• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
Five Alternatives that Make More Sense than Offshore Oil

Source: Getty

Paper

Five Alternatives that Make More Sense than Offshore Oil

Offshore oil reserves are too small to significantly impact world oil prices or U.S. reliance on foreign oil. Alternatives to offshore drilling exist and could maximize long-term environmental, economic, and security gains.

Link Copied
By Whitney Angell Leonard
Published on Nov 3, 2009

Additional Links

Full Text
Program mobile hero image

Program

Sustainability, Climate, and Geopolitics

The Sustainability, Climate, and Geopolitics Program explores how climate change and the responses to it are changing international politics, global governance, and world security. Our work covers topics from the geopolitical implications of decarbonization and environmental breakdown to the challenge of building out clean energy supply chains, alternative protein options, and other challenges of a warming planet.

Learn More

Proponents of offshore oil drilling ignore reality: offshore oil reserves are too small to significantly impact world oil prices or U.S. reliance on foreign oil. Offshore oil, which necessitates costly and environmentally dangerous drilling, would produce about 514 million barrels annually by 2030—less than 1 percent of global oil production.

This paper identifies five alternatives to offshore oil for the transportation sector that would decrease energy demand, limit U.S. dependence on foreign oil, cut costs for consumers, and reduce carbon emissions. The transportation sector accounts for nearly three quarters of all petroleum use in the United States and is responsible for 42 percent of carbon emissions.

Five alternatives that make more sense than offshore oil:

  1. Increasing fuel economy standards: This is the single most important, efficient, and cost-effective way to reduce petroleum consumption. Raising the average fuel economy from 23 to 35 mpg could save 1.2 billion barrels of oil and up to $150 billion per year.
     
  2. Hybrid-electric vehicles (HEVs): If half the cars on the road by 2030 were HEVs, the United States could reduce petroleum consumption by 1.2 billion barrels per year, saving consumers up to $120 billion annually.
     
  3. Alternative commuting patterns: If twenty percent of Americans worked from home three days a week, they could collectively save 149 million barrels of oil. Additionally, the United States could save 54 million barrels of oil a year if half of eligible workers switched to a four-day work week.
     
  4. Plug-in hybrids (PHEVs): While currently constrained by cost and technological advancements, plug-in hybrids could be an attractive option in the future, potentially saving 1.6 billion barrels of oil if PHEVs one day accounted for 50 percent of vehicles. But the full environmental benefits from plug-in hybrids will only be realized if the electric grid in the United States can be converted to use more renewable energy sources.
     
  5. Cellulosic ethanol: Unlike corn ethanol, cellulosic ethanol—produced from the fiber of plants like switchgrass—could reduce emissions 87–94 percent compared to gasoline. Cellulosic gasoline is predicted to produce 133 million barrels of oil annually by 2030, saving consumers $5.6 billion dollars per year.


“The first step toward weaning our nation off petroleum is to take full advantage of the efficient technologies we already have,” writes Leonard. “We can then supplement these with more advanced technologies to maximize our long-term environmental, economic, and security gains.”

About the Author

Whitney Angell Leonard

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Whitney Angell Leonard
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Additional Links

Full Text
North AmericaUnited StatesClimate Change

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    "I Don’t Think Trump Wants to Pull America Out of NATO"

    Does Donald Trump want to redraw the map of the world? Historian and geopolitical thinker Stephen Wertheim tries to parse the logic behind current American foreign policy

      Stephen Wertheim

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Letter from the Editor: Europe Takes Two Steps Forward But One Step Back

    As we close out another season of Strategic Europe, it is worth taking stock of the deep shifts underway.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Photo of refugee tents in Gaza housing displaced Palestinians.
    Article
    The Board of Peace Plan for Gaza

    The Trump-led board has laid out blueprints for “voluntary emigration” and land confiscation.

      • Zaha Hassan

      Zaha Hassan

  • Paper
    Assessing Information Ecosystems: How Governments Can Get Ahead of Hybrid Threats

    The hybrid warfare landscape is evolving rapidly, leaving policymakers without clear strategies. To better inform their work in addressing emerging challenges, governments must dig deeper into the underlying dynamics at play.

      Raluca Csernatoni, Alicia Wanless

  • Apartment building under construction
    Commentary
    Affordability Is the Top Issue on California’s November Ballot

    Direct democracy is the political wildcard in the state’s midterm election.

      Mark Baldassare, Ian Klaus

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.