This is a great idea that needs to be fleshed out by other concerns such as what types of fuels are to be excluded. Reducing Libya’s light (low molecular bias) sweet (low sulfur) crude was a big mistake as it is easy to refine and much less of an environmental impact than the tar sands of Athabasca, for example, where the net energy recovery is abysmal. But taking out some of the former raised the prices to where the economics of recovery of the latter became more favorable. Such is but one part of the oil game. My point is that all oil is not equal; fractionation must be taken into account as do the location and security of refineries. Morgan Downey’s (2009) Oil 101 has a lot of great information in it, but it is not an easy read by any measure. We must continue to battle the poor decisions made concerning fossil fuels and they are rampant, but fossil fuels will be with us a bit longer. Tar sands? Fuck no. Arctic exploration? Fuck no. Fracking? Fuck no. But we will be using oil a bit longer and the best source of it is a peaceful world informed by thoughtful dialogue. Peace.
This is a wonderful idea.
It is worth knowing in advance that the so-called “Trade Agreements” will oppose such actions as specifically as they can, and the general pattern of the nation state, in which laws of smaller political units must conform to those of larger units, will tend to militate against it.
Still, such laws do not have to hold so much as they have to make abusive business less profitable than more proper behavior. Here’s to a patchwork quilt of prohibitions of larger corporate acts.