If the price
of oil, currently at $99 per barrel, shoots much above
$100 on continuing political and social change in the
Middle East, this will be the U.S.'s third oil shock
since 1970 -- the fourth if you count the surge to
$147.27 on speculative buying in 2008. The first two
shocks were in 1973 and 1979.
Whether this
is the third or fourth shock is academic because either
way it's bad news for the country.
Will U.S.
policymakers ever learn? The inanity of the nation's
energy policy -- indeed, nonpolicy -- boggles the mind.
The U.S., the largest, most technologically advanced
economy in the world, is at risk of being tipped into
recession -- again -- due to its overreliance on oil.
More Drilling Won't
Prevent Another Oil Shock
Investors and
Americans in general shouldn't delude themselves
regarding U.S. oil production capabilities. The ominous
reality? The country can't meet its daily consumption
needs of roughly 18.7 million barrels per day (bpd)
through increased drilling, so it has to import to make
up the deficit. In November 2010, the U.S. imported an
average of 8.25 million bpd, about 2 million of which
came from Middle East producers.
Unrest in
that region could send oil above $125 per barrel this
spring, which would probably push the average U.S. price
for regular unleaded gasoline -- currently $3.25 per
gallon -- above $3.50. Add the normal price increase
stemming from the summer driving season, and a gallon of
gas could push past $4 per gallon by the Fourth of July.
This assumes
that oil's price tops around $125 per barrel. Other,
more-sobering scenarios are also possible. Nomura
Holdings Wednesday forecast that if Libya and Algeria
halted production, oil could peak above $220 per barrel.
A price above
$200 would most certainly tip the U.S. into another
recession, just as oil price surges did in 1973 and
1979.
There's a Better Way
However, it
need not be this way. If the U.S. were to implement a
rational energy policy, it could achieve energy
independence and enhance its foreign policy flexibility.
One solution
is natural gas. Abundant, domestic, price-competitive,
clean -- natural gas has many advantages over oil.
Abundance is
perhaps at the top of the list. The Potential Gas
Committee (PGC) estimates that the U.S. has 1.451
trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of recoverable natural gas,
out of a total natural gas resource base of 2.119 Tcf.
That's good for about a 100-year supply (less if natural
gas consumption increases). Also, of the 22.8 Tcf of
natural gas the U.S. consumed in 2009, 90% was produced
in the U.S.
Federal tax
policy could speed the development of new natural-gas
vehicle designs that place bulky fuel tanks under the
vehicle's frame, in dead space. It could also help build
the natural-gas station filling network, which in the
U.S. currently totals only 1.100 stations, compared to
more than 160.000 gasoline stations.
While the
price of natural gas -- currently about $2.50 per
gasoline gallon equivalent (GGE) in Los Angeles, $2.30
in New York City -- would rise with its increased use as
a transportation fuel, it's likely to remain competitive
with gasoline. Most U.S. motorists know the days of
$1.50 gasoline are ancient history, but very few are
prepared for a price closer to $5. Given current global
growth trends, $5 is looking more likely this decade,
and that will help keep natural gas competitive.
Congressional Action
Needed
Of course,
new natural-gas vehicles won't hit showrooms soon enough
to save the nation from the impact of any oil shock this
year, but the sooner the nation increases the number of
such vehicles on the road, the better insulated it will
be from the next oil shock.
One step in
the right direction would be for Congress to implement
federal tax credits that encourage the production and
purchase of natural-gas vehicles, with the goal of
having at least 50% of the new vehicle fleet -- about 6
million to 7 million vehicles per year -- running on
natural gas by 2020.
At the same
time, the ongoing shift toward natural gas in bus, taxi,
and truck fleets and as an energy source for industrial,
commercial and residential uses will continue. In these
areas, the nation is already making the prudent choice.
It's
pointless to debate whether Big Oil has played a role in
preventing increased natural-gas use -- both as a
transportation fuel and for other uses. We know that
most oil companies benefit from a higher oil price.
However, many also have natural-gas operations that
would profit from increased U.S. consumption of natural
gas.
The point
Congress should focus on is this: If national oil use
makes the oil companies strong and the U.S. economy
weak, the move has to be away from oil and toward
natural gas.
Greater use
of natural gas will also enhance the nation's foreign
policy flexibility. Currently, the U.S. has to balance
competing -- and at times conflicting -- demands in the
Middle East, and is ever-wary not to offend key oil
suppliers. A U.S. that doesn't import oil from the
Middle East doesn't face that potential cross-pressure.
Gain, Not Pain
And although
the natural-gas sector isn't as job-intensive as the oil
patch, greater use of domestic natural gas would create
jobs in the U.S. That would mean more dollars
recirculating in American towns and counties --
something that should benefit local economies and
support U.S. GDP growth.
The nation
has a great deal to gain and very little to lose from
increased use of abundant, domestic natural gas. That
sure sounds like a smarter move than debating whether
the price of oil will be $60 or $160.
By
Joseph Lazzaro, who is the
former managing editor of financial news web sites
WallStreetEurope.com WallStreetItalia.com, based
in New York.
Daily Finance
February 24, 2011
|