed the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, which responded to his "Twenty in Ten" challenge in the State of the Union Address to improve vehicle fuel economy and increase alternative fuels. Twenty in Ten has the goal of reducing U.S. gasoline usage by 20 percent in ten years (2007-2017).^[117]

Energy Politics in the 2008 U.S. Presidential Campaign

The energy and climate change topics are part of the political platforms of most Presidential candidates. Several organizations are publishing comparison summaries of the candidates' positions.^[118] Though both Barack Obama and John McCain push toward energy independence and reduction of emissions through renewable energy sources and cap and trade programs, Obama's calls for a larger reduction. Contentiously, McCain reversed his opposition to offshore drilling citing increased oil costs, while Obama used to oppose such drilling, but now allows for its possibility as part of a greater bipartisan energy compromise. McCain has emphasized nuclear power as a means of achieving energy goals calling for subsidies to the nuclear industry. Obama states that he would consider it though is more cautious citing safety, storage, and the need for subsidies.

For immediate economic relief, Obama has called for an energy rebate paid for by a tax on oil company profits, and a release of some of strategic oil reserve. McCain opposes these measures.

International cooperation

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has said the United States and China have a strong mutual interest in avoiding energy supply disruptions.^[119]

See also

• Carter Doctrine
• Economics of new nuclear power plants
• Energy and American Society
• Energy law
• Energy use in the United States
• Hirsch report
• List of United States Energy Acts
• Oil price increases since 2003
• Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming
• United States Department of Energy
• United States Secretary of Energy
• World energy resources and consumption

References

External links

• Energy Profile Analysis of The United States
• U.S. Department of energy
  • U.S. Department of energy timeline
• Energy Information Administration
  • Official Energy Statistics from the U.S. Government
  • Residential Electricity Prices
• USDA energy
• United States Energy Association (USEA)
• U.S. energy stats
• Public Opinion Snapshot: The Public Wants Action on Energy and the Environment
• ISEA ? Database of U.S. International Energy Agreements
• Retail sales of electricity and associated revenue by end-use sectors through June 2007 (Energy Information Administration)
• International Energy Agency 2007 Review of US Energy Policies

fi:Yhdysvaltain energiapolitiikka th:?????????????????????????????