The Bush administration has been quietly warned by the intelligence community that Saudi Arabia is incapable of securing its oil assets from Iranian or al Qaeda attack.

Officials said despite U.S. aid, Saudi Arabia does not have the training and equipment to detect and foil attacks on major oil installations in the Arab kingdom. They said the foiled al Qaeda strike on the Abqaiq refinery in February 2006 pointed to serious deficiencies in Saudi security.

"If it was taken out, it could have taken a year or two to repair the refinery towers," said former CIA Director James Woolsey, now a consultant to the government. "Oil would have gone up to $200 a barrel."

In an address on Dec. 16, Mr. Woolsey, vice president at Booz Allen, Hamilton, said al Qaeda nearly destroyed Abqaiq. He quoted former National Security Advisor Robert McFarland as saying that, had they advanced, the al Qaeda attackers could have destroyed the refinery towers with mortars.

"All they had to do was to get in mortar range and a few of those mortars could have taken them out," Mr. Woolsey said.

But officials said Saudi Arabia has quietly rebuffed U.S. assistance—under the Global Critical Energy Infrastructure Protection Strategy program—to help protect Saudi oil facilities. At a conference in Riyadh in November, State Department and other officials found the Saudis extremely cautious over providing information on oil installations.

"They [the Saudis] were polite, but saw this as interfering in their strategic interests," an official recalled.

As a result, consultants such as Mr. Woolsey have been urging the administration to embark on a policy that could reduce dependency on Gulf oil. Saudi Arabia supplies six percent of U.S. oil requirements.

One plan being examined by the administration is a short-term energy program that could decrease U.S. oil dependency by 25 percent over the next few years. The proposal, the outlines of which have won support from President Bush, envisions a multi-pronged approach that would focus on ethanol and butanol production, much of it from agricultural waste.

In his address, Mr. Woolsey ruled out such options as offshore drilling and exploration in Alaska as well as hydrogen fuel. Instead, he envisioned the conversion of waste into ethanol, which would revive the farming industry, as well as the expansion of hybrid electricity-fuel vehicles.

"We are not just talking about a single process," Mr. Woolsey said. "We are talking about a move away from hydrocarbons. I believe that plug-ins hold a remarkable promise for squaring several circles that need some attention in our overall national need for fuel."

Officials said the administration hopes to win the support of the Democratic-controlled Congress for an alternative energy plan. House Democrats already plan to establish a fund to promote renewable energy and conservation, including a bill that would require large oil distributors to make available fuel that is 85 percent ethanol.

"What we'll do is roll back the subsidies to Big Oil and use the resources to invest in a reserve for research in alternative energy," House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi said.

For his part, Mr. Woolsey has warned that Saudi Arabia might fight U.S. conservation and alternative energy initiatives by flooding the market with oil. But the former CIA chief said the United States, given the vulnerability of Saudi oil installations and rising demand by China and India, must embark on a policy of energy independence.

"No matter what part of the Middle East and Persian Gulf you want to look at, it is very difficult to conclude that this is going to be a stable place to extract petroleum for a long time," Mr. Woolsey said.