에너지경제연구원 전자도서관-상세보기

홈아이콘 > 검색 > 상세보기

출력 보관하기 컬렉션담기 책갈피추가 북마크공유 콘텐츠번호:43882

자료유형 :	NTIS
자료명/저널명 :	Energy Security Means Energy Interdependence
개인저자 :	Bryce, R.
발행처 :	National Defense Univ., Washington, DC. Inst. for National Strategic Studies.
페이지수 :	15p
내용주기 :	The phrases 'energy security' and 'energy independence' have become so hackneyed as to be almost useless. Of course, the overuse of those two phrases has not prevented any number of energy analysts from stepping forward to offer their ideas about what constitutes the ideal level of 'security' and how the US can best achieve the lofty goal of 'independence.' And therein lies the attraction of vague concepts like 'security' and 'independence': the possibility of affecting significant change over a short period of time is almost nil while the potential for outrage is essentially infinite. The never- ending quest for 'energy security' and 'energy independence' reminds me of the quip about the engineer who's looking for a solution to a sticky problem. And that problem can only be resolved with a big dose of 'unobtanium.' Of course, the Periodic Table doesn't include such an element. Nevertheless, the US defense establishment continues to believe that America's security -- and of course, energy security fits under that category -- can only be achieved by maintaining an ever-expanding military footprint. And in the wake of the September 11 attacks, America's military footprint has grown to a truly colossal size. But has that military expansion resulted in an increase in security for the US. Some observers will claim that the US must continue to militarize the Persian Gulf in order to maintain 'energy security.' But given the vast scale of the $5 trillion-per-year global energy sector and the interconnectedness of the global energy market, it's increasingly apparent that markets are trumping militarism. This paper will offer a few points designed to underscore that point.