[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 33 (Wednesday, March 22, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1541-S1542]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
A NATIONAL ENERGY STRATEGY FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I am aware that some Senators have come to
this floor in recent weeks to talk about rapidly increasing petroleum
prices, and other Senators have raised serious concerns about home
heating oil prices in the Northeast this winter. I also recall that
certain regions of this country were threatened by electricity
brownouts last summer, to say nothing of the difficulties our
beleaguered farmers may face this year and to say nothing at this
moment of what they faced last year. All of these issues raise serious
concerns that affect our everyday lives in every season and region of
the country. The crisis that we have all been witnessing not only
forces us to question our dependence on foreign oil, but, more
importantly, to confront the crying need for a serious domestic energy
strategy.
I remember very well, because I was here, the energy problems this
country experienced in the 1970's. During that decade, we were forced
to confront our energy demands and our vulnerability to the whims of
foreign powers. A quarter century later, this nation is still facing
that same vulnerability. While some circumstances may have changed, the
United States is now importing more than half of its oil from overseas.
This fact, in addition to the potential for volatile market swings, is
very unsettling to me. The United States should not be held hostage to
the capricious decisions of other nations--friend or foe. We should not
have to go, hat in hand, to other nations to beg them to produce more
oil so that our supply and prices in the United States do not plummet
to levels that stifle the economy. We should not have to think of
sending in the troops every time some regional difficulty arises in the
Middle East.
Our ultimate national interest lies with concerns that are much
larger than the current price hikes in gasoline, diesel, home heating
oil, or electricity. Though I am certain that, in time, this petroleum
crisis will pass as most crises do, I fear that, as a nation, we will
sink back into somnolence, asleep at the wheel so to speak. The alarm
is ringing loudly today, and it is time to wake up and address the
underlying issue--our lack of a serious, comprehensive national energy
strategy. That is the underlying issue. Our policies must take into
account our energy independence and U.S. energy security. We need a
policy that buffers our economy and our people from decisions made by
foreign suppliers. It is past time to focus on increased research and
development into advanced technologies, energy efficiency and
conservation measures, and market incentives for these advanced
technologies and conservation measures. Obviously we must also be
sensitive to the environment. Clean air and clean water matter; the
responsible use of our land matters; and the potential impact caused by
the growth of greenhouse gases matters. We should aggressively
investigate promising carbon sequestration technologies. In fact, a
comprehensive national energy strategy must also incorporate a strong
environmental strategy. I believe that we can, and that we should
undertake this challenge. We ought to do it now.
The United States is vast, and our resources are vast. We are a
fortunate nation in that regard. The Creator has blessed us. Our
economy is booming and with that boom comes an increased appetite for
energy. We must consider how much we consume and how efficiently we use
these resources. We possess energy reserves of oil and natural gas, as
well as wind, solar, hydro, fuel cell, geothermal, and nuclear power.
And, some of our most abundant energy sources are the coal reserves
underlying many areas of the United States. We will need all of these
resources if we are ever to achieve the goal of stable energy
independence. It is time to examine the tough questions and to explore
the opportunities before us to increase our energy independence.
This is a daunting task, and its success is dependent on our active
support of a focused research and development program. I serve as the
Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. I am proud to
have been able to provide funding for a range of critical research and
development programs for energy efficiency. I have been on that
committee 41 years; now going on 42 years. I have been on that
Appropriations Committee longer than any other Senator has ever served
on it. During that time, I have been conscious of the need for more
energy research and the need for a comprehensive energy strategy. So I
have provided funding for a range of critical research and development
programs for energy efficiency. One such research and development
effort that I am especially proud of is the Clean Coal Technology
Program. I believe that it was, and continues to be, a commonsense,
forward thinking program.
In 1985, I was able to provide the initial $750 million to create the
Department of Energy's Clean Coal Technology Program. It has been a
very successful public-private partnership. Originally designed to
address acid rain reduction, the Clean Coal Technology Program is now
addressing a broader range of emission issues, including the reduction
of greenhouse gases.
Over the years, more than $2.4 billion in federal funding has moved
the clean coal program forward. I have supported every dollar that has
been utilized in this way. To date, 40 projects have been approved,
with 32 either completed or scheduled to be completed by the end of
2001. But there is a disturbing trend taking shape at the Federal
level. These funds are being threatened by deferrals and rescissions by
this Administration. I have had to try to fight off these deferrals and
rescissions that are being recommended by this administration. A
critical research and development program that supports more efficient
use of one of our most abundant domestic fuel sources--coal--must not
be eviscerated if we are serious about advancing our energy security
goal. We must continue to be ready in the event of a crisis. We have
seen these crises occur before. Yet here we are with an administration
that wants to rescind, wants to defer, moneys that are to be spent in
the clean coal technology program.
The utter folly of such an approach is self-evident. Here we have
been caught without a cushion, so we were not prepared for the crisis
the country is now in. We should have been prepared. Coal cannot be
taken off the list of domestic energy sources if we are ever to get out
of the posture of begging, begging, begging OPEC for mercy.
I come from a coal State. Coal reserves are plentiful--not so
plentiful as they once were in my State, but they are plentiful in this
country. Coal supplies 56 percent of all electricity in this country.
See the lights up here. Electricity is what makes those lights burn.
What is behind that electricity? Coal, C-O-A-L. It keeps the lights
burning in the hospitals, in the schools, in the Federal buildings, in
the White House.
Coal, as I say, supplies 56 percent of all electricity in this
country--56 percent.
Coal has literally fueled the American economy. It will continue to
be an important source of energy for the foreseeable future--and it
must continue to be. I know that there are concerns about coal mining
and coal use.
[[Page S1542]]
Some past practices would, quite rightly, not be condoned today. But we
are capable, as a nation, of doing better, and we are doing more by
improving these practices while also supplying the electricity that
operates the wheels of industry and that lightens the offices so we can
do our work, supplying an important fuel that lights our homes and
businesses.
For years, not just recently, I have promoted clean coal and other
clean energy technologies through research and development. But many of
these newer, cleaner technologies are more costly to bring to the
market. We also need to address the gap between the research and
development of these promising technologies and their widespread
deployment in the marketplace. It is imperative that we fill that gap.
For this reason, I have worked with Minority Leader Daschle and other
Members of this body to develop a targeted package of tax incentives to
encourage the demonstration and deployment of many energy efficient
technologies. I worked with these Members for over a year and a half to
craft S. 1833, the Energy Security Tax Act of 1999. If Senators have
concerns about developing greater energy independence and encouraging
cleaner, more efficient technologies, then I urge them to take a
serious look at this legislation. Clean coal technologies are included
in this package, as are a broad range of incentives for other fuels,
including coal mine methane, renewables, and oil and gas. Additionally,
we have included incentives for energy conservation technologies and
energy efficient technologies and practices in the transportation,
steel, and agriculture sectors. I say to my colleagues, if you want to
help develop a strategy for an energy-independent country, then work to
get this bill passed. It is the right thing for our economy, for the
environment, for trade, and for jobs. It is a step toward a
comprehensive national policy to promote energy efficiency, energy
security, and energy independence.
If we want to have a national energy strategy, we must sit down
together and bring all of our interests and concerns to the table. We
must take a multi-pronged approach that looks at the whole range of
fuels, the whole kit and caboodle, at more efficient energy
technologies and conservation practices, and at the participation of a
broad spectrum of industries and interested parties. I do not want the
United States to be at the mercy of rogue nations. I do not want our
economy to tremble each time OPEC flexes its muscle. I want to ensure
that we remain economically competitive. An efficient, stable supply of
energy is key. I believe that the challenges of this new century can be
met, lighting the way for a new energy strategy that recognizes the
importance of economic development and environmental protection at the
same time.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, could the order standing on the floor
at this time be indicated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from
Alaska or his designee is recognized to speak for up to 60 minutes.
____________________