IMMIGRATION AND THE U.S. ENERGY SHORTAGE
by Donald Mann, President Negative Population
Growth, Inc. (May 1988)
Growing dependency on foreign oil is rapidly pushing our
nation toward major economic disruption. The oil crisis is one
element of a long term energy shortage whose effects will
increasingly be felt as we near the end of an era of cheap and
abundant energy. That era was made possible by largebut
nonetheless finitefossil fuel resources.
Estimates of the amounts of oil and coal that will be
ultimately recoverable (and burnable because of environmental
constraints) vary widely. The exact amounts are almost
irrelevant, however, since how long remaining stocks will last is
more a function of the rate at which consumption is growing than
it is of the size of the stocks.
There is an amazing difference in the length of time a given
resource will last when consumed by static, non-growing demand,
compared with the time it will last if consumed by demand growing
exponentially. The central focus of our national energy policy
should be to stabilize demand for energy at a level that would be
sustainable for the very long terma level that would need
to be far lower than it is today
To do so, we need to reduce per capita consumption of energy
by continuing to find ways to use energy more efficiently. Above
all, however, we need to stabilize the size of our U. S .:
population at a far lower level than it is today, after a
prolonged period of population decrease.
Such a reduction could be achieved without undue hardship if
our present total: fertility rate is maintained, or lowered
slightly, and if we substantially reduce immigration so that it
is balanced with emigration (out-migration) and thus no longer
contributes, as it does now, to our annual population growth.
The Coming Oil Crisis
An oil crisis that will imperil both our economy and our
national security is close upon us as demand for oil arises,
domestic production falls, and imports fill the growing gap.
According to a February 1987 report (1) by the Energy Research
Advisory Board to the United States Department of Energy, proven
U.S. oil reserves recoverable with today's technology and price
are only 30 billion barrels of oil. That is roughly equivalent to
10 years production at current rates, and would be sufficient to
meet total U.S. oil consumption for only about five years!
According to the Energy Research Advisory Board (ERAB) report
cited above, we now import more than 4.0 percent of U.S. oil
needs. Many specialists say this figure could reach a dangerous
60 percent by 1995, only a few years from now. This would be far
above the 33 percent rate at the time of the 1973-74 Arab oil
embargo, and would exceed the peak of 48 percent dependency
reached in 1977.
Such dependency would represent a threat to our national
security, and could well lead to economic chaos if imports were
disrupted for any considerable time. It is widely agreed that
within less than a decade the OPEC countries will be back in
control of the world oil market.
We will then find ourselves in the precarious position of
being heavily dependent on countries in the world's most volatile
region for a supply of vitally needed oil. Needless to add, such
a situation would heighten significantly the risk of a great
power confrontation.
U.S. Oil Production and Resources
There are those who hold out hope that U.S. oil production can
be maintained with proper incentives to the oil industry. This
appears to be extremely unlikely. In any event, it could not be
maintained for long. Known reserves are 30 billion barrels, and,
according to Department of the Interior estimates (2), oil
resources that remain to be discovered in both U.S. onshore and
offshore deposits are 69 billion barrels.
The combined total of roughly 100 billion barrels for reserves
plus ultimately recoverable resources is only enough to supply
U.S. needs for less than two decades at even the current demand.
We should also bear in mind that even if U.S. oil production
could be maintained at the present level, our dependency on
foreign oil would continue to grow as long as our total usage
continues to increase.
The ERAB study cited above states that the United States has a
large petroleum resource base, and estimates the remaining total
oil resource as approximately 625 billion barrels. Such estimates
are highly speculative, and involve a great deal of guesswork
about geology, technology and price. Much of the oil resource
base can never be extracted at any rational cost.
It would be far more prudent to err on the side of caution in
estimating the total amount of oil that is available. If we
double the Department of Interior estimate cited above for oil
resources that remain to be discovered, we would arrive at a
figure of 168 billion barrels for the total of reserves plus
ultimately recoverable resources. That would doubtless represent
the upper limit.
At the present level of U.S. demand, even that vast resource
would be exhausted in less than three decades, and much sooner if
demand for oil continues to grow steadily, as it has done in the
past.
Moreover, potential environmental constraints make it
impossible to accurately foresee what portion of the total oil
resource base can ever be recovered and utilized. The ERAB report
states that "unacceptable environmental damage is a
potential impediment to the extraction and utilization of all
existing energy resources, including oil and gas." The day
may be close at hand when, in order to avoid unacceptable and
irreversible damage to the global environment, we will be
required to slow down the rate at which oil and coal are
recovered and consumed.
Finally, any estimates of the quantity of oil ultimately
recoverable must take into account the net energy barrier. One
recent study, (Beyond Oil, Ballinger Publishing Co., 1986),
estimated that, within a few more years, the energy cost of
exploring and drilling for new oil will exceed the energy content
of the oil produced. When that happenswhen we have run into
the net energy wallall other factors, including the size of
our remaining undiscovered oil resource, and the per barrel price
of oil, will simply become irrelevant. We would then have to
depend, for our domestic oil production, on our rapidly dwindling
known reserves that were already discovered.
As we have seen, present known reserves plus resources are
only sufficient to meet total U.S. demand for a few decades. One
would think that this alarming situation would be more than
sufficient to cause panic in the streets. With rare exceptions,
however, our national leaders, the media and the general public
show few signs of concern.
An End to Growth
A sensible and prudent national energy policy should have, as
two of its primary goals, 1) maximizing the lifetime of our
remaining resources of fossil fuels, and, 2) making sure that the
harmful by-products of energy utilization (waste heat and
pollution) do not exceed the long range carrying capacity of our
environment.
To achieve those goals, we need to stabilize demand for energy
at a level that would be sustainable for the very long term. From
the viewpoint of the environment there is mounting
evidencee.g. the greenhouse effect and acid rainthat
today's level is already far too great to be sustainable.
From the point of view of maximizing the lifetime of our
remaining fossil fuel resources so that they will be available
for future generations of Americans for hundreds, or even
thousands, of years, it is readily apparent that growth in energy
demand must be halted. The reason for this is quite simple: any
finite resource, no matter how vast, will be quickly consumed by
steady growth in the rate of consumption of the resource.
The Awesome Power of Exponential Growth
In a paper(3) published in 1978, entitled Forgotten
Fundamentals of the Energy Crisis, Albert A. Bartlett, Professor
of Physics at the University of Colorado, examined the concept of
exponential growth, and calculated how long our fossil fuels
would last at various rates of growth.
Some of the points Professor Bartlett brought out are as
follows:
When the rate of consumption of a resource is growing at a
fixed percent each year, the growth is said to be exponential.
Exponential growth is characterized by doubling, and a few
doublings can lead quickly to enormous numbers.
Another important aspect of exponential growth emphasized by
Professor Bartlett (and one that is astonishing to the non
mathematician), is that the increase in any doubling time is
approximately equal to the sum of all the preceding growth!
For example, when the rate of consumption is growing at seven
percent a year, the consumption in one decade exceeds the total
of all the previous consumption. "The reader can
suspect," Professor Bartlett writes, "that the world's
most important arithmetic is the arithmetic of exponential
function. One can see that our long national history of
population growth and of growth in our per-capita consumption of
resources lie at the heart of our energy problem."
Professor Bartlett makes it clear that when consumption is
rising exponentially, new discoveries that double the size of the
remaining resource result in only a small increase in the life
expectancy of the resource. He goes on to draw a general
conclusion of great importance: "When we are dealing with
exponential growth we do not need to have an accurate estimate of
the size of a resource in order to make a reliable estimate of
how long the resource will last. "
We often read that the vast coal resources we have are
sufficient to last for many hundreds of years. this would only be
true if there is no annual growth in consumption. By contrast,
Professor Bartlett has calculated that, with a five percent
annual growth in consumption, our "superabundance" of
coal would be totally exhausted in less than 100 years!
Professor Bartlett's letter(4) on this subject, written in
1976, is reproduced on page three.
One does not need to be either an energy expert or a
mathematician to realize that, if we want our vast coal resources
to last for hundreds, or even thousands of years, we need to
stabilize demand at a level substantially lower than it is today.
A Smaller U.S. Population
We need, of course, to reduce energy consumption per capita by
continuing to find ways to use energy more efficiently. That
alone, however, will not be sufficient to reduce and then
stabilize energy demand at a level that will be sustainable for
the very long term.
We must recognize that the greater our numbers, the more
energy we will consume each year. The cornerstone of a sensible
national energy policy, therefore, must be a program to halt, and
eventually to reverse, our population growth until, after a
prolonged period of gradual reduction, it can be stabilized at a
far lower level than it is today.
As noted demographer Kingsley Davis pointed out some years
ago, "
we still construe energy policy as producing or
saving energy for however many people there are, not as producing
fewer people so as to give each one as much energy as he or she
needs. Yet it is people who use energy. With fewer people, less
energy is needed. This may seem obvious, but so far we have
tragically postponed acting upon it." (5)
Smaller Would Be Stronger
In an age where energy and other vital resources are in scarce
supply, the smaller our numbers (to a certain point, of course)
the stronger our nation would be, because the less we would be
dependent on outside, often precarious sources, for supplies of
energy and other resources vital for the functioning of our
industrial economy.
What if U. S. population had stopped growing just after World
War II (when there was no shortage of manpower or woman power to
fight a prolonged global war with conventional weaponsconditions
that are unlikely ever to be repeated)?
In 1946 our population was about 145 million, or less than 60
percent of our present population of 245 million. If our
population size had been stabilized at 145 million, our current
oil production would have been largely sufficient for our total
oil needs, and our known reserves would have been ample far into
the future. In short, we could have avoided the precarious
position we will soon find ourselves in with regard to dependency
on foreign oil.
National power is, and is likely to be even more so in the
future, a function primarily of scientific knowledge,
technological skills and industrial capacity. These in turn must
be firmly based on the twin pillars of resource adequacy and a
sound environment, both of which are fostered by a smaller rather
than by a larger population.
To Reduce U.S. Population Size
Our annual population growth is now about 2.2 million (illegal
immigration excepted), or slightly under one percent. At that
rate our population would double in about 80 years, from the
present 245 million to nearly half a billion.
Of that annual growth, the so called "natural"
increase of our population, that is, the excess of births over
deaths, accounts for about 75 percent. Legal immigration accounts
for the balance.
Our present total fertility rate is about 1.8 which is
slightly below the long term replacement level. If that rate is
maintained, in several more decades our natural increase will
come to a halt, and then be followed (assuming a net migration of
zero) by a slow and gradual decline in our numbers.
A slightly lower total fertility rate would be desirable in
the interest of halting our population growth sooner, and that
might be achieved if our federal government encouraged couples,
by non-coercive means, of course, to have not more than two
children.
For example, a largely symbolic measure such as limiting tax
deductions to not more than two children, and a declaration by
the President and the Congress that our national goal was to halt
and then reverse our population growth as soon as possible, might
well be sufficient to lower the fertility rate slightly. Even if
this reduction occurred, however, its effect on our population
growth would be gradual, and would only make itself felt over a
considerable period of time. But we need an immediate and
substantial reduction in our yearly population growth, and we can
achieve this by limiting legal immigration.
Legal Immigration
Legal immigration has averaged about 570,000 a year in recent
years, and accounts for roughly 25 percent of our annual
population growth. Immigration is thus a basic and important
determinant of our population size and growth.
In order to reduce our annual population growth immediately,
and hasten the day when it is halted completely and then
reversed, we believe that legal immigration should be reduced
substantially to an overall ceiling of 100,000 a year, including
all relatives and refugees.
In this way, immigration would be in rough balance with
emigration (out-migration) and would no longer contribute to our
annual population growth, thus aggravating the severity of the
coming oil crisis, and the long term U.S. energy shortage. Such a
balance between immigration and emigration would result in zero
net migration.
An overall ceiling of 100,000 a year would still be generous.
It could be considered small or inadequate only by comparison
with the present level, which is simply no longer compatible with
today's realities, or the vital interests of our nation, in an
era of energy shortage.
The coming oil crisis, and the long term U.S. energy shortage,
will be with us far into the future. The problems that they are
sure to bring in their wake can only be intensified by any
further population growth, from whatever source.
As Professor Bartlett has pointed out, our past population
growth, and growth in our per capita consumption of energy lie at
the heart of our energy problem. Our national interest requires
that we act decisively now not only to halt, but to reverse,
their growth. Only by doing so will we be able to eventually
stabilize our annual energy consumption at a level that will be
sustainable far into the future.
References
1. Geoscience Research for Energy security; A Report of the
Energy Research Advisory Board to the United States Department of
Energy. February 1987. DOE/S4056.
2. Colin Norman in Science, Vol. 228, page 974.
3. Forgotten Fundamentals of the Energy Crisis. by Albert A.
Bartlett American Journal of Physics. Vol. 46. No. 9, September
1978.
4. Physics Today, December 1976, page 9.
5. Science, Vol. 211, page439, January 30, 1981. A
Excerpted from: Below-Replacement Fertility in Industrial
Societies Published in 1986 by Population and Development Review
Negative Population Growth, Inc.
210 The Plaza, P.O. Box 1206, Teaneck, N.J. 076661206,
Telephone (201)8373555. NPG, Inc. is a nonprofit organization
founded in 1972. Annual dues are $30, and are tax deductible to
the extent the law allows.
Table of Contents
Please send me your comments.
|