In an interview, Naysan Rafati assesses the first week that followed the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran.
Michael Young
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "SCP",
"programs": [
"Sustainability, Climate, and Geopolitics"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"United States",
"North America"
],
"topics": [
"Climate Change"
]
}REQUIRED IMAGE
U.S. offshore oil reserves are too small to significantly impact world oil prices or America’s reliance on foreign oil. However, five alternatives to offshore drilling could effectively maximize long-term environmental, economic, and security gains.
WASHINGTON, Nov 3—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, explains a new paper from the Carnegie Energy and Climate Program. 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.
Whitney Leonard 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:
“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.”
###
NOTES
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.
In an interview, Naysan Rafati assesses the first week that followed the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran.
Michael Young
But to achieve either, it needs to retain Washington’s ear.
Alper Coşkun
At heart, to impose unconditional surrender on Hezbollah and uproot the party among its coreligionists.
Yezid Sayigh
Just look at Iraq in 1991.
Marwan Muasher
Tehran’s attacks are reshaping the security situation in the Middle East—and forcing the region’s clock to tick backward once again.
Amr Hamzawy