 |
| Hybrid fleet vehicles, University of California, Berkeley. |
 |
Why is oil addiction dangerous?
The United States has less than five percent of the world's population, yet we every year we use more than 25 percent of the planet's oil production. Clearly, we are consuming a disproportionate amount of this limited resource. And our dependence is expected to grow. Today the U.S. imports 55 percent of all the oil we use. By 2025, we will depend on foreign sources for up to 68 percent of all our oil. It's not just that the U.S. is dependent on oil—we are positively addicted to it.
Like all addictions, our addiction to oil comes at a high price. Oil addiction undermines the vitality of the American economy, contributes to global warming and other kinds of environmental destruction, leads to human rights abuses, and unnecessarily erodes our national security.
Oil addiction endangers our economy
In the last two decades America's industrial heartland has been ruined. Hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs have been sent overseas as major U.S. corporations, led by the auto manufacturers, relocate production facilities. The loss of these jobs has contributed to crime, urban blight, and drug use in the U.S.'s once flourishing cities.
Sadly, there is little sign that the exodus of manufacturing jobs will slow any time soon. Reports show that U.S. auto companies intend to move more and more of their factories to Mexico over the next decade. The auto industry's current business model will lead to further job loss.
Oil addiction endangers our national security
Our oil binging prevents us from thinking straight when it comes to national security. To keep the oil flowing, the U.S. props up the repressive kingdom of Saudi Arabia. And it's unlikely we would have invaded Iraq if broccoli were the number one export from the Middle East.
Oil addiction endangers human rights
Human rights groups have documented the way in which oil exploration and drilling contribute to assaults on human rights. In Nigeria oil company security guards have killed local protesters demanding the cleanup of oil spills. In Indonesia government army troops hired by multinational oil companies have killed activists. In Colombia and Ecuador, Indigenous communities face extinction as oil drilling wipes out the forests on which they depend.
Oil addiction endangers the environment
The science is unambiguous: Oil consumption is a major contributor to global warming. Personal vehicles presently account for nearly one-quarter of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Over the last century, the earth has warmed by 1 degree Fahrenheit, and scientists are certain that at least the last 50 years of warming is due to human activity. If oil consumption continues as expected, scientists predict global temperatures could rise by as much as 10 degrees by 2100.
Oil dependence also harms precious eco systems such as rainforests through oil spills, road-building, erosion, and habitat destruction.
Gas guzzling puts us all at risk. If we want a secure nation, a safe environment, and a strong economy, we need to kick the petroleum habit.
Why not target the oil companies?
Oil companies won't stop drilling as long as we keep consuming oil. After years of efforts to cancel environmentally and socially destructive petroleum projects, environmental and human rights advocates have strikingly little to show for our efforts. When we persuade an oil company to abandon a project, another company fills in the gap. One petroleum development shutting down is a drop in the bucket to the global oil industry. The bottom line is that we must curb the demand for petroleum that fuels the quest for oil. Forty-percent of our oil consumption goes into gas guzzling cars, trucks, and SUVs; the single largest reason for our demand for oil is the vehicles we drive. The biggest step that we can take to break our addiction to oil is to get the US automakers to build petroleum-free, pollution-free vehicles.
Aren't consumers and SUV drivers to blame for our oil consumption?
The problem of oil addiction is very complex and fueled by a variety of factors, including government decisions, urban planning, and consumer choices. The challenge we face as activists is to design strategic campaigns to make the biggest impact with the fewest resources. To that end, we have looked to corporate campaigning rather than targeting individual consumers. We have focused on the auto industry in order to make the biggest impact on oil dependence and global warming in the shortest period of time.
In our experience, we've found it isn't very productive to target individual consumers for their auto choices. Large public education campaigns to convince people who don't need SUVs to not buy them have gone on for a while; sadly, they just aren't working to reduce our dependence on oil. And even if you do give up your SUV, it's still hard to find a fuel efficient, let alone a zero-gasoline, American union made vehicle. A consumer walking into a car dealership today is faced with very few choices. Even if you don't want an SUV, your only alternative is to buy a vehicle with a slightly smaller internal combustion engine, which still consumes oil and has harmful tailpipe emissions. It's a shame, because you are buying a car to get around, not to fuel oil addiction, smog and global warming. But the automakers don't offer us real alternatives.
The bottom line is that personal lifestyle changes aren't enough. We might try to drive less, bike more, or take public transportation, but as long as the automakers keep producing gas guzzlers, our efforts will be cancelled out. To break our collective oil addiction, we must insist that the auto industry commit to petroleum free, pollution free alternatives NOW. A company with a brand name like Ford or GM has tremendous power to drive consumer choices. If you look back over the last 20 years, the automakers actually created the demand for gas guzzling SUVs by pushing models like the top-selling Explorer with rebates and incentives. Now, it's high time for one of the automakers to break away from the pack and lead the industry by creating the demand for a new generation of zero-gasoline, zero-emissions vehicles.
Shouldn't we be reducing our dependence on motor vehicles themselves?
Make no mistake; we certainly need to implement strategies to reduce our dependence on motor vehicles. However, as our oil addiction increasingly threatens our national security and our environment, we need to first prioritize ending our dependence on oil. Therefore, the immediate goal of the Jumpstart Ford campaign is to end our dependence on oil in automobiles. In the longer term, before the end of the 21st century, we must fundamentally overhaul our transportation systems, and replace our single-driver car culture with a more sustainable mix of mass transit, bicycle transportation corridors, and generous incentives to encourage citizens to declare independence from oil, other fossil fuels, and eventually motor vehicles themselves.
In order for the short and long term goals to be achieved, US consumers need to have more sustainable transportation choices. Mass transit shouldn't be the exception; it should be the rule, and needs to be accessible to most consumers. Bicycling should be a transit choice, not just a fitness choice. Realistically, these changes will require a dramatic overhaul of most American communities, and will need to happen over time.
Another important point is that the end of our oil dependence cannot be achieved without sustainable electricity. The two most promising clean car technologies, plug-in electric vehicles (EVs) and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCVs), both require electricity to replace gasoline. (The biggest difference between them is that EVs exist today, they are not a new technology, whereas FCVs are at least two decades away from mass production.) The clean transportation revolution will have to be accompanied by a clean energy revolution.
Why target the automakers rather than getting Congress to pass fuel efficiency regulations?
Unfortunately US government regulation of fuel efficiency has made no movement in over 30 years and looks to stay the same under the current administration. The average fuel-economy of new vehicles today is worse than it was ten years ago.
The tremendous lobbying power of automakers and oil companies is the reason why. They don't want regulation of fuel efficiency or of greenhouse gas pollution and fight against every positive policy incentive. For example, the automakers lobbied to keep oil-reducing fuel efficiency standards out of the 2005 Energy Bill, and they won; the bill says it aims to end our dependence on foreign oil but doesn't require the automakers to lift a finger to help. Another example: The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is has filed a federal lawsuit to overturn California's popular new vehicle emissions standards, the nation's first ever law to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution and the most advanced automotive GHG reduction targets in the world.
Because the automakers won't stop fighting regulation, we choose to make an end run around Washington and the state governments. Our strategy is to go straight for the corporations, trying to convince the auto makers through public and consumer pressure to change their policies. This is the strategy that was used successfully by the U.S. anti-apartheid movement: after many years of futile pressure on the U.S. government, the movement focused its pressure on the US corporations invested in apartheid and eventually forced more than 200 US companies to withdraw from South Africa.
What is our ideal green vehicle?
We don't know which available technologies will enable us to completely end our oil addiction -- likely it will be a combination. What we do know is that we can't wait. Our planet is in a crisis, people are being killed and we need to take a dramatic step in ending our oil addiction. While we continue to develop new, healthier technologies we can and have the ability to act today.?We recommend:?1) A Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle with at least a 40 mile range in its battery?2) Recharged with electricity powered by residential rooftop solar?3) And for longer trips, with cellulosic ethanol or waste biodiesel fuel in the tank.
What are we waiting for?
For more information, also see Alternatives to Oil on the Freedom from Oil website.
Are zero-gasoline, zero-emissions cars really possible?
Oh yes, definitely. Most of today's cars drive with a 100 year-old technology, the internal combustion engine. Although fuel efficiency hasn't increased (for example, Ford's Model T drove 24 miles on a gallon of gas while today Ford's fleetwide average is 19.6 mpg) there are plenty of ways today to improve fuel efficiency and achieve Zero Emissions.
Electric vehicles offer a glimpse into what a completely petroleum-free auto fleet could look like. EVs plugged into solar panels have allowed drivers across California to live free from fossil fuels. EVs were leased by automakers in the U.S. until 2002; many of these cars survive today despite automakers' attempts to eliminate them. Many customers have converted regular cars to EVs by removing the engines and replacing them with battery packs, and several small specialty companies offer new retail EVs.
A promising new development is Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs), which are modified versions of a hybrid vehicle outfitted with a larger battery pack and a plug. The batteries hold a sufficient charge for a daily commute, and the car still has its engine and gas tank for a longer trip.
What about using alternative fuels like bio-diesel and ethanol?
Biodiesel and ethanol fuels may be part of a program to declare independence from oil. Like any fuel source, these biofuels have associated pros and cons. Agriculture consumes a lot of fuel, and under the current system, we'd use more fuel for operating the tractors, transporting the products, and even converting them to fuel than the fuel we'd produce! But eventually, with advances like cellulosic ethanol, biofuels could ultimately reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. As an alternative to fossil fuels, biofuels have low carbon monoxide emissions and little smog pollution. Furthermore, since these products can be made within our country, biofuels have the benefit of limiting high transportation costs from importing foreign oil. Domestic production also allows us to reduce our oil imports from conflict regions and countries that abuse human rights.
However, we don't want to see the automakers using flex-fuel vehicles as an excuse to put off dramatic improvements in fuel efficiency. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, "There are already close to 6 million Flex Fuel Vehicles on the road today, but less than 1 percent actually run on the alternative fuel."
Why is grassroots organizing so important?
Grassroots action is the backbone of our campaign. The diverse network of grassroots activists provides the human-power behind the Freedom from Oil campaign. Activists distribute information, organize demonstrations and events, and recruit other folks to work with us. Freedom from Oil supports grassroots activists by offering materials and information, skills training, local organizing, group development, and general support.
The auto industry is huge, and it will take a lot of pressure to get Detroit to increase its fuel efficiency. Grassroots organizing in local communities raises awareness about the automakers' track record, our addiction to oil, and climate change, as well as putting pressure on local dealers.
By working directly at the local level, you can achieve significant change. When you organize at your local dealership, you will become part of a network of hundreds of other activists around the world, all putting pressure on the industry. You are not working alone!
source: http://www.globalexchange.org/war_peace_democracy/oil/freedomfromoilfaq.html
No comments:
Post a Comment