Major Differences In Opinion: Can Congress Develop A Responsible Energy Policy In 2002?

Whether we realize it or not, America has started its latest debate on energy. Fueled by the attacks of September 11, President Bush has called on Congress to pass his version of an energy 'security' policy.

The House of Representatives has already passed an energy bill, legislation which religious advocates and environmental groups have found mostly unacceptable. In the Senate, Sen. Daschle (D-SD) has offered energy legislation that will be taken up soon, starting sometime in February 2002.

Leaders of major faith communities have recently written a statement on energy policy (that will be sent to the U.S. Senate early in 2002) and have stated: "At a moment of great moral urgency for our nation and the planet, God's children and God's creation, we caution Congress not to adopt an energy policy based on short term consideration without regard for long term solutions."

Drawing upon scripture, the statement affirmed the importance of considering long-standing principles of faith and values that concern all of creation: stewardship, covenant, justice, prudence, solidarity, and intergenerational equity.

Today, more than ever, these precepts should guide our action. Recent events remind us of the intimate link between the safety of people and the reliability of our energy system. Efforts to preserve the environment are clearly necessary in order to protect human life: Security and sustainability are inextricably linked.

The religious leaders agreed in their statement with President Bush that "the less dependent we are on foreign sources of crude oil, the more secure we are at home." Yet, those leaders emphasize that it is clear we do not have suffic- ient domestic reserves to replace foreign oil supplies. Conservation and reducing our dependence on oil and other fossil fuels is critical to achieving energy independence and can be accomplished in economically responsible and beneficial ways.

Details are forthcoming about the Senate energy legislation, but clearly the bill recognizes that improving fuel economy is the single most effective step that we can take to reduce our dependence on oil, save consumers money, and cut global warming pollution.

While the energy package begins to stake out a path to a safer, cleaner, and cheaper energy future, there is much more that must be done. Some of the toughest decisions remain to be resolved. For example, still to be determined are how much fuel economy standards will be raised, and what tax incentives will be provided for clean energy technology. This bill is moving in the right direction on renewable energy sources by the year 2020 - but more can and must be done. Leading environmental groups claim that a goal of 20 percent of our energy from renewable energy sources by 2020 is achievable and needed.

One concern is that the bill continues to give huge subsidies to the nuclear industry. The Senate should be sure their bill does not include subsidies to the nuclear or coal industries.

"Senator Daschle's bill recognizes that the best way to reduce America's dependence on oil, coal, and nuclear energy is to reduce demand for them in the first place," said Carl Pope, Executive Director of the Sierra Club. "While the bill is not without its flaws, it establishes a framework on which America can build a secure energy future. We look forward to working with the Senate to deliver on its promise of an energy future for America that is cleaner, cheaper, safer and more secure."

America does deserve a safe, clean, affordable energy future. As Americans, we can reduce our reliance on oil, and secure our energy future by using America's technological know-how to develop newer, cleaner sources of energy, such as solar and wind, and by making our cars, homes and appliances more energy efficient. However, in the aftermath of the September 11 tragedies, some are trying to use our fears about national security to campaign for a swift passage of fundamentally flawed energy legislation that would do little if anything to improve our energy security.

Advocates need to urge the U.S. Senate to promote a real security agenda that focuses on oil-saving efficiency measures and on diversification to clean renewable energy sources. Instead, some Senators are pushing for legislation similar to the divisive bill passed in the House (HR 4). This legislation would:

• Open America's special places to oil drilling,
• Use $38 billion in taxpayer dollars to subsidize polluting industries that cause smog, global warming, oil spills, and radioactive waste production,
• Roll back environmental and public health protections.

The religious community has strongly united against any energy legislation that opens the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other sensitive public lands to oil and gas drilling or otherwise threatens the environment or increases taxpayer subsidies to polluters. Instead, it is encouraged to work for a smarter, cleaner energy future that includes increased miles per gallon standards for vehicles, and a significant shift to clean.

Advocates are encouraged to urge their Senators to support carefully crafted legislation that would improve America's energy security by:

1. Improving automobile fuel economy standards.
   Increasing the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), or miles-per-gallon, standards is a critical step in reducing our dependence on oil. CAFE standards that were enacted in 1975 doubled auto fuel efficiency and save the U.S. 2.8 million barrels of oil every day.
   
   Unfortunately, fuel economy reached an all-time low this year. According to a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, each auto maker could produce a fleet of cars and light trucks that average 40 miles per gallon (mpg) using cost-effective, existing technology. In 2010, this would save nearly four times the yield from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge at peak production. A 40 mpg standard would boost the U.S. economy by saving consumers $9.8 billion at gas pumps annually and would create a cumulative total of 40,000 jobs in the auto industry by 2010.
   
   The first phase for implementing the 40 mpg standard would be to require light trucks to meet the same miles-per-gallon standard as cars. By 2010, this alone would save more than one and a half times the yield from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge at peak production.
   
   
2. Increasing energy efficiency and clean renewable energy generation.
   Increasing efficiency and diversifying our energy sources will make our energy infrastructure more resilient and less vulnerable to disruption. The Renewable Energy Act of 2001 ( S 1333), by Senators Jeffords (VT), Kerry (MA), Lieberman (CT), Snowe (ME) and Schumer (NY), would increase the generation of clean renewable energy and fund energy efficiency programs. Clean, renewable energies such as wind, geothermal and solar energy are becoming increasingly cost-competitive, and can help protect consumers against fluctuating fossil fuel prices. S 1333 would create a renewable portfolio standard, requiring an increasing percentage of electricity to come from clean renewable sources, reaching 20 percent of power generation by 2020. This bill would also create a public benefits trust fund, collected through a 0.2 cents per kilowatt-hour charge on electricity, equivalent to about $1 per month for a typical household. This fund would provide some $8 billion annually in matching funds to states for energy efficiency programs, renewable energy technologies, and low-income assistance programs. A recent Union of Concerned Scientists report found that the renewable portfolio standard and system benefit fund in S 1333 would save consumers more than $70 billion by 2020, as well as reduce global warming emissions by one-third, and reduce smog and soot-forming pollution as well.
   
   
3. Creating incentives for energy efficiency and clean renewable energy.
   Energy efficiency is the quickest, cheapest, cleanest way to save energy and reduce dependence on unstable fuel supplies. Americans today consume 40 percent less energy and thus have 40 percent lower energy bills as a result of smart efficiency policies initiated over the last 25 years. Congress should encourage the construction of highly efficient homes, buildings and appliances and support S 207 to reward significant efficiency improvements. Credits for the purchase of highly efficient appliances should be supported as well. Finally, Congress should strengthen standards for energy efficient home appliances, such as refrigerators, washer/dryers, hot water heaters and air conditioners, and create a Production Tax Credit for very highly efficient appliances. To spur even greater increases in the use of clean, renewable energy, Congress has the option to extend the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for five years, an important factor to encourage the growth of wind, solar, geothermal energy, and clean biomass while specifically excluding municipal solid waste incinerators.

This new energy future would create more jobs, as demonstrated by the World Wildlife Fund/Tellus Institute report released in November.
Americans deserve a smarter, cleaner energy future. The three initiatives noted on page 3 will (according to leading environmental groups) save consumers money, reduce demand for oil, and protect our public health and environment.

There is no reason to damage our environment or threaten public health in the name of energy security. The fastest, cheapest way to reduce our vulnerability to potential oil price shocks is to reduce our consumption of oil through higher fuel economy standards.

Advocates are encouraged to contact their Senators and ask them to oppose the following proposals that would damage our environment and do little to increase long-term energy security:

• Opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other sensitive areas to oil and gas drilling, reducing environmental protections of those areas and accelerating inappropriate oil and gas development on public lands.
• Extending the Price Anderson Act (or other increased nuclear subsidies), including those that encourage reprocessing.
• New or expanded oil and coal subsidies.
• Any other provisions that would weaken environmental and public health protections in the name of energy security, including overly broad restrictions on information disclosure, and eminent domain regarding transmission line siting.

Now is the time for Presbyterian environmental advocates to contact their Senators. Urge them to support carefully crafted clean energy legislation that would build a smarter, cleaner energy future for America. Ask your Senate representatives to oppose any energy legislation that opens the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other sensitive public lands to oil and gas drilling and increases taxpayer subsidies to polluters.

General Assembly
The 213th (2001) General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) stated in a policy entitled, "Call to Halt Mass Extinction," that we must call "upon the United States Congress and the Bush administration, particularly the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service, and the Interior Department, and also the governments of the states to refrain from or turn back all efforts to abolish or undercut established policies and recent initiatives to protect endangered species, to preserve wetlands, to restore the Florida Everglades, to minimize road building in national forests, and to preserve roadless wilderness areas." The Assembly further called "upon the United States Congress and the Bush administration, together with industry, agriculture, and individuals, to face the compelling urgency to promote energy conservation and efficiency and also to accelerate the transition from a fossil fuel base to a solar-hydrogen base for the economy."