Following the U.S. midterm elections, the Republican Party won the majority of seats in the House of Representatives. While the Democrats maintained their control of the Senate, President Barack Obama and his Democratic Party lost their simultaneous control of the executive and legislative branches of power that they had over the past two years. In truth, these results will cast a shadow on most U.S. domestic and economic policies in the next two years, including energy and environmental policies. Despite the influence that he yielded in the past two years and despite his persistent attempts in this regard, Barack Obama has failed in securing congressional approval for unified legislation on energy and the environment. Hence, it will now prove extremely difficult for Obama to pass the energy and environmental policies that he seeks, in light of the clear rift in the political leanings of the Americans, not to mention the difficulty of securing the approval of the Tea Party, the Republican Party and even the approval of a number of Democrats in his party, for laws that may impose additional taxes on American consumers. Obama is therefore expected to propose “modest” policies with regard to alternative energies or improving the performance of energy programs. Such policies will most likely appease all parties concerned at the same time, but without imposing additional financial burdens on Americans. In fact, the Republicans and the Tea Party have won by promoting a policy that is clearly opposed to any additional taxes, amid fragile economic conditions and with no less than five million Americans currently unemployed. One of Obama's grave failures in this regard involves his attempt to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by about 17 percent by 2020, as he had announced during the Copenhagen Summit. Now, Obama is expected to rely more on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enforce relevant laws in a more stringent manner than before. This means that the opposition will focus its attacks and criticisms against this government agency, and will also attempt to shrink its budget as much as possible in order cripple its ability to act effectively. Since the oil companies usually favor the Republican Party and often make financial contributions to its election campaigns, these companies will try to halt any attempt by the Democrats to impose an additional tax of eight cent per barrel on companies that import crude oil, or pass legislation that would require oil-producing companies that operate in the United States to contribute to an environmental pollution compensation fund. Such a fund may gather an estimated total amount of 31 billion dollars, which would be earmarked for compensating damage caused by oil spills such as the one that occurred in the Macondo field this year. The fact of the matter is that the Obama administration attempted in the past two years to implement one of the most important policies pledged during the presidential election campaign, namely, to reduce demand for crude oil. And indeed, the Obama administration has succeeded in increasing the quantity of biofuels blended with conventional gasoline and diesel, and also took the initiative when it comes to improving fuel efficiency in vehicles, enabling them to travel longer distances with less fuel. It is expected that the administration will continue these attempts to reduce reliance on conventional fuels, or to use them in a more economic manner, through the laws that have been enacted but that are yet to be implemented. Such attempts are significant for the global oil industry, given the fact that the use of fuel in transportation in the United States accounts for about 25 percent of total global consumption. This is not to mention the significance of the U.S. laws pertaining to the quality of newly manufactured cars that are in force and their implication in general in what regards the quality of vehicles produces globally. It is clear that Obama has succeeded so far in his various initiatives to reduce the consumption of petroleum. However, the path towards the adoption of new policies will be fraught with difficulties in the upcoming period, as the U.S. President will have to follow a more cautious approach that takes into account the views of both his party's leaders and those of the opposition parties at the same time. This means, for example, that the desired policies that would allocate huge amounts of money to promote the use of electric cars or to fund a bank to support the funding of infrastructure for alternative energies – which are some of the important plans being proposed - may be delayed for some time, or may be shelved or downsized by withholding funding. But in the end, it must be noted that the delay in some of these proposed projects does not mean that they will be discarded entirely. This is because the United States desire to end crude oil imports, an otherwise unrealistic and far fetched goal, remains a key focus for both the Republicans and the Democrats, and also an important part of U.S. security policy that is trying to gradually end heavy reliance on energy imports from Arab countries. *. Mr. Khadduri is an energy expert
