Throughout the past few decades, nations all over the world have become increasingly dependent on oil as a source of energy.  The United States, specifically, has heavily relied on the Middle Eastern oil supply without ever questioning its abundance.  Recently, that supply has begun to dwindle, posing a problem for those nations depending on it to sustain themselves.  In Matthew Simmons's "The Oil Supply Crisis Could Be Humanity's Greatest Challenge," the investment bank CEO attempts to persuade the audience of the apparent danger the energy problem presents. Though he mainly employs pathos to strike fear and guilt in his audience, he is effective in his use of logos as well, providing statistics and figures to support his claim.  However, Simmons's argument about the severity of the oil crisis would have been stronger had he further incorporated ethos. 

Pathos is a key component when developing an argument centering around environmentalism because when facts appear uninteresting, apparent danger to one's environment always catches the reader's attention. Writers and speakers rely on pathos to guilt or scare their readers into caring more about environmental issues.  In Simmons' article, he attempts to evoke feelings of anger, guilt, and fear.  To trigger anger in his readers, the author blames the crisis on energy-observing specialists.  Simmons condemns these specialists when he states that "for inexplicable reason, virtually no energy planner ever questioned this 'Middle East Energy Abundance Theory,' though little hard data ...  ever existed to confirm it" (Simmons). The theory he refers to is one claiming that "Middle East oil [is] virtually inexhaustible" and Americans should continue their dependency on it (Simmons).  If readers feel deceived, they will be angry with authority are more likely to trust and agree with Simmons that the problem is serious and must be addressed.  He goes on to accuse experts of "'See-no-evil' projections, [which] not only disguise the impending oil supply crisis but may contribute to its potentially catastrophic effects by keeping policymakers in the dark" (Simmons).  Though a subtle allegation, this statement uses connotations such as 'see-no-evil,' 'disguise,' and 'dark' which further the readers' suspicions of deception and resentment towards officials.  Again, this adds to the audience's hatred and distrust for environmental officials.

Continuing in his use of pathos, Simmons then switches the blame from energy officials to the audience themselves.  To promote guilt in his readers, Simmons injects into the article subtle reminders to readers that they, too, contributed to this disaster.  Simmons again uses careful word choice when he writes that "the world has blissfully assumed that oil and gas supplies were abundant and inexpensive to produce" (Simmons).  The word 'blissfully' implies that the world, including his audience, was too caught up in enjoying the diminishing resources to acknowledge the growing problem it was causing.  Simmons also holds the audience accountable for letting "the possibility of energy issues morphing into economic disruptions [fade] as the world enjoyed decades of low energy prices and ample supplies" (Simmons).  The word 'enjoyed' furthers the assumption that the world acted irresponsibly, observing the benefits of cheap oil but none of the consequences.  The purpose of Simmons guilting his readers is to make them feel remorse for their ignorance and indifference to the issue.  This will, in turn, persuade them that his claim about the severity of the oil problem is true, and that they must act.  

Though it is not difficult to instill fear when it comes to environmental issues, Simmons does so very effectively in this article.  By informing readers that "The Golden Age of abundant and cheap Middle East oil is long gone," Simmons warns readers to grieve for the good times, and prepare for the impending doom.  The reference to the Golden Age paired with the word gone poses a stark contrast to bring readers back to reality.  He emphasizes the consequences of oil dependency by forewarning that, should an accident occur to a " ... petroleum highway ... it would only take a matter of weeks before all usable crude and finished product inventories were used up and shortages began to shut down key parts of the global economy" (Simmons).  These alarming statements are intended to frighten readers into taking action by placing the issue on a (very short) timeframe.  Through effective word choice and the arousal of fear, anger and guilt, Simmons builds a strong argument through pathos.

Like pathos, an effective scientific argument cannot exist in the absence of logos.  Though his failure to any cite sources lessens his credibility, Simmons includes multiple statistics in his article, such as "the various models forecasting oil demand by 2020 to 2030 all end up showing a world needing between 115 and 130 million barrels a day of oil use and demand for natural gas, 50% higher than today" (Simmons).  He also refutes previous theories of the unexplored Middle East containing more oil by stating that "fewer than 40 giant and super giant oil fields have ever been discovered in almost 100 years of intense Middle East exploration for oil and gas" (Simmons).  This is a very low return rate for the money and time put into the operation, and makes further exploration seem illogical.  To emphasize the exponential growth of this issue, he includes "current rates of decline approximate 8 percent each year, and spare production capacity has dropped more than 5 million barrels per day in 2002 to less than 1 million this year" (Simmons).  These facts, combined with others, create an overwhelming sense of the severity of the problem, further supporting Simmons' claim.  Though a lack of citation lessens the effectiveness of the argument, Simmons is largely successful in his use of logos.

Though Simmons uses both of the previously mentioned appeals efficiently, his argument is widely lacking in ethos.  He has no situated ethos, being that he is a chief executive officer for an investment bank, a position possessing no relation to environmentalism and international oil dependencies.  Where he should be making up for this in invented ethos, he again falls short.  Though he uses intelligent word choice and relevant statistics, his failure to cite any credible sources, or any sources, for that matter, lessens his own credibility.  For all the reader knows, Simmons could have fabricated these facts, or exaggerated to support his claim.  Though he includes at the bottom of his article a list of further readings, his article would have benefitted more had he included direct information from an outside source.  He also attempts to establish invented ethos through placing the blame on others and siding with " ... serious energy students who warned of pending problems [and were] usually dismissed by most energy economists and labeled as pessimists, contrarians, or alarmists crying wolf" (Simmons).  Simmons is trying to appear that, like these students, he knew the solution all along.  This attempt is unsuccessful because one could argue that anyone could agree with these students in hindsight, and it offers no credibility as to his personal knowledge.  

Without the use of these rhetoric appeals, Simmons' article would have been ineffective, boring, and likely would have not made it to publication.  However, because of these persuasive techniques, one is likely to agree with him that the oil crisis proposes an enormous threat to society and must no longer be overlooked.  Less-easily persuaded readers may have, however, found the argument more convincing had it included greater insight to the author's credibility.  A lack of ethos can be detrimental, making the difference between an accredited scientist writing a knowledgeable article and an opinionated ordinary person on a blog.

