A ‘Dirty’ Energy Policy
The new administration’s idea of energy policy is to drill for oil on federally protected lands and promote the use of coal in power generation. President Bush has abandoned his campaign pledge to reduce carbon dioxide pollution and is proposing to make steep cuts in federal funding for research in energy efficiency and the development of solar, wind and other renewable sources of energy. This is a business plan for big oil and the coal industry, not a credible energy policy.
To build support for his plan, drawn up by Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force and scheduled for release next month, Bush warned of an impending energy supply crisis. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham also told a Chamber of Commerce energy conference Monday, “America faces a major energy supply crisis over the next two decades.”
The word “supply” is key here because it is the focus of Bush’s energy plan. He wants to open the Alaska Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other protected areas to oil and gas exploration and boost the use of coal in power generation. But, aside from paying lip service to energy conservation, Bush is ignoring the demand side of the energy equation, where substantial and relatively quick solutions can be found. In fact, acting in the name of fiscal discipline, the White House is asking the Energy Department to cut as much as half of its $1.1-billion budget for energy efficiency research and the development of alternative energy sources. The Bush administration also may ease half a dozen new efficiency standards that the Clinton administration issued at the end of its term, for air conditioners, refrigerators, washing machines, water heaters and lightbulbs. Those standards--including more efficient compressors, better insulation and new cooling technology--are to be phased in over the next four years.
Energy efficiency, born of the oil crises of the 1970s, is one of America’s true success stories. New construction technology makes some windows as energy-efficient as walls. Appliances use two-thirds less power than they used to. The cost of power generated by wind and solar cells has come down to levels where it can compete with gas-generated electricity.
The technology for new air conditioners--which consume 28% of California’s peak demand for electricity--would save enough energy to help avoid the construction of 11 large power plants on the West Coast and 120 such plants nationwide by 2010, when almost all the old-technology air conditioners would presumably have been replaced. Added up, the energy savings under all six standards would by 2010 be big enough to light all American homes for two years, says Dan Reicher, former head of the Energy Department’s efficiency and renewable energy program.
Energy conservation has been so successful that it nearly matches oil as the No. 2 energy “source.” Federal funding for efficiency and renewable energy programs must remain intact. If Bush doesn’t do it--Secretary Abraham, who once wanted the Energy Department abolished, certainly won’t--it will be up to Congress.
