All Six Guides are Now Available

Meanwhile, our energy situation is changing rapidly. Our current energy outlook is far different than what it was just a few years ago, due mainly to a significant surge in domestic oil and natural gas production. In 2010, we imported less than 50 percent of the oil we used, for the first time in 13 years, and that trend continued in 2011. Still, this hopeful bit of news is itself fraught with tradeoffs, mainly environmental. In fact, there are a lot of critical tradeoffs we will need to confront as we decide how to move forward on energy policy. Many advocate for things like developing infrastructure and technology for renewables like wind and solar power, modernizing our energy grid, or developing “clean coal” technology. The cost of these endeavors has the potential to be massive. In our fragile economy, are we prepared to widen our federal budget deficit for our energy needs? Our energy policy also has the potential for creating a lot of jobs. People talk about “green jobs” that will come from developing infrastructure for renewable energy, but a lot of jobs (some say more) can also be created from upping our domestic production of oil and natural gas—we’ll need people to build the pipelines and do the drilling. But again, these job creation strategies may contribute significantly to the deficit.

1.	ECONOMICS While the price of oil is down from this time last year, most analysts say it will keep going up over the long run. World energy demand is projected to jump nearly 40 percent over the next 20 years, as countries like China and India require more fuel for their booming economies—increasing our competition for this vital resource. Meanwhile, our economy remains fragile for the foreseeable future; thus, we must figure out how to keep energy affordable.
2.	ENERGY SECURITY While our energy production is on an upswing and our outlook on oil and natural gas availability has brightened, the country’s demand for energy still currently outpaces production, and that gap is expected to widen. Significant amounts of our energy sources, especially oil, come from more problematic nations. Many experts worry this leaves us vulnerable to supply disruptions and yoked to unstable or even hostile regimes. This is a visceral concern for those of us who remember the long lines at the gas station during the OPEC oil crisis of the 1970s. Some economists even say that a spike in oil prices caused by a confrontation with Iran is the biggest current threat to the U.S. economy.
3.	ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Our increase in domestic energy production is due mainly to hydro- fracking (also known as hydraulic fracturing, or simply fracking). Fracking is a method of extracting natural gas and oil from shale rock deep under the ground. Fracking has its benefits. It has decreased our dependence on foreign energy sources. It has increased jobs, both directly and because the fewer dollars we send overseas, the more we can put into investment and job creation. Also, by making natural gas more available and affordable, we’ve been able to move away from coal for electricity—and coal is the worst contributor to global warming. But there’s also a lot of controversy surrounding hydrofracking’s environmental impact; critics say that it unearths naturally occurring carcinogens and radioactive elements, which then contaminate our water supply. When it comes to domestic energy production, we have additional environmental considerations to weigh as well. Most experts say nearly all of the remaining oil reserves we have are in remote locations, like offshore and in Alaska. Drilling will have repercussions on the preservation of our forests and the protection from pollution of our air, water supplies and wildlife. We have seen significant pushback from environmentalists against the Keystone Pipeline in Alaska, for example. The Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico also increased wariness against domestic ocean drilling. Finally, there’s the question of global warming. About 6 in 10 Americans don’t think global warming will have a serious impact on them during their lifetimes; however scientific consensus is that temperatures are rising and at a faster rate than ever before. Scientists believe the impacts of climate change could include a host of negative occurrences, including coastal flooding, extreme weather and drought, not to mention the resulting social instability in many countries, especially poor ones. Groups like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warn that it is no longer a question of whether world temperatures will increase as a result of global warming; it’s a matter of how much. Eleven of the 13 hottest years on record have occurred since 2001. Reducing our reliance on fossil fuels is fundamental to controlling the greenhouse gas emissions that scientists say are causing global warming. Not everyone agrees on the extent to which each of these issues is a threat or what government in particular should do to address them. But there is a much broader consensus that the United States needs diversified, stable, and affordable sources of energy in order to protect our economy and our way of life. Energy may seem complicated, but we don’t need to be experts to be able to weigh the options—we just need a few basic facts to understand the tradeoffs and consider our solutions. Here are a few things that we do need to know.

On a per person basis, our consumption levels are not too much higher than what they were in the late 60’s—mostly through technology that has made our cars and appliances more energy efficient than ever. However, we’re using a lot more energy as a society. Energy consumption in the U.S. has nearly tripled in the last 60 years, due mainly to population growth—there are nearly 135 million more people in the U.S. today than in 1960. We’re also driving more than ever and using more technology than any generation before us. Even though fuel efficiency standards have been bumped up twice in recent years, the number of vehicles per household increased by 66 percent between 1969 and 2009. And it’s important to recognize that Americans have one of the highest per person use of energy rates in the world.

This increase is driven mainly by economic development and the rising standards of living in China and India and other countries. In many respects, this is a positive development. More people around the world have better transportation, better housing and better communications, but that also takes more energy. But we’re competing with these growing nations for the energy that’s available. This fact alarms a lot of experts, and you should be concerned too. By simple laws of supply and demand, this means we’ll be paying higher prices.

Fossil fuels—petroleum, natural gas and coal—not only emit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, they are also nonrenewable sources of energy, meaning they will all run out one day.

The cost of developing infrastructure and technology for renewable energy sources is much steeper than most recognize. And, even if we did decide to invest in renewable energy, it will be decades before we can produce wind and solar power at reasonable prices and in enough quantities to supply the electricity we need. It will also be decades before our energy grid is ready to handle them. Any substantial transition to renewable energy will be a massive and difficult undertaking.

There are plenty of new ideas in the pipeline—from technological innovations like clean coal technology and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, to policy ones like energy efficiency standards and a gas tax, to fiscal ones like investing in our country’s infrastructure by improving our public transit systems and modernizing our power grid. There are many practical solutions to our energy problems being discussed, no matter where your political views lie. The trick is to consider our values and priorities, decide which options are most environmentally and economically viable, and then weigh the costs and tradeoffs needed to make them work.

We’ve already done irreparable damage to the environment in the form of greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. Let’s limit any further harm to the Earth by curbing our use of nonrenewable fossil fuels and developing the necessary resources and technology to embrace renewable forms of energy.

This should be done by:

• Making federal investments in the research and development of all renewable energy sources, like hydroelectric, solar, wind, and geothermal and other clean-burning fuels.
• Setting a federal limit on and taxing carbon emissions. Manufacturers will have a financial incentive to emit less and we could address our federal budget challenges and protect the environment at the same time.
• Raising the gas tax and requiring car manufacturers to make vehicles more fuel-efficient.
• Limiting offshore drilling, fracking and other types of energy exploration in areas that cause damage to our most precious natural resources.

In an age when there is so much uncertainty around the world, and when our economy needs all the help it can get recovering, we simply have to make this our first priority. The U.S. already produces an abundant supply of energy from fossil fuels and possesses the resources and ingenuity to further develop renewable sources as well.

This should be done by:

• Increasing domestic production and investing in the development of alternative fuels like ethanol and other biofuels, as well as liquefied natural gas.
• Opening up federal lands to drilling for oil and gas. Easing restrictions on offshore drilling and fracking. Investing in new technology in drilling techniques that allow us to drill faster, deeper, cleaner and with minimal impact on the environment.
• Investing in the research of clean coal technology. Coal has long been a staple of our country’s energy infrastructure. It is cleaner than it used to be and is in abundance in the U.S.; let’s use it to our benefit while also supporting current efforts to develop carbon capture and storage technology to reduce coal’s carbon footprint.
• Building more nuclear power plants.

Exploring alternative energy sources is certainly important, but not getting to the crux of the problem: we as a society need to use energy more efficiently and reduce our energy use overall. Americans should be more mindful of how and how much energy they use, and the government should invest in infrastructure that makes the country more energy efficient.

This should be done by:

• Helping and encouraging Americans to change their energy lifestyle. Individuals should buy more energy- efficient appliances and vehicles, construct smaller houses, or renovate their existing homes to be more energy efficient. The government should offer tax breaks for energy efficient homes, appliances and vehicles, as well as improve and increase their energy standards and compliance laws.
• Improving building codes—buildings account for 40 percent of our nation’s energy use and carbon dioxide emissions — and setting efficiency standards for manufacturers.
• Changing the way Americans commute by placing surcharges on vehicles that guzzle gas, investing in railroads and public transit and exploring technology for electric cars. Relying more on telecommuting and teleconferencing when it’s not necessary to be in the office or at a meeting in person in order to cut down on the use of oil for cars and planes.
• Rebuilding the electricity grid to be more energy efficient. Our current one may not even be able to keep up with energy demand as it is, and it certainly isn’t ready for a move to renewable energy or electric cars. It’s time to replace outdated copper wires with new high-tech models that can carry three to five times as much current.

The Citizens' Solutions Guides are made possible by the generous support of The Dilenschneider Group. "Energy: A Citizens' Solutions Guide" was written by Jenny Choi and Allison Rizzolo, with input and guidance from Scott Bittle and Jean Johnson, authors of Who Turned Out the Lights?. Public Agenda’s Citizens' Solutions Guides are nonpartisan, unbiased resources to help you think through a difficult issue in alternative ways, weighing and evaluating values, priorities, pros, cons and tradeoffs. The Guides can also be used as discussion starters for community and group conversations and in classes. Note that the Citizens' Solutions Guides are meant to help people start thinking and talking about an issue in productive ways — they are not meant to rigidly restrict thinking or dialogue. The perspectives described are not the only ways of dealing with the problem, nor are the viewpoints mutually exclusive in every respect. You can mix and match from different perspectives, or add additional related ideas.

Public Agenda is a national, nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to strengthening democracy and improving people’s lives. Through research and public engagement, we help leaders, citizens and stakeholders build common ground on solutions to tough public problems like education reform, the environment and healthcare. Public Agenda was founded in 1975 by the social scientist and public opinion expert Dan Yankelovich and former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, and is based in New York City. Find us on Facebook at facebook.com/PublicAgenda and on Twitter at @PublicAgenda

For more information on the Citizens' Solutions Guides or Public Agenda, contact Allison Rizzolo at (212) 686-6610, ext. 148, or email at arizzolo@publicagenda.org.

---

---

View press release of Tuesday, September 25th, 2012