US Senate Democrats last week introduced an energy bill plan they claim is more balanced than a pending Republican proposal that passed the House last August.
Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) said he is committed to debating a comprehensive energy bill early next year but that the legislative calendar is too crowded to consider it before Congress leaves in mid-December for a month's recess. And if Republicans insist on including a provision to allow leasing in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, it may stall the process indefinitely, Daschle warned.
The most dramatic difference between the House and Senate bills is the contentious ANWR issue. The House Republican plan would allow leasing of the ANWR coastal plain. The Senate bill does not.
Bill provisions
The House bill also offers $34 billion in new energy tax incentives over 10 years, including $8 billion for expanded tax breaks for marginal well production. The White House has joined with Democrats in expressing reservations over that measure's cost. Other provisions of the House bill have been heartily endorsed by the administration, however. The bill seeks to expedite permitting, streamline regulations, and encourage domestic production.
The Senate bill does not yet include tax provisions; a separate committee is still drafting provisions to be included early next year. But Democrats said they expect there to be a much greater emphasis on renewable energy. Similarly, the Democrats' latest energy proposal does not spell out how automakers should boost fuel efficiency, but they expect the provision to include higher standards for all vehicles, including sport-utility vehicles. A House bill calls on automakers to find a way to reduce SUV fuel use by 5 billion gal/year over 6 years.
The Democratic bill does, however, include several provisions Republican leaders support.
The bill would permanently authorize the operation of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the ability of the US to cooperate with other oil-consuming nations to plan for and respond to any potential oil supply disruption. The bill also directs the SPR be filled to its current 700 million bbl capacity and requires a report on infrastructure bottlenecks that might impede drawdowns. It also requires recommendations for increasing the capacity of the stockpile.
The bill also would boost funding for federal onshore oil and gas leasing programs to ensure adequate personnel at the Department of the Interior, so that required environmental reviews related to oil and gas production on public lands can be completed more quickly.
The bill alters the acreage cap for oil and gas leases on federal lands so that producing leases are not included in existing statewide acreage limitations.
The bill also would establish an Outer Continental Shelf Energy Infrastructure Security Program, administered by Interior, that would let states adjoining federal offshore leases receive money based on production to fund infrastructure security projects.
Controversial provisions
Part of the Democrats' bill nearly as controversial as ANWR is language requiring the Environmental Protection Agency to mandate renewable fuel in the gasoline pool, starting with 2 billion gal/year in 2003 and increasing to 5 billion gal/year in 2012. It would also ban the use of methyl tertiary butyl ether within 4 years and authorize funds to clean up groundwater contamination. States would also be allowed to waive the oxygen content from clean fuel programs. The bill would also offer grants to MTBE producers who convert production to other fuel additives.
The bill also seeks to integrate climate change concerns with energy policy by establishing a White House office to address the issue and creating an interagency task force to promulgate policy. And the Department of Energy would have to create a new division to oversee a $4.75 billion climate change research budget over 9 years.
The Department of Commerce, meanwhile, would be required to establish a database that includes an inventory of emissions from "significant" sources and a registry of voluntary reductions. The bill would also provide federal loan guarantees of up to $10 billion for an Alaska gas pipeline, provided applications for certificates to move forward were filed 6 months after the bill passed. Democrats do not endorse a specific route but call for expedited federal review if a pipeline application is filed.
