This is three weeks old, but here’s an interesting press release that discusses the severity of America’s potential oil crisis. Two groups — Security America’s Future Energy (SAFE) and the U.S. National Commission on Energy Policy — co-sponsored an oil crisis simulation event called Oil Shockwave that shows how a series of world events can quickly lead to crisis at the pumps.

Here’s what happens in a scenario where just 3.5 million barrels of oil are quickly removed from a global market of more than 83 million barrels:

* Gas prices in the U.S. soar to $5.74 (U.S.) per gallon.

* Global oil prices rise to $161 per barrel.

* Consumer confidence plunges by 30 per cent.

* A 28 per cent drop in the S&P 500.

* A drop in GDP over two consecutive quarters.

“This simulation serves as a clear warning that even relatively small reductions in oil supply will result in tremendous national security and economic problems for the country,” stated Robbie Diamond, president of SAFE and — strangely — a Canadian who went to school at the University of Toronto.

I say strangely because you’ve got to ask why a Canadian is helping America fight to secure its energy future. The obvious answer is that Canada is just along for the ride, and Diamond realizes that change is necessary south of the border for change to happen at home.

This is three weeks old, but here’s an interesting press release that discusses the severity of America’s potential oil crisis. Two groups — Security America’s Future Energy (SAFE) and the U.S. National Commission on Energy Policy — co-sponsored an oil crisis simulation event called Oil Shockwave that shows how a series of world events can quickly lead to crisis at the pumps.

Here’s what happens in a scenario where just 3.5 million barrels of oil are quickly removed from a global market of more than 83 million barrels:

* Gas prices in the U.S. soar to $5.74 (U.S.) per gallon.

* Global oil prices rise to $161 per barrel.

* Consumer confidence plunges by 30 per cent.

* A 28 per cent drop in the S&P 500.

* A drop in GDP over two consecutive quarters.

“This simulation serves as a clear warning that even relatively small reductions in oil supply will result in tremendous national security and economic problems for the country,” stated Robbie Diamond, president of SAFE and — strangely — a Canadian who went to school at the University of Toronto.

I say strangely because you’ve got to ask why a Canadian is helping America fight to secure its energy future. The obvious answer is that Canada is just along for the ride, and Diamond realizes that change is necessary south of the border for change to happen at home.

Here’s an interesting Q&A in Wired.com with Larry Burns, General Motor’s vice-president of R&D and strategic planning. It’s no secret that GM has been the most vocal and persistent car manufacturer when it comes to plans for a mass-market hydrogen vehicle, but Burns makes a few interesting comments in this interview in response to critics of GM’s hydrogen promises. Among them:

On why hybrids aren’t the long-term answer: What long-term problem have we fixed with the miracle of a hybrid? If you woke up tomorrow and all 220 million cars and trucks in the United States had been hybridized to the degree that the Prius has — all getting 25 per cent better fuel economy — in six years we would be consuming the same amount of petroleum that we are right now.

On those who doubt GM’s hydrogen promises: The first question I’d like to ask them is, when was the last time you were in a state-of-the-art fuel cell-development laboratory? I work with a tremendous team of scientists and engineers who are creating that capability, and my confidence in our 2010 timetable grows every week.

On concerns that hydrogen production will still rely on carbon fuel: I don’t care whether the hydrogen comes from wind, geothermal, nuclear, solar, or fossil. What I care about is that each local economy plays to its strength. You get 5 per cent from here and 10 per cent from there, and suddenly you’ve created a transportation energy market with a number of pathways competing, as opposed to just a petroleum pathway.

You’ve got to give GM credit for not straying from its goal, no matter how unlikely it seems some times. I still haven’t ruled out the hydrogen fuel-cell car, but I do remain concerned about some of the developmental barriers that must still be overcome.

Here’s an interesting Q&A in Wired.com with Larry Burns, General Motor’s vice-president of R&D and strategic planning. It’s no secret that GM has been the most vocal and persistent car manufacturer when it comes to plans for a mass-market hydrogen vehicle, but Burns makes a few interesting comments in this interview in response to critics of GM’s hydrogen promises. Among them:

On why hybrids aren’t the long-term answer: What long-term problem have we fixed with the miracle of a hybrid? If you woke up tomorrow and all 220 million cars and trucks in the United States had been hybridized to the degree that the Prius has — all getting 25 per cent better fuel economy — in six years we would be consuming the same amount of petroleum that we are right now.

On those who doubt GM’s hydrogen promises: The first question I’d like to ask them is, when was the last time you were in a state-of-the-art fuel cell-development laboratory? I work with a tremendous team of scientists and engineers who are creating that capability, and my confidence in our 2010 timetable grows every week.

On concerns that hydrogen production will still rely on carbon fuel: I don’t care whether the hydrogen comes from wind, geothermal, nuclear, solar, or fossil. What I care about is that each local economy plays to its strength. You get 5 per cent from here and 10 per cent from there, and suddenly you’ve created a transportation energy market with a number of pathways competing, as opposed to just a petroleum pathway.

You’ve got to give GM credit for not straying from its goal, no matter how unlikely it seems some times. I still haven’t ruled out the hydrogen fuel-cell car, but I do remain concerned about some of the developmental barriers that must still be overcome.