Sooner or later, the Earth will run out of oil. That’s not to say it will happen tomorrow, or even in our lifetimes. But it is an inescapable fact our supply of oil will not last forever.
That fact alone should be enough to encourage the research and development of viable alternative energy sources. But because of the entrenchment of oil companies in economies and governments, both national and international, the investment into alternative energy sources is not as prevalent as it needs to be.
Oil companies receive about $21 billion in subsidies. For many reasons, subsidization of oil companies must end, despite the short-term effect that would have on gas prices.
By ending subsidies for oil companies, we will see gas prices rise, but there are more reasons to reduce oil subsidies and increase subsidizing alternative forms of energy than gas prices. Furthermore, this debate must be about more than gas prices.
Oil isn’t as environmentally friendly as solar or wind power, isn’t renewable like ethanol from corn and isn’t produced domestically in the same high quantities as natural gas. And as we saw with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill last year and the Exxon Valdez oil spill more than 20 years ago, oil extraction and transportation present serious environmental issues.
The Deepwater Horizon oil spill deeply interfered with wildlife in the gulf, causing the deaths of migratory birds, sea turtles and marine mammals, not to mention the impact on fishing and other maritime industries.
A year since the disaster, shorelines from Louisiana to Alabama still aren’t clean. Cleaner alternative energy solutions would prevent disasters like these.
Rising gas prices also offer an opportunity to reprioritize American infrastructure.
In seeing gas prices rise, maybe we’ll also see a renewed focus on public mass transit such as trains and buses.
Maybe we’ll see a new focus on lessening Americans’ drive time, a move to combat suburban sprawl. Maybe we’ll see Americans purchase fewer cars and release fewer emissions, allowing our air to be more pure.
By eliminating oil subsides and bringing higher prices in the short term, we’d also be free to invest part or all of the subsidy money into alternative energy research, which would lead to new developments in those fields, providing safer, cheaper, more environmentally friendly alternatives to oil. With further funding of research of alternative energy sources, America can set itself up to lessen its reliance on oil both foreign and domestic.
In a future without billion-dollar oil subsidies, maybe oil becomes the alternative energy source.
And with no oil subsidies, giving some of that $21 billion in subsidy money back to the taxpayers in the form of tax rebates, improving or restoring social programs or simply reducing the national deficit is an option that has to be on the minds of legislators.
Either way, if everything is on the table in the name of getting our nation back to a solid financial place, we should set a place for oil companies too.
Support student media! Please consider donating to The State News and help fund the future of journalism.
