No Need for Oil?

Making the Energy Challenge Look Easy

By Jonathan Weber, 4-06-05

	Amory B. Lovins

The debate about energy policy is generally framed by those who believe - as the Bush Administration does - that we need to find and use every last drop of fossil fuel in the U.S., and those who think that conservation and alternative energy can at least reduce the need for new oil sources and new coal-burning power plants. Amory B. Lovins, the chief executive of the Rocky Mountain Institute and a long-time thought leader on energy issues, has a far more radical agenda: ending our dependence on oil entirely over the next few decades.

To hear him tell it, as I did today at the Colorado College State of the Rockies conference, this is not only possible, it's simple. Use new composite materials to make cars and trucks much, much lighter, and therefore several times more fuel efficient. Invest in next-generation biofuel alternatives. That's it. No more wars over Middle East oil, no more destructive drilling in some the nation's most pristine places, no more economic jolts from energy price volatility. Oh, and this program will also create a million new jobs in the U.S. - most of them in rural areas where they're needed most - and keep the country from falling behind China in the economic arms race.

Now Lovins is not one to be taken lightly. His list of acheivements is longer than this article, including no less than nine honorary doctorates and a MacArthur Fellowship, and he appears to have the ear of many government and industry officials. Yet my all my journalistic instincts tell me to be skeptical of grand and too-simple solutions to big problems and to adhere to the maxim that if it's too good to be true, it probably is.

At the same time, though, everything he says is emminently sensible, and my experience writing about technology tells me that he's almost certainly correct on the basics of his argument. There are lots of new materials out there much stronger and lighter than the steel that still fills automobiles, and many of them are already in use in many areas. I know less about biofuels, but it stands to reason that better refining techniques promise a lot of advances in this area.

I didn't entirely follow the math on which steps save how much money at what oil price level (and to be honest I did oversimplify his argument quite a bit, you can get the full version in his 2004 book, Winning The Oil Endgame, available free online). But I'll take his word for it that if you accept the assumptions the money math adds up in a way that none of this would cost either consumers directly or the government a lot of money over the long run.

So what's one to think? Why don't we at least hear of politicians and business leaders jumping onto Lovins' bandwagon? Maybe he's been pigeon-holed as a nutty environmentalist (he did say something about growing bananas in his house in Colorado at 7100 feet), and maybe the science and economics don't quite hold up. But I tend to think it has more to do with political timidity and the (logical) reluctance of business leaders to transform nicely profitable industries. I'll try to ask Bill Richardson, the New Mexico governor and leader on Western energy issues, what he thinks when he's here tonight.

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.