Conservation, alternative energy and natural resources

The solution to America's energy crisis is conservation, investing in alternative energy and increasing our production of our own natural resources, said U.S. Rep. Patrick McHenry.

How the U.S. could ease its dependence on foreign oil over the next 10 years was McHenry's main topic at his Catawba County Town Hall meeting Tuesday night. About 30 people showed up for the meeting.

North Carolinians alone use 20 million gallons of oil daily. Although McHenry talked briefly about conservation, mentioning Americans have used 3 percent less oil from July 2007 to July 2008, rather than more, the crux of his talk was on accessing existing oil in the U.S. and on alternative fuels.

To get people to develop alternative fuels, McHenry is proposing a "21st century Manhattan Project." The original Manhattan Project resulted in the first atomic bomb during World War II.

"We need to create workable products or technologies to help break our dependency on foreign oil. We could award up to $1 billion to a type of technology that would end our dependence on foreign oil," he said.

Area resident Cole Setzer asked McHenry what is an acceptable percent of imported oil from foreign countries.

"Zero. Our dollar is weakening because we haven't gotten serious about getting rid of our dependence on it. If we're independent, we'll be better off," McHenry said.

Alternative fuels that are feasible for North Carolina are smaller amounts of hydroelectric power, but primarily nuclear power plants. Power plants currently provide the state with about 32 percent of the state's energy. The total amount of the energy for the U.S. that comes from nuclear power plants is 19.4 percent.

"Nuclear plants are a viable option. They're clean and efficient and provide very little waste," McHenry said. "We will need about 45 more to meet the projected demand of energy that we'll need. They're powerful and cheap, but the investment is massive."

To fund the building of nuclear plants and other alternative energies, McHenry suggested contracting for oil and natural gas, beginning with the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The refuge is the size of South Carolina and the drilling platform would be about the size of Lowe's Motor Speedway, McHenry said. There's potentially 18 million barrels of oil to get there. Opponents, however, say drilling in the refuge would destroy the environment and affect millions of migratory animals.

"We'd use the Prudhoe Bay Oilfield pipeline, that's about 75 miles away, and bring it to the lower 48 states," he said. "There's another 26 billion barrels of oil offshore in Alaska, but it's more dangerous to get."

McHenry said there's also oil off the shores of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, as well as another 44.9 billion barrels off the Gulf of Mexico.

Other energy sources in the U.S. are coal — America has 3.2 billion tons, which is enough to last 250 years at the current rate of use, according to the U.S. Department of Energy — and oil shale.

"That's essentially oil rock that would mature to crude oil in a million years. It's located in the western mountains," McHenry said. "If we super-heat it, we can separate the oil from the rock. We're not doing it because a senator from Colorado prevented it with a measure in a bill.

"We have to have a holistic look. Working together, I think we can do it. We have to make this a national priority, and by using our national resources," McHenry said.

Area resident John Ebert said one way to reduce how much oil America uses is by reducing the speed limits on roads by 10 miles per hour, which can save the amount of gas people use if drivers abide by the posted speed limits.

"That is one consideration. It was proposed in the '70s," McHenry said. "But that's a power that should be best left up to the states."