Eight Presidents, One Pledge: To Reduce Dependence on Foreign Oil

At a time when partisanship seems to lead most every story in politics, it’s worth highlighting a sweeping bipartisan push that’s lasted four decades… Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


At a time when partisanship seems to lead most every story in politics, it's worth highlighting a sweeping bipartisan push that's lasted four decades...

Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama have all made the same pledge to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. And yet at the end of each administration so far, imports have been higher than before.

The pledge seems to have meant little--until now. By the time President Obama leaves office, oil imports will be lower and this trend will continue. And to be fair, it's not all thanks to Obama.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Decreased dependence on foreign oil is the cumulative result of many events that set the stage for natural gas. Government policies since the 1970s funded advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (already available since the 1930s and 1950s respectively). Later, high gas prices provided market incentives to locate new wells on private lands utilizing these technologies. Most recently, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 excluded hydraulic fracturing from underground injection regulations. It's a rare instance in which markets, government, and technology worked together with a common goal. And succeeded.

As a result, the energy transition is now in play, but most people haven't noticed yet. In fact, Dr. Michael Webber, Deputy Director of the Energy Institute at The University of Texas at Austin, predicts natural gas will overtake petroleum as the dominant energy source in the U.S. within 10-20 years. Perhaps when this occurs and we finally achieve that famous political pledge to "reduce dependence on foreign oil," more Americans will recognize the significance of what's taking place.

 

This post originally appeared at Scientific American’s ‘Plugged In

Sheril Kirshenbaum is executive director of Science Debate, a nonpartisan org working to get presidential candidates on record on science policy. She co-directs Michigan State University's Food Literacy and Engagement Poll and hosts the NPR podcast Serving Up Science.

More by Sheril Kirshenbaum

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe