The Bush administration has declared that this week is “energy week”, as the President and his cabinet travel the country to tout the programs that will, in the President’s words “help us reach another great goal: to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025”.

The President’s acknowledgment of our oil addiction made headlines the world over. Less publicized was the administration’s admission, less than 24 hours later, that his dramatic announcement was, according to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, “purely an example”. Secretary Bodman went on to say that oil is a freely traded commodity on the international market, and consequently it would be impossible to replace imports from any single region, especially one as oil rich as the Middle East.

Another administration official, speaking to Knight Ridder on condition of anonymity, said the President wanted to dramatize the issue in a way that “every American sitting out there listening to the speech understands.”

The Energy Information Administration’s 2006 Annual Energy Outlook provides the most damning projections of the President’s statement, predicting that in 2025 net petroleum imports will be up to 60% from 58% in 2006.

There are many American citizens, including the President, who cringe at the call for greater conservation measures. But even they have turned around and shot themselves in the foot, essentially agreeing with my assertion that global energy independence based purely on technological innovation seems like a mathematical impossibility.

As frequent readers of this blog know, I myself am a technologist and an advocate of sustainable living through technological innovation. But the first step to dealing with our energy crisis is to acknowledge that there is no silver bullet. Moving beyond hollow political promises and catchy rhetoric will empower us to have a serious debate about the practical ways in which we can produce and consume energy now and for generations to come.