NFHS Policy Debate Study Report and Topic Proposal: Energy / Environment

NFHS Policy Debate Study Report and Topic Proposal: Energy / Environment

Submitted By

Larry McCarty

Introduction

US energy policy review reveals US doesn’t have an energy policy US oil and gas production have boomed, but the country still lacks a coherent energy strategy, according to an International Energy Agency review.[1] Historically, the United States has embraced a proactive approach to energy issues. From the 1970’s “energy crisis” that resulted from an embargo on imports of oil to dramatic fluctuations of productions levels of the 1980s to the steadily increasing concerns regarding climate change during the late 1990s and beyond, the role of the federal government has been consistently inconsistent.

Americans typically consume energy for one of two purposes; electricity generation and transportation. Although data and statistics tend to vary somewhat, energy consumption is relatively equal in terms of the two. With respect to both of these areas, fossil fuels have historically accounted for a majority of both production and use. Significantly, the transportation sector continues to be almost completely dependent on petroleum, mostly gasoline.[2]Although development of renewable energy resources has occurred over the past two decades, most of this development has been in the area of electricity generation while fossil fuels continue to serve as the mainstay of transportation. Even in situations involving transportation shifts from traditional fossil fuel vehicles, the alternative is generally some form of electricity-powered venue with no assurances that the original source of the electricity is fossil fuel or renewable. In short, expedience and, to a lesser degree, economics, tends to influence energy policy more than the environment. Yet, unfortunately, blasting air conditioners, revving gas guzzlers and pumping oil, Americans have long attracted censure for their wasteful ways. After all, they produce a disproportionately large share—15 %—of global carbon dioxide emissions.[3]

In addition to the vast amount of energy consumed within our borders, there is a corresponding contribution to the world’s CO2 emissions as well. The United States, with 4% of the world's population, produced about 17% of global carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels in 2011, the most recent year for which global data are available. The United States accounts for this share primarily because the U.S. economy is the largest in the world and meets 83% of its energy needs by burning fossil fuels.[4]

Today’s energy policy in the United States is once again problematic and characterized by elements of uncertainty. In recent years, with increased domestic production of both oil and natural gas, resulting from development of shale reserves, the energy sector has claimed an increasingly greater part of the nation’s economy. Predicting the future is always dicey, and predicting the energy future has been more often wrong than right.[5] As prices fluctuate however, the ripple effect is felt throughout the economy, from Wall Street to Main Street. How will the government respond? As in the past, we will rely on a mix of regulation and markets, and we will not adopt a comprehensive energy policy aimed at coordinating energy industries.[6] Making the situation even more problematic is the fact that, as was the case on several past occasions, the United States is at the mercy of the policies of other nations and various international organizations. Unfortunately, the international petroleum industry is characterized by a myriad of groups, many of which operate with differing sets of objectives. The fact that U.S. political leaders frequently express the need for the nation’s energy independence reflects both the interest and necessity of such policies. In reality, however, markets and economic factors tend to influence decisions made within the boardrooms of energy-related industry much more often than government policy and objectives. A comprehensive national energy policy makes sense both environmentally as well as economically.

Problem areas

Policy Fragmentation

Energy policy has been a recurring issue for Congress since the first major crises in the 1970s.[7] In spite of the fact that a host of U.S. political leaders will attempt to address energy concerns during most Congressional sessions, the corresponding reality is that little is often accomplished. This hold true particularly in terms policy charting new directions for energy management in the nation. When policy is enacted or addressed, it is normally in response to some sort of event that has altered energy supply, production, distribution, demand or availability. Furthermore, energy policy frequently is a factor of a more broad based economic policy. An issue that cuts across all these factors is the role of government. How much does and should government policy affect energy markets? A fundamental dichotomy that lies beneath many individual policy debates, not only in energy issues, is between those who see government intervention as a positive force, and those who view it at best as a necessary evil to be restricted as much as possible.[8]

U.S. energy policy since the Arab oil embargo in the 1970s has been aimed at a long-term goal with three major dimensions: to assure a secure supply of energy, to keep energy costs low enough to meet the needs of a growing economy, and to protect the environment while producing and consuming that energy. A continuing theme during this period has been that dependence on imported oil for a large share of the U.S. energy mix, particularly in the transportation sector, impedes that aim in all three dimensions.[9]

Like the goals of energy policy, the means of achieving them have three dimensions: reducing consumption by increased energy efficiency; increasing domestic production of conventional energy sources, particularly oil and natural gas; and developing new sources of energy, particularly renewable energy and renewable fuels, that can replace oil and other fossil fuels.[10]Pursuing the goals of energy policy has been complicated by the diversity of energy consumption and supply in the United States. On the consumption side, there are three major sectors: residential/commercial, industrial, and transportation. On the supply side, the primary sources have traditionally been fossil energy: petroleum, natural gas (and “natural gas liquids” such as propane and butane), and coal. Electricity, which is both an energy source and a consumer of energy, has replaced some fossil fuels: about 75% of the energy consumed by the residential/commercial sector is electricity, and industrial energy consumption is about 35% electricity. But in the transportation sector, petroleum has remained dominant. Only in the past few years has corn-derived ethanol become a significant transportation fuel, replacing around 10% of gasoline consumption.[11]

On the consumption side, there are three major sectors: residential/commercial, industrial, and transportation. On the supply side, the primary sources have traditionally been fossil energy: petroleum, natural gas (and “natural gas liquids” such as propane and butane), and coal. Electricity, which is both an energy source and a consumer of energy, has replaced some fossil fuels: about 75% of the energy consumed by the residential/commercial sector is electricity, and industrial energy consumption is about 35% electricity. But in the transportation sector, petroleum has remained dominant. Only in the past few years has corn-derived ethanol become a significant transportation fuel, replacing around 10% of gasoline consumption.

If the US is to emerge as a global energy superpower in the coming decade, shouldn’t it make sure it has its own house in order first? “Developments in the US energy sector have bolstered the country's energy security, sustainability, and economic competitiveness – but challenges remain,” IEA Executive Director Maria van der Hoeven said Thursday at an event with US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz. A chief obstacle in US energy policy a lack of clarity, the report says.[12]

Reliance on Fossil Fuels

In addition to policy fragmentation, another fundamental facet of U.S. energy policy is that, in spite of decades of attempts at addressing a host of concerns ranging from supply interruptions to environmental issues, the nation still relies heavily on fossil fuels. The historical trends show petroleum as the major source of primary energy, rising from about 38% in 1950 to 45% in 1975, and then declining to about 40% in response to the energy crises of the 1970s.[13] A patchwork quilt of crosscutting federal and state policies govern oil, gas, coal, and renewables in the US. From the ban on oil exports, to New York’s ban on fracking, to the long delayed Keystone XL pipeline, energy cuts across myriad departments and agencies within the government, often with little coordination. “It’s seen as a very local, economic issue. The resources are in certain places, so that calls in a lot of local decision making,” says Deborah Gordon, director of the energy and climate program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. But collectively, Gordon says, it makes sense for the federal government to oversee issues at a higher level.[14]

The two basic factors that foster reliance on fossil fuels are two interrelated concepts, economics and availability of resources. Energy policy in the United States has focused on three major goals: assuring a secure supply of energy, keeping energy costs low, and protecting the environment. In pursuit of those goals, government programs have been developed to improve the efficiency with which energy is utilized, to promote the domestic production of conventional energy sources, and to develop new energy sources, particularly renewable sources.[15] Typically the first two of these goals receives far more attention, at least currently, than the third. Oil prices, which had been low and stable throughout the 1990s, resumed the volatility they had shown in the 1970s and early 1980s. Starting in 2004, perceptions of impending inability of the industry to meet increasing world demand led to rapid increases in the prices of oil and gasoline. The continuing high prices stimulated development of nonconventional oil resources, first in Canadian oil sands, then in the United States in shale deposits.[16]

U.S. oil production, which had apparently peaked, showed a dramatic increase starting in 2009. U.S. imports of oil have also been decreasing over the same time period, and there are calls to allow more exports. Natural gas followed a long-term pattern of U.S. consumption similar to that of oil, at a lower level. Its share of total energy increased from about 17% in 1950 to more than 30% in 1970, then declined to about 20%.[17]Recent developments of large deposits of shale gas in the United States have increased the outlook for U.S. natural gas supply and consumption in the near future, and imports have almost disappeared. The United States is projected to be a net natural gas exporter by 2018.[18]

Renewable energy sources (except hydropower) continue to offer more potential than actual energy production, although fuel ethanol has become a significant factor in transportation fuel. Wind power has recently grown rapidly, although it still contributes only a small percentage share of total electricity generation. Conservation and energy efficiency have shown significant gains U.S. Energy: Overview and Key Statistics Congressional Research Service over the past three decades and offer potential to relieve some of the dependence on oil imports and to hold down long-term growth in electric power demand.[19] In the past, at least during the 1970s when the fear of a major supply interruption surfaced, political leaders began to express concern regarding U.S. reliance on imported oil. Once again, policy was influenced by the conditions at hand and the result was long-term in nature. Implementing these programs has been controversial because of varying importance given to different aspects of energy policy. For some, dependence on imports of foreign oil, particularly from the Persian Gulf, is the primary concern; for others, the continued use of fossil fuels, whatever their origin, is most important.[20]Ultimately, in spite of concerted efforts on the part of environmentalists and the renewable energy sector representatives, reliance on fossil fuels continues. U.S. power plants used renewable energy sources, including water, wind, biomass wood and waste, geothermal, and solar, to generate about 13% of the electricity produced in the United States during 2015.[21]

Environment Related Issues

As Congress is seemingly unable to provide a meaningful and substantive energy policy, disagreement among its members regarding environmental concerns is also a factor. The contribution of burning fossil fuels to global climate change is particularly controversial. Another dichotomy is between those who see government intervention as a positive force and those who view it as a necessary evil at best.[22] In reality, the relationship between current energy consumption and environmental impact makes a compelling case for a substantive policy direction shift. Awareness of climate change is also beginning to spread. Despite the scientific consensus, a 2013 survey by the Yale PCCC found that only 63 percent of Americans “believe that global warming is happening.” A second, important question in the survey found that 49 percent of Americans believe global warming—if it is happening—is caused mostly by human activities and 30 percent believe it is due mostly to natural causes.[23]

How does energy use affect the environment? Greenhouse gases trap heat from the sun and warm the planet's surface. Most U.S. greenhouse gas emissions are related to energy production and consumption. Most of those emissions are carbon dioxide (CO2) from the burning of fossil fuels. From 1990 to 2014, energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in the United States increased on average by about 0.3% per year.[24]What specific kinds of greenhouse gases does the United States emit?The major greenhouse gases the United States emits as a result of human activity and that are included in U.S. and international emissions estimates are:

• Carbon dioxide (CO2)
• Methane (CH4)
• Nitrous oxide (N2O)
• High-global warming potential gases, which are:
• Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
• Perfluocarbons (PFCs)
• Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)[25]

Furthermore, the connection between energy use and emissions is evident. Of the total amount of U.S. greenhouse gases emitted in 2014, about 84% were energy related and 92% of those energy-related gases were CO2 emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels. In 2012 (the latest year complete country data is available), the United States was the second-largest contributor of energy-related CO2 emissions, after China, and was followed by India, Russia, Japan, and Germany.[26]

The electric power and transportation sectors are the two largest sources of energy-related CO2 emissions in the United States, accounting for 38% and 34%, respectively, of total energy-related CO2 emissions in 2014. Taken together, emissions in the electric power and transportation sectors increased at an average annual rate of 0.6% between 1990 and 2014. The remaining 28% of energy-related CO2 emissions are from the direct use of fossil fuels in homes, commercial buildings, and industry.[27] The industrial, commercial, and residential sectors had combined energy-related CO2 emissions of 1.5 billion metric tons in 2014 from the direct consumption of fuels in manufacturing facilities, farms, office buildings, schools, houses, and apartments. Together, emissions from the three sectors declined at an average annual rate of 0.2% since 1990. Examined separately over this time period, the increased emissions from the commercial sector and the residential sector were offset by the industrial sector, which saw a drop in its emissions because of the decline in energy-intensive industries.[28]

In spite of political rhetoric supportive of renewable development and modest efforts aimed at promoting such development, use of alternatives continues to lag. The largest share of electricity generated by renewable sources in 2015 came from hydroelectric power (46%), followed by wind (35%), biomass wood (8%), solar (5%), biomass waste (3%), and geothermal (3%).[29] In 2015, for the second year in a row, solar, wind, and other nonhydro renewable energy sources combined to generate more electricity on an annual basis than the amount of electricity generated by hydropower.[30]

The history of electricity generation provided by each renewable energy source in the United States is different. The generation capacity and availability of each resource has evolved over time.

• Almost all hydroelectric capacity was built before the mid-1970s, and much of it is located at dams operated by federal agencies.
• Biomass waste is mostly municipal solid waste or gases from landfills that are burned in waste-to-energy power plants.
• Most electricity generation from wood biomass occurs at lumber and paper mills. These facilities use wood waste to provide much of their own steam and electricity needs.
• The amount of electricity generated by wind has increased substantially in the past eight years. This increase is largely attributed to the construction of new wind turbines, which is encouraged by the availability of federal financial incentives and renewable portfolio standards (RPS) mandated by state governments.
• Solar generation almost tripled from 2013 to 2015. But unlike other sources of renewable electricity generation, a significant amount of solar generation growth has occurred with small-scale installations, often solar panels located on residential and commercial rooftops that in 2015 totaled 12.1 billion kilowatthours.[31]

In spite of ambitious efforts on the part of some of the nation’s leaders, little progress is evident regarding reduction of harmful emissions. Petroleum use accounts for the largest contributor of CO2 emissions from energy consumption in the United States, followed by coal and natural gas. In 2014, the amount and share of total U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions from these fuels include:

• Petroleum accounted for 2.3 billion metric tons (42%)
• Coal accounted for 1.7 billion metric tons (32%)
• Natural gas accounted for 1.4 billion metric tons (26%)[32]

Climate change

Clearly one of the more pressing, long-term, issues related to air quality and carbon emissions, is climate change. There is a scientific consensus that the global climate is changing and that humans, in part, are causing it.[33] Today, both the United States and the global community are at a critical juncture of making decisions on both energy and environmental concerns. Joint consideration of the two interrelated issues is both timely and logical. In short, the scientific community has coalesced around an assessment articulated by the Joint Science Academics Statement: “Earth’s warming in recent decades has been caused primarily by human activities that have increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”[34]Future emissions of CO2 from fossil energy combustion follow directly from overall trends in energy consumption, coupled with forecasts of the carbon intensity of the energy mix.[35]