A Clear Path Forward on Energy

17 Jun 2011 – Jeff Erikson

Oceana, the NGO which, according to its website, is the largest organization focused soley on ocean conservation, has been running a new ad campaign in Washington, DC since about the first anniversary of the BP Deepwater Horizon accident (mid-April). I see the posters frequently on my ride to and from work on the DC Metro. The campaign is titled What If It Happened Here?, and depicts a DH-like drilling platform fire and the consequences – oil slicks, deployed booms, oiled birds – adjacent to the Golden Gate Bridge, the Statue of Liberty and the Washington Monument.

The intent of the campaign is to personalize the risks of deepwater oil drilling for policy-makers and other influentials, and to get them to rethink support for offshore oil drilling. The print in the ads tells the reader that we cannot continue to rely on crude oil for our fuel supply, and that we need to convert to “clean energy.”

My initial reaction to the campaign was somewhat negative. I have great respect for NGOs like Oceana who are not afraid to address environmental and societal issues head on, and who challenge the status quo. Their actions contribute positively to the debate about the future of energy in this country. And I agree with the sentiment of the ads – that we as a society must move to a low-carbon economy that is not dependent on oil.

But the reason I responded negatively was that the term “clean energy” is often used in an ambiguous – if not misleading – way, when a clear path forward is required. Last year, Oceana ran a poster ad, also in the DC Metro system, that depicted a choice between oil (rig afire, black smoke billowing) and wind/solar. This was more of the same, I thought. A rhetorical and simple trade-off, when the real picture is vastly more complex.

Then I went to the Oceana website that was noted in the ad – StoptheDrill.org – and I found that Oceana has quite thoughtfully mapped out, in very practical terms, what it will take to eliminate US dependence on Gulf of Mexico and foreign oil over the next 22 years. The report, published in April of this year, coincident with the ad campaign, is titled Breaking the Habit: Eliminating Our Dependence on Oil from the Gulf of Mexico by 2020, the Persian Gulf by 2023 and All Other Nations by 2033.

This is what has been missing from the public debate about the future of oil – a clear sense that yes, it is indeed possible, with technologies that exist today or are expected to be commercialized over the next two decades, and without dramatically subsidizing cleaner sources of energy. Not surprisingly, transport electrification plays a significant role in the reductions, but so do the development of cellulosic ethanol fuel and algal biofuel, improvements in commercial shipping efficiency, and reducing the use of oil for residential and commercial heating and electricity generation.

Oceana calls the plan “aggressive but practical,” but notes that business as usual will not suffice. Smart public policy decisions are necessary – including avoiding the temptation to manage the price of gasoline. But business leaders both within and beyond the energy and transportation sectors have an important role as well. They can provide the technology, the market pull and the momentum to take us to an energy future that is less dependent on oil, more diverse and more secure.

Tell us what you think about the path forward on energy. Does the Oceana plan hold water? How does it compare to other bold visions along these same lines – for example, WWF’s Energy Report: 100% Renewable Energy by 2050? Is there a better alternative?

For more information on SustainAbility’s work in this space, or for advice on how your organization can help drive forward and/or prepare for the future of energy, please contact erikson@sustainability.com.