I have noticed thatthe issue of oil dependency continues to resurface. People try to make it sound like a new issue, but its the same old story, just updated tobe faithful to the times.

I guess the first wave of conservation hysteria occurred during the early 1970s when OPEC first limited oil production. Politicians first proclaimed that we need to limit our reliance on oil. The only realistic alternative at that time came in the form of cars that got high miles per gallons.

Remember that only Japanese automobiles provided high mpg potential in the 1970s. The Honda Civic, a car that attracted relatively little popular attention before the oil crisis, became the Car of Choice. You might recall that dealers ran out of these cars. People seemingly gladly paid hundreds of dollars over the stickerprice. Do you remember “odd/even” gas rationing. Gas retailers routinely ran out of gasoline to sell. And we were all warned about the need to become less oil dependant.

Then the problem was over. While Civics remained popular, their national importance reverted somewhat. If I recall, people began to purchase Honda Accords—which are Civic similar, but a little larger. Fora while, the Accord became an American best seller. We didn’t need the smaller Civic any longer, because we were not in an emergency condition.

Then there was the second oil crisis. And once again smart people proclaimed “we need to end our oil dependency.” They so opined as if it were original thought. But it was not.

That crisis came to pass as well. They all ultimately do and as soon as the gun isn’t resting on our forehead, we all forget about the need to reduce oil dependency. The always new idea resurfaces when it is opportune. But the new idea is always dropped when the crisis of the moment ends.

Often OPEC members have themselves ended the crisis by failing to agree on a single productionor pricing scheme. Many OPEC members seem to distrust each other as much as they do outsiders.

Now, as we stare at the prospect of a war that many claim is a fight over oil (whether that is true or not is less important than theperception) we again hear the same new idea. The modern spin concerns funding fuel cell technology with the hope that these super batteries will help limit our oil reliance. Fuel cell technology, while not new, is evolving and getting more use-able. But come on, who really believes that Washington is ready to abandon its oil company friends? Experience certainly would not support such a belief.

But this is not only the President’s fault. We are all to blame. All Americans are now what Texans used to be. We love excess. Meal sizes are bigger, we are bigger.

Few of us need, really need, an SUV. Ford has one that is so big it ought to have its own zip code. Cars are bigger while many families are smaller (2children, not the 3 everyone had in the1950s.)

If Washngton wants to help, it ought to outlaw SUVs, pour money into mass transit and not roads,and provide meaningful incentives for people to buy green. Everything else is more of the same old, same old.

By the way, I just saw a new advertisement on televisionpromoting a novel way to rely less on gasoline. No kidding: it was an ad for the Honda Civic. I kid you not.

Published: March 20, 2003

Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright laws.