The U.S. may become energy-independent after all
Together, rising oil production and shrinking demand should dramatically reduce U.S. imports, says the IEA. In 2011, they had already fallen to 9.5 million barrels a day, roughly half of U.S. consumption. But by 2035, the IEA expects net imports of only 3.4 million barrels a day. The decline is split roughly between higher production — including biofuels — and savings from greater fuel efficiency.
The IEA sees profound consequences. For starters, the long-standing U.S. trade deficit will narrow and might disappear. In 2011, oil imports represented two-thirds of the deficit in goods. While the United States will use less imported oil, it should also become a substantial exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG); until a few years ago, it “was expected to become a major importer of LNG.” Abundant and cheap natural gas should support a manufacturing revival by attracting energy-intensive industries such as “aluminum, paper or iron and steel, or . . . petrochemicals . . . where feedstock costs can represent over 80 percent of total operating expenses.”
Within a few decades, the United States could attain Nixon’s once-impossible goal.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Not if Obama/EPA has anything to say about it.
petefrt on November 15, 2012 at 9:45 AM
One the economy is completely reduced to Portugal like levels and we have deindustrialized, everything will be swimmy.
tom daschle concerned on November 15, 2012 at 9:46 AM
The US will be more or less forced to become energy-independent after the Middle East lights off thanks to Obama’s incompetence.
Unfortunately, we’ll be faced with a number of problems all at once. Such as the likely fact that our Big Oil Reserves Right Here(tm) have been exaggerated, the liberals have prevented any refinery building, not to mention the shortages in the short term…
MelonCollie on November 15, 2012 at 9:49 AM
No, Obama and the EPA will figure some way to kill production on private and state land. The fact this is happening must really irk the enviro-communists.
darwin on November 15, 2012 at 9:50 AM
This is great news! How long until Obama nationalizes the fossil fuel industry so he can fund his agenda of social justice?
HarryBackside on November 15, 2012 at 9:50 AM
Not if Obama can help it ……………. well, he will be of some help, since he is setting us on the road to a smaller economy that will decrease demand.
SC.Charlie on November 15, 2012 at 9:52 AM
Only the rich will be able to drive.
Do these whackos have any idea how this affects the economy? If you can’t afford gas, you can’t afford to buy things.
Blake on November 15, 2012 at 9:54 AM
Why is Atlas shrugging?
claudius on November 15, 2012 at 10:00 AM
But by 2035, the IEA expects net imports of only 3.4 million barrels a day.Really? This is a story dependent on economic projections 20 years out? I’d rather read my junk mail.
elfman on November 15, 2012 at 10:01 AM
Obama’s plan is to drive up the cost of gas so no one can afford to drive, then have the government give a rickshaw to the unemployed.
Unemployment solved! Do I get a Nobel Prize?
HarryBackside on November 15, 2012 at 10:04 AM
Bah. The new discoveries in the Green River oil shale formations are estimated around 3 trillion barrels, 2 trillion more than we’ve used in the last 100 years, but you can bet your overfed, racist butt that Bark and the ‘rats will never allow us to really go after it.
Besides, that “savings” in current oil usage comes at the expense of burning our food grains so we can feel good about saving the environment or something.
Bishop on November 15, 2012 at 10:04 AM
2 trillion more than used in the last 100years GLOBALLY.
the_nile on November 15, 2012 at 10:07 AM
Yes, and rising energy prices will make most people dependent on gubmit energy payments, like food stamps, to heat their homes.
petefrt on November 15, 2012 at 10:10 AM
The plan is to “nudge” people back into the cities from suburban and rural areas by making commuting by private vehicles practically unaffordable.
petefrt on November 15, 2012 at 10:13 AM
My apologies, yes the article said globally which is pretty incredible when you think about it.
Bishop on November 15, 2012 at 10:18 AM
What will happen to our forest, snail fish,
old drunksair and water?? We can’t have that! Let the poor remain poor or where will we DO Social Justice?(Lyrics sung by Liberals around Girl Scout campfire while roasting marsh mallows.)
Herb on November 15, 2012 at 10:20 AM
Bill Ayers has another idea…
Rixon on November 15, 2012 at 10:27 AM
one person says it’s great news (then goes pessimist on me)
everybody else is just bashing …. afraid O would get credit or something?
I thought O’s EPA was getting trashed by conservatives for forcing businesses to control emissions?
I see this as Obama continuing some of the Bush initiatives….40/60 credit no good?
It’s going to be a long 4 yrs for some of you.
Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 15, 2012 at 10:30 AM
Too bad their won’t be any free Americans left to enjoy it.
Browncoatone on November 15, 2012 at 10:33 AM
We’re on track to be energy independent by the end of Barky’s term. The best way to immediately lower the consumption of fuel is to complete the destruction of the US economy.
Supply and Demand, Barky style.
CorporatePiggy on November 15, 2012 at 10:38 AM
It totally destroys “peak oil”.
the_nile on November 15, 2012 at 10:40 AM
These developments are taking place in spite of the policies of the Obama Administration. New technologies, new discoveries of natural gas/LNG et cetera. As Samuelson explains, geology and technology are pushing this.
Sorry, Mr. Obama deserves a little credit – he gets a tip of the hat for enacting higher fuel efficiency standards – for these developments but not much more.
SteveMG on November 15, 2012 at 11:42 AM