- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 11,862
- Reaction score
- 10,300
- Location
- New York
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
From Reuters:
OPEC says oil supply gap looms later this year | Reuters
From a separate report in CNBC describing an interview with former CIA Director James Woolsey:
News Headlines
Should a supply gap emerge, and Saudi Arabia still has spare capacity that can postpone that development, it is highly likely that U.S. policy makers will again head down the path of asserting that there is little the U.S. can do about the situation. What won't be mentioned, as usual, is that the lack of strategic flexibility on the part of the U.S. is directly the result of the deliberate choice the nation has made to avoid the development and implementation of a credible energy policy. Of course, each Administration, including the current one, has devoted significant rhetoric to energy policy. However, political rhetori is no substitute for the persistent lack of imagination and lack of investment.
The absence of robust and sustained investment in increased energy flexibility is, in fact, a robust and sustained investment in energy vulnerability. U.S. vulnerability to a supply gap or, even worse, use of oil as a political weapon by Iran or some other hostile oil producer, is greater than it would otherwise have been. Given the political and social challenges in many oil-producing countries, U.S. geopolitical risk exposure is also higher than it would otherwise have been.
Tragically, just as has been the case since the nation's first energy crises in the 1970s, I expect that nation's policy makers to ignore Mr. Woolsey's warnings. Consequently, in substance, the invitations for a future energy crisis will continue to be drafted by today's policy makers.
OPEC says oil supply gap looms later this year | Reuters
From a separate report in CNBC describing an interview with former CIA Director James Woolsey:
News Headlines
Should a supply gap emerge, and Saudi Arabia still has spare capacity that can postpone that development, it is highly likely that U.S. policy makers will again head down the path of asserting that there is little the U.S. can do about the situation. What won't be mentioned, as usual, is that the lack of strategic flexibility on the part of the U.S. is directly the result of the deliberate choice the nation has made to avoid the development and implementation of a credible energy policy. Of course, each Administration, including the current one, has devoted significant rhetoric to energy policy. However, political rhetori is no substitute for the persistent lack of imagination and lack of investment.
The absence of robust and sustained investment in increased energy flexibility is, in fact, a robust and sustained investment in energy vulnerability. U.S. vulnerability to a supply gap or, even worse, use of oil as a political weapon by Iran or some other hostile oil producer, is greater than it would otherwise have been. Given the political and social challenges in many oil-producing countries, U.S. geopolitical risk exposure is also higher than it would otherwise have been.
Tragically, just as has been the case since the nation's first energy crises in the 1970s, I expect that nation's policy makers to ignore Mr. Woolsey's warnings. Consequently, in substance, the invitations for a future energy crisis will continue to be drafted by today's policy makers.
