Approaching Energy Independence?

When I read an article a couple of weeks ago in Bloomberg about the US nearing energy independence, I thought to myself -how could that possibly be?  What are we talking about anyway?  Fuel? Crude Oil? Natural Gas? Electricity??  (Ok not true, what I really thought to myself was: The US is no closer to energy independence than the world is to solving global hunger!!)  Back to the question at hand.  We can't be talking about crude oil for transportation fuels (the commodity at the origin of a number of foreign conflicts).  After all, we hit a 70% import ratio last decade; we're the world's largest consumer of oil.  We must be talking about natural gas... but we don't export LNG (liquid natural gas).  In fact, before the shale-gas revolution just a few years ago we were building up infrastructure to import significant amounts of LNG.  So what is being referenced in speaking of energy independence? 


I've been following the news since then on this topic of course, and we're now seeing 'energy independence' bandied around amongst the political right as some sort of proof that we are on the right course, and need take nor further action on energy, and that we'll return to $2.50/gal gasoline.  Ok!  At least in these perspectives I see proof that we are talking about crude oil.


Well a simple little fact checking, to remind me of our exact trade deficit shows 19 million bbl/day imported and we produce some where around 9 MMBD.  I darned sure wouldn't label a 50% import ratio as "approaching energy independence"; it may no longer be what I have previously referred to as energy ambivalence, but energy independence!? Come on.  (There is good information at the EIA site but these two summaries show the trends more clearly -Washington Post and -RigZone.)


Yes it is true that continued innovation in drilling techniques have recaptured previous depleted fields.  In fact in only 5 yrs US oil drillers have increased total production by 25%.  Awesome.  That's what high priced fuels will do for you.  When you add a 10% drop in US fuel usage, mostly due to the economic shock of the last three years, you get a nice narrowing of the gap.  No doubt, high prices have modified behavior and we should see more gains coming with increased fuel economy standards as well as switching to natural gas propulsion.


But back to the main point here: what in the world is behind the statement "Net Exporter"?  Refined fuels, that's what we are talking about, not crude oil.   We actually have more refining capacity than we need in the US.  Perhaps that's good.  I think it's actually a result of capital expenditure decisions early last decade to stay ahead of projected growth in consumption.  No wonder all the hubbub over the Keystone Project to pipe hard crude from the Alberta tar sands to the Texas refining mecca.


It's interesting how 'net export of refined fuels' gets lumped in with a 'narrowing oil import gap' and also crosses over to the topic of 'natural gas as a bridge fuel' to become Americans Gaining Energy Independence with US as Top Producer.  It is absolutely wonderful that the US has a bit more time  to become as efficient as possible given expected growth rates.  It's also noteworthy to look at the drop in CO2 emissions over the same time period.  But it is unethical to lead the public to a belief of energy independence -no doubt that has to be the goal however- when we remain the largest per capita consumer of all things disposable, by a wide margin.  We should live well, no question, but we have to do so in a sustainable manner... which can only happen with open discourse of real issues.