If we could do that effectively, then I'd bet my house the rest of the world would follow.
If technologies and techniques developed that would let us do that without massive pain, then other countries could use those technologies and techniques.
But if you assume no major changes, and that we do so by going through the pain; our reduced use would decrease the price which would tend to increase usage in other countries, esp. developing countries.
Then if the world were to reduce oil consumption by 75%, then that would result in a collapse in the price of oil and the Middle East would revert back to a worthless desert which would take a lot of money out of the hands of intolerant, backward extremists who want nothing but to destroy Western-style civilization
It would be devastating to the ME regimes, but
1 - 75% reduction is very unlikely, no matter what policies the US follows, unless "peak oil" hits hard and we just can't get enough oil.
2 - Lower US demand will help control price increases, if we can reduce demand.
3 - 25% is still a lot of money, esp. on the scale of the terrorists, and if it goes down that far because of availability then A - the price will be higher, so the revenue will have less than a 75% reduction, and B - The Middle East has the largest reserves so the percentage from that area would increase.
4 - Lower revenue in the Middle East could cause disruptions that increase the threat from radicals and terrorists.
(Note all assumptions esp #1 are assuming over the next couple of generations, a century out or more is to far to have any idea of what might happen)
The side benefit is that if oil prices collapse, there will be fewer dictators.
Plenty of poor countries are ruled by dictators. |
