Yesterday, The Grand Rapids Press published a 1,284 word "guest column" by West Michigan congressional representative Vern Ehlers. The column--coming from a representative who is not known for being particularly transparent given the fact that he holds one town hall meeting per year in his home of Grand Rapids--outlined some of his views on energy and conservation. As is characteristic of a representative who never tires of explaining his wish that "energy was purple" is called "Gas prices--Ouch!"

The simple title is indicative of the analysis in the column. While Ehlers does tie rising gas prices to an inevitable shortage of oil because it is not renewable, he fails to outline support for specific programs. He advocates more drilling for oil and exploration, although he admits that such efforts are only a temporary fix for the problem. He advocates, "we rapidly develop alternative energy sources to replace our declining resources." To that end, Ehlers says that the country must embrace solar, nuclear, and geothermal energy. Such exploration can be advanced by tax credits and making it easier to open nuclear power plants, according to Ehlers.

However, while Ehlers talks about increasing alternative energy production, a significant portion of his column focus on "conserving energy." This would not typically be problematic, except for the fact that Ehlers speaks only of individual energy conservation. He writes about the importance of "driving more slowly, properly inflating tires, keeping cars well-tuned, carpooling and eliminating unnecessary trips" and purchasing fuel-efficient vehicles. However, he says nothing about the systemic aspects of energy use--creating the impression that everyone from individuals to corporations have an equal responsibility to conserve--when in fact the amounts of energy used for certain components of our economic system (for example industrial agriculture (http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/fossil-fuels.cfm)) is much greater than that used by individuals. While individual choices can reduce fuel consumption and are important, the issue needs to be addressed at a system-wide level. However, Ehlers instead promotes a feature on his website that asks constituents to share their favorite individual conservation methods.

Moreover, the column raises questions about Ehlers' views on the environment. Ehlers has maintained a reputation as an environmentalist despite the fact that this piece and his record generally do not typically reflect the aims of the admittedly varied environmental movement. Most recently, Ehlers received the endorsement of the League of Conservation voters for his "pro-environment" stance. How does that endorsement relate to his desire to expand oil drilling and nuclear power?

Ehlers' full guest column is printed below:

"The price of gasoline pinches our pocketbooks, and I know that Michiganders especially are struggling to pay for gas. Truckers face bankruptcy. The American auto industry, long the mainstay of Michigan's economy, cannot sell its main products, big cars, pickups, and SUVs, putting their corporate future close to bankruptcy.

How could this happen? We all know some of the answers: demand has increased more than supply, driving the cost up; restrictions on drilling have reduced America's potential oil production; China subsidizes gas prices and therefore uses increasingly more gas, and many more reasons. But, as Paul Harvey would say, what is the rest of the story?

I am a physicist, and have worked with energy issues for years. The laws of nature tell us that energy is our most important natural resource, and also that energy is our only non-recyclable resource. In other words, we can recycle the steel in your car, but every time you burn a tank of gas, that energy is gone forever. Since Earth contains a finite amount of crude oil, that means we are bound to run out.

This is not new information; we have known this since new energy sources fueled the industrial revolution. A noted geologist predicted years ago that oil production in the United States would peak in the 1970s, and it did. We now expect global oil production to be at all-time peak levels in the next decade, before going on a permanent decline. Because of this, we are feeling the pain.

Perhaps the most frequent call to action to stem the rise of gas prices is, "Drill here! Drill now!" We certainly can drill more here, especially offshore where there is considerable oil. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, which many are demanding, will not help very much. The oil estimated to be in that area, although substantial, is only slightly more than the amount of oil we consume in the United States in just one year.

Yes, we can drill more, and I support efforts to explore for more oil within our borders. But, usually we can not drill "now." Drilling is expensive, and no company will drill without first doing a comprehensive geological study to find out exactly where the oil is located. That, plus the drilling process, means it can easily take nearly a decade for the new oil to reach the market.

Are we doomed then to continue paying ever-increasing gas prices? By no means. We must rapidly develop alternative energy sources to replace our declining oil resources. The alternative sources must include primarily solar, nuclear, and geothermal energy. Congress can encourage this by giving tax credits for developing energy in all its forms, by making it easier for new nuclear power facilities to come online and by funding basic research, which will lead to the development of new alternative energy sources.

While we develop other energy resources, we must immediately conserve energy by using it more efficiently. There is no better, cheaper, and quicker way to solve our current energy problems. We got ourselves through the energy crisis in the 1970s by conserving energy, and I know we can do it again.

There are some simple things everyone can do to reduce the demand for gasoline, such as driving more slowly, properly inflating tires, keeping cars well-tuned, carpooling and eliminating unnecessary trips. Purchasing a fuel-efficient vehicle can greatly reduce fuel costs. There may be other ways to reduce fuel consumption, and I challenge people in West Michigan to come up with their own suggestions. I have set up a page on my Web site at www.house.gov/ehlers to accept your opinions on ways to effectively conserve, or solve our gas shortage, and I will be sharing your ideas with others.

Despite the energy challenges we face today, I am optimistic that we will make significant progress toward reducing the price of gas. The current truths about our energy situation are harsh, and as the old saying goes, you can't argue with Mother Nature. But if we work together toward the common goal of conservation and alternative energy, we will make it through this crisis. I will hold up my end of the bargain by supporting measures in Congress to responsibly expand domestic oil exploration, foster the development of alternative energy, and provide tax incentives for energy efficiency. If we do not take significant steps to solve today's energy problems, we will only be passing our troubles on to our children and grandchildren. Fortunately, greater energy independence is within reach, and I urge everyone to join me in working toward that goal."