Reply from Dave Heineman

I recently sent a letter to the Nebraska Governor expressing my displeasure in Nebraska's low ranking in the NRDC's survey of what states are doing to reduce their oil dependence.

Here is his reply:

Thanks for sharing with me the information from the National Resources Defense Council that ranks states on how they are reducing their oil dependence. You noted that the study found that Nebraska was one of "the 10 states doing the least to reduce their oil dependence."

In response, I would note that the evaluation that placed Nebraska in the bottom rung relied on seven benchmarks. Several of the benchmarks were mandates or increased spending on new programs:

• requiring renewable fuel in all gasoline
• limits on new vehicles available for sale
• growth policies that limit land use options
• increased mass transit spending
• hybrid vehicle tax incentives, and
• alternative fuel station tax incentives

While some of these efforts may be laudable, Nebraskans have generally opposed "government mandates" whether they come from the federal, state or local government. Increased spending or new and costly programs must compete with other uses for limited tax revenues. Since Nebraska is a large state with a small population some efforst such as mass transit or limiting growth options may not be economically supportable or prudent public policy.

Unfortunately, the study did not include a category for renewable energy production. If that had been included, I suspect the state would have ranked very high. We will likely produce a billion gallons of ethanol. Most of the ethanol produced is exported, making it possible for state to adopt renewable fuel standards using Nebraska-produced ethanol.

First, the fact that I got such a targeted reply suggest to me that somebody in the Governor's office already researched this in order to come up with these excuses. That's cool, nice to see they are on top of things.

I note that the posture of the reply is very defensive. It is saying, in a nutshell, that the criteria for the study don't apply to us because we are special. That certainly may be a valid criticism, so lets take the objections point by point.

"While some of these efforts may be laudable, Nebraskans have generally opposed 'government mandates'.

Translation, some of these are good ideas, but we lack the balls to do anything about it.

People are stupid, especially in large groups, thats why we have a representative government rather than a direct democracy. We hired you guys to figure out how to get the right things done, not to do the stupid crap the unwashed masses think are good ideas. Sorry, does that sound elitist? Do I sound like a Republican? People, in general, don't plan for or think about the future. We swill down the hydrocarbons and drive around in pickup trucks, assuming that somebody will figure out how to keep it all going. That is why we have government. To govern. To control. To take the long view and direct the course of civilization.

"Since Nebraska is a large state with a small population, some efforts such as mass transit or limiting growth options may not be economically supportable or prudent public policy."

Translation, we are too busy to address critical issues with creative thinking, instead we'll trot out tried-and-true excuses instead of taking risks that might get me kicked out of office.

You know how you get people to ride the bus? Make it free. Make it widely available. Provide a way for people to take their bicycles with them. Make sure you have wide-area coverage, even if you can't give people door-step service in downtown. Advertise aggressively! Listen to people's concerns and then address them.

"If [a category for renewable energy production] had been included, I suspect the state would have ranked very high."

Maybe so. But using corn fields to turn natural gas and diesel fuel into ethanol isn't doing much to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels is it?

"We will likely produce a billion gallons of ethanol."

Oh, wow, a BILLION gallons. We consume over 900 billion gallons of gasoline each year. If you were budgeting your paycheck for a week, and you had 900 dollars, how excited would you get about finding out that you could spend 90 cents on the bus to go pick up an extra buck.

That's how ethanol works, you put 90 cents worth of the energy in the form of natural gas and diesel fuel in order to grow a bucks worth of ethanol. In the process you're probably using industrial cropping methods to degrade your topsoil, reducing your yields over time.

Of course, that fits with most people's idea of conservation anyway, they'll drive across town in a SUV, burning up three bucks worth of gasoline to 'save' 2 bucks on a 6 dollar item that they didn't need and wouldn't have bought at the regular price.

Here, expand your mind, watch Crude - the incredible journey of oil at least you'll know what the stuff is and why, two decades from now, you are doing manual labor on a farm and there are no more contrails.