In which Tom Friedman agrees with Me

Tom Friedman’s column in the NY Times this weekendis about the recently announced agreement struck by the Administration and the Automakers to double auto fuel economy by 2025. I, and the rest of my colleagues at the American Security Project, agree that “This is a big deal” as Friedman writes.

In fact, I agree completely, in exactly the same words. I originally wrote, on July 28 “This is a big deal.” as part of a blog post on ASP’s Flashpoint blog when the deal was signed. This sentence, along with more analysis on how important this deal will be for national security was included in an article written by Mark Clayton in the Christian Science Monitor.

I’m pleased that Mr. Friedman agrees with our analysis: the agreement struck by the Administration and the Automakers to double auto fuel economy by 2025 is a big deal.  It is very important for American national security and foreign policy that we use less oil.

Here’s Tom Freidman:

This is a big deal — a legacy deal for Obama that will make a significant, long-term contribution to America’s energy, environmental, health and national security agendas.

Here’s my blog post:

This is a big deal.

It is very important for American national security and foreign policy that we use less oil. Last year, ASP released a report“Ending Our Dependence on Oil,” which showed how America’s addiction to oil threatens our national security.

It is important that the United States as a whole uses less oil because the sheer volume of oil imports harms American competitiveness and drives down the value of the dollar. The United States sends hundreds of billions of dollars overseas to pay for oil. The United States consumed over $1.45 trillion worth of oil in 2010, of which $680 billion was spent on imports.

Here’s the Christian Science Monitor quoting me:

Energy-security experts praised the new agreement as key to reducing America's reliance on foreign oil.

"This is a big deal," Andrew Holland, senior fellow with the American Security Project, a bipartisan public-policy and research organization, wrote on his blog. "It is important that the United States as a whole uses less oil because the sheer volume of oil imports harms American competitiveness and drives down the value of the dollar."

The US spent at least $680 billion on oil imports in 2010, he writes. Without those imports, the US trade deficit of $497 billion in 2010 "would not have existed.” He continues, “That capital could be used for investment at home, and the export of that capital had the effect of driving down the value of the dollar."