[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 167 (Tuesday, November 18, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H11363-H11364]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          A NEW ENERGY POLICY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, this week we are taking up the 
energy bill, finally. As a member of President Nixon's Oil Policy 
Commission during the Arab oil embargo, I have long felt that not only 
we should, but we must do more to ensure domestic energy supplies.
  After more than 2 years of negotiation, the House and Senate are 
poised to finally pass an energy bill, much overdue. The legislation 
will help make transmission networks more reliable to prevent the type 
of blackout that paralyzed us last August. It is going to reduce our 
dependence on foreign petroleum. It is expected to pass this week and 
become law, I predict, by Thanksgiving.
  Over the long term, the United States must move away from its heavy 
reliance on petroleum for energy. As long as we consume 25 percent of 
the world's oil, while only possessing in this country 3 percent of the 
world's proven reserves, it will be nearly impossible to eliminate our 
dependence without alternatives.
  American production is not going to substantially increase because 
this bill will not permit the development of our most promising new 
source of oil and natural gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 
because of fierce opposition. With opposition also to most offshore 
drilling as well, U.S. production is going to continue to fall. For 
lack of a better word, hostility against expanding our production in 
this country has been a major factor in production falling from 12 
million barrels a day in 1970 to 8 million barrels a day now, a 
substantial reduction.
  Conservation can help reduce petroleum consumption to some degree, 
but it cannot eliminate the critical need for new energy sources.
  Mr. Speaker, a little bit of the good news: since 1970 our GDP has 
risen 147 percent while our consumption has only increased by 42 
percent. The energy bill is going to help us do even better with the 
focus on more efficient appliances, electricity generation, increased 
automotive efficient; but as long as the economy continues to grow, 
conservation is only going to meet part of the need. It is very 
unlikely that it is going to lead to any reduction in total 
consumption.
  As a result, the only real solution I think to our dependence on 
foreign energy lies in shifting consumption patterns away from oil 
towards other energy sources, and this is what this energy bill helps 
us do.
  Where this bill shines is in its support for alternative fuels such 
as clean coal, ethanol, biofuels, renewable energies to make a shift 
away from petroleum possible.
  Mr. Speaker, there are many talented people working on solutions 
attracted not just by government tax breaks and subsidies, but also the 
huge potential profit in store for an inventor who provides practical 
solutions to our energy

[[Page H11364]]

problems. For example, a week before last, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Rohrabacher), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Bartlett) and I and some others met with a Russian physicist who had 
invented an engine that uses coal dust for fuel. It is more than 80 
percent efficient, and that means it has almost zero pollution. These 
engines could allow us to make better use of our domestic coal 
reserves.
  The energy bill conference report is over 1000 pages long, and I do 
not think most of us have had a chance to read it all yet, but I am 
excited about some of the potential it has. However, on the down side, 
it contains at least $20 billion in tax credits for energy development 
and production. This is about twice as much as was in the House-passed 
bill. We are going to have to look closely at these tax breaks and look 
for special interest ``pork'' provisions that should not be in the 
bill.
  I hope to support the bill if it is along the lines of what we passed 
in the House. We need to reduce our reliance on hostile and politically 
unstable Middle East fuel. Achieving energy self-sufficiency is going 
to improve our country's security for decades to come. This national 
energy policy shows us a way out of dependence. I hope we will give it 
due consideration and hopefully pass a good bill as quickly as 
possible.

                          ____________________