| |
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
|
|
Guest Commentary: June 16, 2001
Crafting a National Energy Strategy
The Honorable Olympia Snowe
|
Memorial Day marked the beginning of the traditional summer season, and with it comes worries of higher gasoline prices. These challenges are all the more important in the face of the energy crisis that is gripping California, where consumer electric prices have risen tenfold in the past year alone.
Decisions made in recent years in California about utility deregulation, coupled with a reluctance to build new power production plants and a power grid strained to its limits by increased demand, have caused an array of problems from rolling (temporary) blackouts, to spiking gasoline prices, to soaring utility bills. California is suffering an energy crisis -– and as a nation, we must protect against similar problems by developing and implementing a national energy strategy.
Amazingly, our nation has not enacted a comprehensive energy plan since the oil crisis of the late 1970s. Maine was the proverbial "canary in the coal mine" in January of 2000 when heating oil prices skyrocketed and supplies ran dangerously low. This was followed by last summer's oil price spike which inspired concern about meeting our nation's energy needs, but the Clinton Administration was admittedly "caught napping", and was slow to react to the problem.
Addressing our nation's energy needs was instead left to President Bush, who demonstrated leadership last month in setting forth a comprehensive, 105-point National Energy Policy. Although I do not support every aspect of this plan, I am pleased that the President has joined the effort to examine our nation's energy needs, by providing a roadmap.
For Maine, the stakes are high, because we lie at the edge of the New England power grid, from which we receive our electricity. Fortunately –- even in the wake of utility deregulation over the past few years -– we have maintained ample power production capacity, even for growing summer energy needs. Five new natural gas-fired power plants have been built in Maine that augment existing power facilities, and our region as a whole has wisely planned its state energy production capabilities. Indeed, New England has the ability to supplement power needs for New York -- which faces greater challenges -- in order to keep the Northeast on-line and energized.
Our challenge for the region is to maintain a balance between energy needs and the growing challenges to our environment. We must continue to assure adequate power production capacity in our region so that neither summer heat nor winter cold exhaust the available supply. I will continue to insist on strong environmental air quality standards to prevent the spread of pollution to our region, which is why I joined with a bipartisan group of Senators in introducing the Clean Power Act of 2001.
Our legislation will reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide from electric power generators, including coal-burning power plants in the Midwest. These pollutants contribute to our state's air pollution, and U.S. carbon dioxide emissions need to be reduced to help curb global climate change. The President's blueprint includes a welcome call for reductions in sulfer dioxide (SO2), carbon dioxide (CO2) and mercury, and I will encourage him to support reduction of carbon dioxide emissions in his upcoming Climate Change Task Force proposal as well.
Among his recommendations, the President offers renewable and alternative fuels as "hope for America's energy future." The blueprint outlines extended and expanded tax credits for electricity produced using solar, wind and biomass. Under these guidelines, taxpayers who make use of solar energy in their homes, for instance, would be eligible for a new 15 percent tax credit up to a maximum of $2,000.
I applaud efforts to encourage use of renewable or alternative sources, and have led Senate efforts to encourage increased appropriations, research and development of these sources of power. For example, I recently cosponsored legislation with Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) which would encourage the use of the use of fuel cells –- which utilize hydrogen-rich fuel to generate electricity and thermal energy –- by providing a tax credit of $1,000 per kilowatt to purchasers of all types and sizes of permanently installed fuel cell systems.
By investing in renewable energy research and development we can reduce our dependence on foreign oil, expand U.S. markets, help agriculture, improve environmental quality and create jobs. Until the day comes that renewable and alternative fuels fulfill a significant part of our energy needs, we must continue to meet the nation’s energy requirements by the means available to us. And that means our public policy can and must also encourage energy conservation.
Energy conservation provides a means toward solving the problem of high energy bills and power shortages by decreasing demand and taking pressure off energy markets. I have consistently supported this type of approach, and this year alone I have supported a number of provisions that provide tax benefits or raise standards for conservation of electricity and fuel.
In February I joined with Senator Bob Smith (R-NH) in introducing legislation to provide tax incentives for the construction of energy efficient buildings. Buildings contribute to well over half of peak electric power demand in the United States and cost their owners over $250 billion a year. Our Energy Efficient Buildings Act encourages the production and sale of technically advanced, energy-efficient buildings, cutting energy usage by as much as 50 percent -– and if passed into law, could bring almost immediate aid to California’s current crisis.
More recently, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and I introduced legislation to adjust Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards to close the "SUV loophole" and meet our goals of reduced fuel consumption. CAFE standards, weighted for actual sales, effectively balance the most economical vehicles in a manufacturer’s fleet with "gas guzzlers" that consume more energy. Raising standards for the light truck category from 20.7 miles per gallon (mpg) to that required of regular passenger vehicles –- 27.5 mpg -– can both reduce consumption of gasoline, and also benefit with significantly reduced emissions of carbon dioxide and smog-producing nitrogen oxide.
By tackling the goals of increased power production, investment in renewable energy and development of new fuel sources, using tax incentives to spur construction efforts and pledging to more in our daily lives, I believe we can overcome our nation’s energy challenges. President Bush's National Energy Policy provides an important begining for our debate, and I will continue to work with my colleagues, the Administration, and industry and environmental groups to create a plan which will address localized energy challenges today -– and meet our nation’s long-term energy needs as well.
Note: Sen. Snowe issues a weekly column; the above is adapted from the June 1, 2001 issue.
 How to contact Senator Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)
Reading a past guest commentary? Click here for the most current one.
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
