|
作者：艾默•拉文士 與 杭特•拉文士
八百英哩長的唇膏
相形之下，美國政府選擇在北極地區的國家動物保護區進行鑽油工作，就是一種減低國家安全的行為。如果這個保護區的確有著經濟上具開採效益的油源（但根據官方的資料，這是不可能的，若有任何經濟效益的可能性，也是十年以後的事），那麼只透過一條單一的輸油路線（跨阿拉斯加的管線系統），只會讓國防授權方案中防範恐怖份子的目標半途而廢，因為這條輸油管線會成為能源恐怖份子在美國國內最便捷的目標，就如比爾•麥齊賓所形容，這等於是在山姆大叔的背後貼上一個「踹我吧！」的牌子。
就輸油本身而言，這條管線也許可以讓這些國內生產的石油不出紕漏，但它卻是極度不安全的。這條管線幾乎都裸露在地面上，攻擊者很容易就可以下手，而且在冬天可能會無法修復，如果某一端的抽油站或是主要設施發生故障，9百萬桶的熱原油就會在冬天中的一個星期全部凝結成一條八百英哩長的「唇膏」。陸軍軍方、美國總審計局以及參議院司法委員會都認為美國無法妥善保護這條管線，今年的10月4日，一個醉漢只用了一發步槍彈，就導致該輸油管線關閉了近60個小時，過去也曾有人蓄意破壞這條管線，包括被射擊50多次，並遭人兩次放置炸彈未遂；兩年前，一位怨憤不平的工程師曾經精心策劃使用14個炸彈炸掉三個重要地點，幸好後來被阻止，而這個人跟策劃911事件的恐怖份子相比，已經是一個和靄的菜鳥。我們要知道，策劃911事件的恐怖份子，他們在奈及利亞的同夥才剛威脅要炸掉一條通往南歐的主要輸油管線，在10月26日週末，中西部的警方才留置（隨後遭釋放）了6名可疑的中東人士，他們身上都攜帶著這條管線的照片。
火線下的輸油管線（照片提供 美國國家再生能源實驗室）
從波斯灣進口原油，和快速老舊化的跨阿拉斯加輸油管線，都是戕害國家能源安全的作法。我們應該用更快速、更便宜、本質上也較為安全的節省能源方式，以及分散式的國內能源供應系統，這樣才能設計一套恐怖份子永遠無法關閉的能源系統，為美國建立一套可大可久的基礎，讓美國不再成為一個脆弱的強權。
欲知進一步的詳情，請至洛磯山研究中心圖書館參閱有關能源與能源安全的文章。本文初稿稍早曾發表在TomPaine.com.
艾默•拉文士與杭特•拉文士是洛磯山研究中心的共同創辦人，這是一個推動能源效率與保育資源的非營利組織，目標是為了創造更安全、更繁榮、以及更加生命永續的世界，同時他們兩位也長期擔任主要石油公司、以及能源與國防兩部的顧問。
【文章連載】
■管線不安全，美國倒大楣 (上) (下)
全文與圖片詳見：http://www.gristmagazine.com/grist/im
ho/lovins112001.asp
版權歸屬Earth Day Network，環境資訊協會(陳潁峰 譯，林子倫 審校)
中英對照譯稿請見：http://e-info.org.tw/issue/energy/2002/
en02010801.htm
|
|
by Amory and L. Hunter Lovins
The 800-mile-long Chapstik
In contrast, such options as drilling for oil and gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge decrease security. If the refuge held economically recoverable oil (unlikely and in any case a decade away, according to the official data), then delivering that oil by its only route, the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline System, would undercut the anti-terrorist goals of the Defense Authorization Act. It would make the pipeline the fattest energy-terrorist target in the country -- akin, writes Bill McKibben, to pinning a "Kick Me" sign on Uncle Sam's backside.
The pipeline would carry a domestic energy source all right, but it's frighteningly insecure. It's mostly aboveground, accessible to attackers, and can become impossible to repair in winter. If pumping stations or key facilities at either end were disabled, 9 million barrels of hot oil could congeal in one winter week into an 800-mile-long Chapstik. The Army, U.S. General Accounting Office, and Senate Judiciary Committee found the pipeline indefensible. On Oct. 4, a drunk shut it down for 60 hours with one rifle shot. It had previously been sabotaged, shot at on over 50 occasions, and incompetently bombed twice. A disgruntled engineer's more sophisticated plot to blow up three critical points with 14 bombs, then profit from oil futures trading, was thwarted by luck two years ago. He was an amiable bungler compared with the Sept. 11 attackers, whose Algerian colleagues have just threatened to blow up a major gas pipeline to Southern Europe. On the weekend of Oct. 26, Midwest police detained, and later released, six suspicious Middle Eastern men who had photographs of the pipeline.
In the pipeline of firePhoto: NREL. (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
Both Gulf oil and the vulnerable, rapidly aging Trans-Alaska Pipeline imperil national energy security. Both should be replaced with faster, cheaper, inherently secure energy efficiency and a distributed domestic supply system. That is how to design an energy system that terrorists can't shut off -- and a durable foundation for an America that would no longer be a fragile power.
For further details, please visit the Rocky Mountain Institute's library of articles on energy and energy security. An earlier version of this piece was published on
TomPaine.com.
Amory Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins are co-founders of Rocky Mountain Institute, an entrepreneurial nonprofit organization that fosters the efficient and restorative use of resources to create a more secure, prosperous, and life-sustaining world. They are longtime consultants to major oil companies and the Departments of Energy and Defense.(20 Nov. 2001)
http://www.gristmagazine.com/grist/im
ho/lovins112001.asp
|
