skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Oil Independence: Achievable National Goal or Empty Slogan?

Abstract

Oil independence has been a goal of U.S. energy policy for the past 30 years yet has never been rigorously defined. A rigorous, measurable definition is proposed: to reduce the costs of oil dependence to less than 1% of GDP in the next 20 to 25 years, with 95% probability. A simulation model incorporating the possibility of future oil supply disruptions and other sources of uncertainty is used to test whether two alternative energy policy strategies, Business as Usual and an interpretation of the strategy proposed by the National Commission on Energy Policy (NCEP), can achieve oil independence for the United States. Business as Usual does not produce oil independence. The augmented NCEP strategy comes close to achieving oil independence for the U.S. economy within the next 20-25 years but more is needed. The success of the strategy appears to be robust regardless of how the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) responds to it. Expected annual savings are estimated to exceed $250 billion per year by 2030.

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [2];  [3];  [3]
  1. ORNL
  2. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Planning, Budget and Analysis
  3. Argonne National Laboratory (ANL)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)
OSTI Identifier:
978740
DOE Contract Number:
DE-AC05-00OR22725
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: Transportation Research Board's 86th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, USA, 20070122, 20070125
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
02 PETROLEUM; 29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY; BUSINESS; ENERGY POLICY; OPEC; PETROLEUM; PROBABILITY; SIMULATION; SUPPLY DISRUPTION

Citation Formats

Greene, David L, Leiby, Paul Newsome, Patterson, Philip D, Plotkin, Steven E, and Singh, Margaret K. Oil Independence: Achievable National Goal or Empty Slogan?. United States: N. p., 2007. Web.
Greene, David L, Leiby, Paul Newsome, Patterson, Philip D, Plotkin, Steven E, & Singh, Margaret K. Oil Independence: Achievable National Goal or Empty Slogan?. United States.
Greene, David L, Leiby, Paul Newsome, Patterson, Philip D, Plotkin, Steven E, and Singh, Margaret K. Mon . "Oil Independence: Achievable National Goal or Empty Slogan?". United States. doi:.
@article{osti_978740,
title = {Oil Independence: Achievable National Goal or Empty Slogan?},
author = {Greene, David L and Leiby, Paul Newsome and Patterson, Philip D and Plotkin, Steven E and Singh, Margaret K},
abstractNote = {Oil independence has been a goal of U.S. energy policy for the past 30 years yet has never been rigorously defined. A rigorous, measurable definition is proposed: to reduce the costs of oil dependence to less than 1% of GDP in the next 20 to 25 years, with 95% probability. A simulation model incorporating the possibility of future oil supply disruptions and other sources of uncertainty is used to test whether two alternative energy policy strategies, Business as Usual and an interpretation of the strategy proposed by the National Commission on Energy Policy (NCEP), can achieve oil independence for the United States. Business as Usual does not produce oil independence. The augmented NCEP strategy comes close to achieving oil independence for the U.S. economy within the next 20-25 years but more is needed. The success of the strategy appears to be robust regardless of how the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) responds to it. Expected annual savings are estimated to exceed $250 billion per year by 2030.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 2007},
month = {Mon Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 2007}
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • Presentation given at the LERDWG Meeting, February 7, 2007, in Washington, DC.
  • As the nation moves into the 1980s, development of our domestic energy resources must surely be the number one priority of energy policy. Important natural resources are owned by the Federal government and must be dedicated to development in the public interest. This includes a government leasing program which fosters competitive and efficient development of these resources by private companies. Through its antitrust review of individual leases and its general advocacy of competition in the leasing program, the Department of Justice seeks to bring the prospect of a sound national energy policy closer to reality. Examples of how this reviewmore » functions are drawn from the Outer Continental Shelf Land Acts Amendments of 1978 and the Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1975. 32 references.« less
  • Each year a Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) goals are developed and reported to the Department of Energy, Richland Operations (DOE-RL). In addition to providing DOE-RL with goal status, these reports provide Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) management with a dose summary and status of annual ALARA goals. The CY-89 ALARA collective dose goal of 520 person-rem for compliance workers was easily met. A large contribution to the saved collective dose resulted from special ALARA practices and principles used by N Reactor during the tube inspection process which resulted in a significant reduction of 73 person-rem from the projected dose. Nomore » significant skin contaminations were incurred by WHC workers in CY-89. This report provide detailed information about the distribution of radiation dose and presents the apportionment of those doses to separate facilities. By combining the dose summary and the ALARA dosimetry goal status per facilities, some areas within specific WHC organizations were found no to be represented by ALARA teams. This caused some discrepancies in the report. These areas are clearly labeled in each organizational subsection with an asterisk. ALARA facility team chairs are currently investigating within their own organizations how to resolve representation for organizations. 11 figs., 6 tabs.« less
  • According to a new National Research Council (NRC) study published this month, groundwater restoration may be possible for sites with relatively simple contamination scenarios, but for the most complex sites, which includes the majority of Superfund sites, existing technologies may be unable to restore significant areas to health-based standards. In addition to analyzing conventional pump-and-treat systems, the committee evaluated innovative groundwater and soil cleanup technologies currently under testing and development. Based on its review of the technical, economic, and policy issues raised by the societal goal of cleaning up contaminated groundwater, the committee identified four key areas where change ismore » needed to improve regulation of the cleanup process. The first area is the setting of groundwater cleanup standards by regulatory agencies. The second area the committee found in need of change is in incentives to use innovative technologies. Third, the committee recommends the use of expert panels in technical feasibility evaluations at complex sites. Finally, the committee emphasizes the importance of systematic and continued evaluation of subsurface remediation efforts around the country. 11 refs., 2 tabs.« less
  • Purpose: To develop a practical workflow for retrospectively analyzing target and normal tissue dose–volume endpoints for various intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) delivery techniques; to develop technique-specific planning goals to improve plan consistency and quality when feasible. Methods and Materials: A total of 165 consecutive head-and-neck patients from our patient registry were selected and retrospectively analyzed. All IMRT plans were generated using the same dose–volume guidelines for TomoTherapy (Tomo, Accuray), TrueBeam (TB, Varian) using fixed-field IMRT (TB-IMRT) or RAPIDARC (TB-RAPIDARC), or Siemens Oncor (Siemens-IMRT, Siemens). A MATLAB-based dose–volume extraction and analysis tool was developed to export dosimetric endpoints for eachmore » patient. With a fair stratification of patient cohort, the variation of achieved dosimetric endpoints was analyzed among different treatment techniques. Upon identification of statistically significant variations, technique-specific planning goals were derived from dynamically accumulated institutional data. Results: Retrospective analysis showed that although all techniques yielded comparable target coverage, the doses to the critical structures differed. The maximum cord doses were 34.1 ± 2.6, 42.7 ± 2.1, 43.3 ± 2.0, and 45.1 ± 1.6 Gy for Tomo, TB-IMRT, TB-RAPIDARC, and Siemens-IMRT plans, respectively. Analyses of variance showed significant differences for the maximum cord doses but no significant differences for other selected structures among the investigated IMRT delivery techniques. Subsequently, a refined technique-specific dose–volume guideline for maximum cord dose was derived at a confidence level of 95%. The dosimetric plans that failed the refined technique-specific planning goals were reoptimized according to the refined constraints. We observed better cord sparing with minimal variations for the target coverage and other organ at risk sparing for the Tomo cases, and higher parotid doses for C-arm linear accelerator–based IMRT and RAPIDARC plans. Conclusion: Patient registry–based processes allowed easy and systematic dosimetric assessment of treatment plan quality and consistency. Our analysis revealed the dependence of certain dosimetric endpoints on the treatment techniques. Technique-specific refinement of planning goals may lead to improvement in plan consistency and plan quality.« less