Comments on: Enhancing our national security by reducing oil dependence and environmental damage http://climateprogress.org/2009/08/26/enhancing-national-security-by-reducing-oil-dependence-and-global-warming/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:46:09 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Jeff Huggins http://climateprogress.org/2009/08/26/enhancing-national-security-by-reducing-oil-dependence-and-global-warming/#comment-104963 Jeff Huggins Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:16:11 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=10498#comment-104963 Where IS ExxonMobil? According to a very simple analysis of numbers in its 2008 report . . . About 85% of ExxonMobil's oil and gas production comes from outside the U.S. That means that a lot of $$$$ are going outside the U.S. About 80% of ExxonMobil's capital expenditures were outside the U.S. More money gone. About 75% of ExxonMobil's total capital employed is outside the U.S. That means they have THREE TIMES AS MUCH employed outside the U.S. as within the U.S. Roughly 79% of capital and exploration expenditures were outside the U.S. All things considered, although I haven't done this particular detailed calculation, it's pretty likely that ExxonMobil is one of the -- and perhaps THE -- largest corporate vehicles for taking your money and sending it overseas. That's just the START of the story. Cheers, Jeff Where IS ExxonMobil?

According to a very simple analysis of numbers in its 2008 report . . .

About 85% of ExxonMobil’s oil and gas production comes from outside the U.S. That means that a lot of $$$$ are going outside the U.S.

About 80% of ExxonMobil’s capital expenditures were outside the U.S. More money gone.

About 75% of ExxonMobil’s total capital employed is outside the U.S. That means they have THREE TIMES AS MUCH employed outside the U.S. as within the U.S.

Roughly 79% of capital and exploration expenditures were outside the U.S.

All things considered, although I haven’t done this particular detailed calculation, it’s pretty likely that ExxonMobil is one of the — and perhaps THE — largest corporate vehicles for taking your money and sending it overseas.

That’s just the START of the story.

Cheers,

Jeff

]]> By: paulm http://climateprogress.org/2009/08/26/enhancing-national-security-by-reducing-oil-dependence-and-global-warming/#comment-104947 paulm Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:04:51 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=10498#comment-104947 This one really confuses the GOP and deniers. They can't handle this angle. This one really confuses the GOP and deniers. They can’t handle this angle.

]]> By: Michelangelo http://climateprogress.org/2009/08/26/enhancing-national-security-by-reducing-oil-dependence-and-global-warming/#comment-104946 Michelangelo Wed, 26 Aug 2009 22:51:37 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=10498#comment-104946 I think this is a great idea -- But the fact is that China is doing it better (and with domestic manufacturing there are always complaints: http://bit.ly/3vzvkn), investing more (apparently 1.2 million/day now in renewables) -- So my question (and that of many others) is: Will we buy our turbines, clean energy cars, etc. from China if it is cheaper?? Is there any room in this policy to prevent that trade, and is that prevention even a good idea?? I question this whole "energy sovereignty", as the term is "global" warming not "American" warming... I think this is a great idea — But the fact is that China is doing it better (and with domestic manufacturing there are always complaints: http://bit.ly/3vzvkn), investing more (apparently 1.2 million/day now in renewables) — So my question (and that of many others) is: Will we buy our turbines, clean energy cars, etc. from China if it is cheaper?? Is there any room in this policy to prevent that trade, and is that prevention even a good idea?? I question this whole “energy sovereignty”, as the term is “global” warming not “American” warming…

]]> By: Colin Pepaprd http://climateprogress.org/2009/08/26/enhancing-national-security-by-reducing-oil-dependence-and-global-warming/#comment-104940 Colin Pepaprd Wed, 26 Aug 2009 22:05:36 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/?p=10498#comment-104940 This report highlights the critical connection between global warming solutions, national security, and foreign policy. It also proposes some urgently needed policy measures that will help to reduce our reliance on oil. However, with all due respect to the authors, it misses a major policy area in need of significant reform - surface transportation policy. The report notes that transportation - mostly cars and trucks - are responsible for the majority of oil use. More efficient vehicles and lower carbon fuels are a big part of the solution. But if we do not address the rapidly increasing the US driving rate, the benefits from these policies will largely be undermined. A major report by leading transportation analysts, Moving Cooler (www.MovingCooler.info), found that reforming US transportation policy can contribute to significant GHG reductions and oil savings. Specifically, coordinated, multi-strategy transportation efficiency policies could cut annual GHG emission reductions up to 24% in 2050, saving up to 660 million barrels or oil each year. These strategies also would save consumers billions at the pump. I hope that future CAP reports on oil reduction and global warming expand to examine these critical policies. Doing so would help to make a good report even better! This report highlights the critical connection between global warming solutions, national security, and foreign policy. It also proposes some urgently needed policy measures that will help to reduce our reliance on oil.

However, with all due respect to the authors, it misses a major policy area in need of significant reform – surface transportation policy.

The report notes that transportation – mostly cars and trucks – are responsible for the majority of oil use. More efficient vehicles and lower carbon fuels are a big part of the solution. But if we do not address the rapidly increasing the US driving rate, the benefits from these policies will largely be undermined.

A major report by leading transportation analysts, Moving Cooler (www.MovingCooler.info), found that reforming US transportation policy can contribute to significant GHG reductions and oil savings. Specifically, coordinated, multi-strategy transportation efficiency policies could cut annual GHG emission reductions up to 24% in 2050, saving up to 660 million barrels or oil each year. These strategies also would save consumers billions at the pump.

I hope that future CAP reports on oil reduction and global warming expand to examine these critical policies. Doing so would help to make a good report even better!

]]>