The root cause of our current situation involves two primary issues: refinery capacity and overall consumption rate:

As has been the case for many weeks, gasoline consumption continues to run above last year, a series of refining problems have kept gasoline output well below the utilization needed to build stockpiles, and the US seems to be unable to find enough refined gasoline in the world markets to make up the difference (1)."

Despite our best efforts to use more fuel, the national ability to turn unrefined oil into gasoline has hit a bottleneck. This doesn't really slow down consumption, it just tends to drive prices up and eat into national reserves:

Last week, US gasoline stockpiles dropped for the 12th straight week by another 1.1 million barrels as US motorists continued to burn up gasoline at a rate 1.6 percent higher than last year (1)."

In reality, we are just using too much fuel. I understand that this is not exactly a new concept, especially to GO readers. But it's an issue worth reconsidering today, and probably every day for the foreseeable future:

. . .if present trends continue, the U.S, will be burning 290 billion gallons of gasoline by 2050 (up from 140 billion gallons today) (2). "

Not only are we using too much oil, but scant consideration is given to exactly where all this money goes. The serious rumination garnered by socially and environmentally certified products is seldom extended into the realm of transportation. But there is little justification for such a psychological disconnect: If every dollar spent is a vote, then most of us are all still voting for Big Oil:

Demand for oil has increased significantly in the last few years, and world production is close to full capacity. According to Resources, "Global oil supply stands at 84 million barrels per day, while spare capacity is only 1 to 1.5 million barrels per day–the lowest level in three decades." The United State's oil import bill in 2005 was over $240 billion dollars, much of which flowed out of the country into so-called terrorist regimes."

Today, the world’s oil frontier includes a list of countries that mirrors a catalog of global trouble spots, including Angola, Azerbaijan, Chad, Nigeria, Sudan, and Venezuela. Most of these countries rank disturbingly low in many measures of political liberty, human rights, and corruption (3)."

The whole idea of financing the corrupt industries of Angola, Azerbaijan, Chad, Nigeria, Sudan, and Venezuela (among others) is ethically bankrupt. It is inconceivable that consumers purchase fair-trade and organic products, while simultaneously sending supporting this international oil industry (4)."

Now I won't go so far as to condemn the American People, because I think oil consumption is a product of lack of consciousness and/or viable alternatives. But why don't gas purchases carry the same weight as buying fair-trade coffee imported from Ecuador? How much does it take to push us into changing the way we live? Each day, 300 million of us choose how to get around, and if we question it at all the most likely point we come to is, "well, what else are we going to do?"

There are several underlying problems behind the growing [fuel] shortfalls, none of which seem susceptible to immediate solution. The automobile is so deeply embedded into our lifestyles that gasoline will have to go much higher * some say $6+ a gallon - before there will be any significant slackening in demand. Sales of gas-guzzlers probably will continue to drop, but major changes in lifestyles will not come until actual gasoline shortages and gas lines develop. Here in America, there are simply too many other ways to save money before we cut back on driving. In the meantime, the struggle among demand, prices, refining, and imports will continue. Every Wednesday morning the Department of Energy will update the score card and the picture of how much longer we can all continue business as usual will become a little clearer."

My question to you, the reader, is: what can we do right now to really start moving away from using gasoline and diesel for transportation?

I know we write a lot here about alternative fuels and new resource-conserving technology. But sometimes the real important message, the call to action, the part where we actually start doing something and implementing these new solutions into our own lives - sometimes this gets lost in the text.

So let me turn this obscure dicussion on oil consumption into a call to action: When you finish reading this post, take a few minutes to think about the gas you use and the driving you do. How much of it is necessary? How much is not? Is there a bus-stop nearby, but you've never taken the time to learn the routes? Is there an opportunity to carpool to work or other activities? Is it possible to ride your bike or walk for at least part of your trip?

If this bit of reflection reveals anything to you, or even if it doesn't, please take a minute and post it as a comment. I am eager to hear about any steps you may have made to drive less. If you haven't taken any steps yet, that's ok - all I'm asking for is a few minutes of reflection.

What part are you playing in the world we live in today?

(1) Energy Bulletin: The peak oil crisis: Week twelve. Tom Whipple. (May 3, 2007)
(2) Grist: A Bridge to Somewhere? What we've learned from the biofuels series. (Dec 15, 2006)
(3) WorldWatch Institute. American Energy: The Renewable Path to Energy Security. (Sept. 2006)
(4) For more information on Nigerian Oil, see National Geographic Magazine's Article.

I was invited to join the call, hosted by API President and CEO Red Cavaney. I represented Maria Energia and Green Options. Other invited bloggers included Jeff McIntire-Strasburg (representing Treehugger), The Oil Drum, EcoGeek, NewsWatch: Energy (the Houston Chronicle), the Wall Street Journal Energy Roundup, Fortune/CNNMoney.com, ShopFloor.org (National Association of Manufacturers), and Wired.com's Autopia. Unfortunately I was not able to be on the call, but did submit questions in advance. The full, 18-page transcript is online and a This post contains additional media. Click here to view the full post. is also available. Here, I'll focus on the questions related to energy policy and global warming solutions:

Energy efficiency is the fastest, easiest, and cheapest way to cut our global warming emissions, and it was one of the first questions that came up. Tom Fowler of the Houston Chronicle asked whether API has a specific position on efficiency improvements for vehicles and appliances. Cavaney responded that energy efficiency needs to be the cornerstone of a national energy policy, but API doesn't comment on any specific sector other than to say that everyone has a responsibility:

''…so we don’t comment in great detail about how one might go about addressing CAFÉ [Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards for vehicles], but we do feel that the transportation sector, like any other, has a responsibility to become more energy efficient….It’s the easiest way to add additional capacity is the barrel…So we find also that that message resonates very well with the individual consumer, but what we also find with the exception, generally, of California – the consumer hasn’t had a lot of recent experience on this and isn’t well-educated on it…"

I was surprised by this statement. It seems like every time gas goes up 2 cents, we're bombarded with fuel-saving tips from the media. Perhaps not enough credit is being given to the consumer, or perhaps I just notice the tips more because I watch for them.

Later, one of my submitted questions was asked: Where is the United States' biggest opportunity to increase energy efficiency? Transportation? Electricity?

Again, Cavaney didn't comment on any particular sector, explaining that API takes the position of "not sticking our nose in other people's business." But he did say that the private sector should work with government on energy efficiency solutions:

"…I think that we’ll end up getting surprising gains in every sector because to the business community, in most cases, energy efficiency is money that drops to the bottom line."

Cavaney also had a comparatively optimistic view of peak oil. He said that even after the world's oil production hits its peak, the fall of production will probably be gradual, rather than steep. He also believes that much of the world is "under-explored."

Jeff McIntire-Strasburg of Treehugger asked about API's stance on federal global warming regulations, like carbon dioxide (CO2) caps. Cavaney responded that API wants to continue with voluntary measures to cut emissions, because "that's how you push the technology." However, if CO2 regulations are coming down the pipeline (as some companies believe and have indeed asked for), API has no preference for a carbon tax versus a cap-and-trade policy, but went on to explain their opinion on the development of any carbon regulation in four parts:

"…we want to be at the table, and we want to share our experience, we’re willing and open to listen to others and we think, number one, that the government should not pick winners and losers in advance of that discussion getting underway, number two, we think that the market is the best place to solve and sort of all these varying things, number three, we think that multiple approaches and multiple opportunities, rather than one, is going to help get us there more cost-effectively. We think, number four, that the problem needs to have global participation, not just U.S. participation; it’s not going to be sufficient."

This reminded me of the frustration I felt when listening to ExxonMobil's Vice President of Public Affairs, Ken Cohen, answer a similar question. We get the same sort of circular answer: Yes, climate change is important. Yes, it requires action. But we don't have a position on the best action, but we should be involved, but it shouldn't just be required of our sector, and we have to make all the countries in the world do it, or it won't work. This sort of vague explanation shows a lack of leadership. We can't sit around waiting for other nations to get on board (while so many others have already). Global warming demands solutions now.

However, I am encouraged that API is reaching out to talk about energy issues and solutions. Many thanks to Red Cavaney for his invitation to be on the call and for his willingness to discuss these very tough issues. I hope that we see real leadership, partnership, action, and change from an industry absolutely critical to the fight against global warming.

Cross posted at Maria Energia