Greater oil production won't stop electricity shortage

To the Editor: I would like to comment on some statements made by Sen. Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, in his recent keynote address to the ASME's Industry Advisory Board, as reported in the May 2001 ASME News.

The Senator declared an energy "crisis," and used California as an example. The truth is, there is no energy crisis in this country. The problems in California are due to not enough power plants being built in the past decade, distribution glitches and inexperience in managing deregulation issues. They are not due to demand outstripping supply. We are not running out of energy.

He also mentioned the likelihood of similar blackouts occurring this summer in the Northeast. This is unlikely to happen for several reasons. According to Public Service Electric & Gas, the major electric utility in New Jersey, the independent system operator (ISO) in the Northeast that manages the sale and movement of power has been operating for decades and is much more experienced than California's ISO.

In addition, a reserve margin of approximately 20 percent is required in the Northeast to ensure adequate supplies during peak demand. Finally, power generation capacity in the Northeast has been increased by approximately 25 percent over the last 10 years, while California has added only 8 percent.

Sen. Murkowski also mentioned that oil should be extracted from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) because of concerns over our dependency on foreign oil for 56 percent of our needs.

What wasn't mentioned was the fact that over 60,000 barrels of Alaskan oil are currently exported to Asia every day, and ANWR oil probably would be exported as well, as it is more profitable to the oil industry.

If Sen. Murkowski is really interested in reducing our dependence on imported oil, then why was he largely responsible for ending the ban on the exportation of Alaskan oil in 1995?

And after it was pointed out that it could take a decade or more for ANWR oil to reach the marketplace and thus could do nothing to alleviate the current "crisis," Sen. Murkowski conveniently declared that this crisis could now take "decades to fix." Furthermore, since oil-fueled power plants provide only 3 percent of the electricity generated in the United States, additional oil production would do nothing for the current electricity situation anyway.

If we are truly experiencing an energy crisis, then why does the Bush administration's proposed budget slash funding for energy efficiency research and development by 27 percent, even while they claim their projected budget surpluses are so large as to warrant massive tax cuts? Why does Vice President [Dick] Cheney only support more oil production, but dismiss alternate energy sources and conservation measures in his recent energy policy statements?

Robert E. Ehrenbeck
Garwood, N.J.

Funding for Boy Scouts questioned

To the Editor: My attention was caught by the article [in the April issue of ASME NEWS]on the grant support given by the ASME Foundation to the Boy Scouts of America and ASME's BPC for a revised engineering merit badge. This brought several questions to mind.

As ASME is an organization that is open to everyone regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation, why does it provide funding support for an organization that is openly opposed to differences in sexual orientation?

Why were the Boy Scouts given preferential consideration when many organizations, such as schools, churches, governmental entities and others, are excluding them from their premises and dropping their support because of BSA's policies? As a former member of the Council on Education, this causes me alarm. Also, as a former member of the Board on Minorities and Women, I question why consideration was not given to support of other organizations in creating an engineering merit badge, such as the Girl Scouts of America.

It would be far better for ASME to be enhancing its image and the image of the engineering profession amongst young women where there is considerable underrepresentation in ASME's membership. This ASME/Boy Scout effort seems to be gender discimination on the surface.

Every ASME member can make his own decision on whether to participate and support this effort. However, as I am a former Star Scout and Scoutmaster, I cannot support an organization that has openly discriminatory policies, and neither should ASME.

Emil L. Martinec
Life Fellow
Past Vice President

back to columns