Rob Helpy-Chalk explains beautifully why Bush's promise, during his State of the Union address, to cut U.S. dependence on Mideast oil by 75%, was misleading, amounts to an insignificant change in current policy, and will ultimately make us more dependent on foreign oil. Nevertheless, Bush can probably use his paltry promise to increase drilling in places like Alaska.
[...]
Bush's advisors are explaining that when he said "reduce middle eastern oil imports 75% by 2025" he really meant "replace an amount of our oil consumption equivalent to 75% of what we currently import from the Middle East with consumption of local energy by 2025." Since the actual physical amount of oil we get from the region is quite small, the amount of consumption he is planning on replacing is quite small. This does not mean that we will be 75% less beholden to the Saudis, because they will still control the market where we buy all our oil. In fact, we will be more beholden to them, because their share of the global market will have increased, because their oil fields will run out last.
This is probably like last year's (it was last year, wasn't it? Time seems to drag with Bush in office) promise of fuel cell technology to clean up the environment.
Of course, the plan was to make the hydrogen from hydrocarbons, oil to you and me.
I hear there was a drastic cut in the alternative fuels group the day after SOTU.