Congress’s last effort to craft a decent energy strategy, in 2005, was largely disappointing. But at the risk of getting our hopes up once again, we call attention to two promising bills making their way to the Senate floor. Stapled together, they could make a constructive start toward reducing this country’s dependence on oil imports and its emissions of greenhouse gases.
The first, championed by Senators Jeff Bingaman and Pete Domenici of New Mexico, has three main objectives. It seeks to reduce oil consumption by quintupling the production of biofuels — principally ethanol from sources other than corn — by 2022. It would mandate stronger efficiency standards for energy-intensive household appliances, including lighting fixtures and refrigerators.
And, perhaps most important, it would try to bring to commercial scale the government’s nascent efforts to build coal-fired power plants capable of capturing and storing emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas. Coal will remain the world’s most plentiful fuel, and unless some way is found to neutralize its emissions, the battle to stabilize emissions is almost certainly lost.
The other important bill, known as the Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act, was approved last week and is mainly the handiwork of Senator Dianne Feinstein of California. It would raise the fuel economy standard for passenger cars from 25 to 35 miles per gallon over the next 10 years, and — for the first time — would require steady improvements in fuel efficiency for medium and heavy-duty trucks. The debate over fuel economy has been deadlocked for three decades, and approval of this bill would represent a major breakthrough.
The bills need work. There are big loopholes in the fuel economy bill that need closing, and safeguards must be built into the Bingaman-Domenici bill to make sure that forests are not plowed under in a mad rush to cultivate feedstocks for ethanol. This will require deft management by Harry Reid, the majority leader, whose task will be to open the bills to constructive amendment without triggering the feeding frenzy that energy bills usually inspire.
Congress must understand that these bills are not a substitute for a global warming strategy that puts a price on carbon emissions through a tax or a cap-and-trade mechanism, or a combination of both. That essential task lies ahead. What these bills offer is a chance to move the country toward developing the fuels and technologies that will be necessary for a sustainable energy future.
