|
World Energy® Television presents
an hour-long PBS special.
Hosted by Chris Ross, giving their opinions on the situation are:
Tom Baker
President, Oncor Group |
Larry Dickerson
President, Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. |
Aubrey McClendon
Chairman, Chesapeake Energy Corp. |
U. S. Senator Jeff Bingaman
Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources |
Matthew Simmons
Chairman and CEO, Simmons & Co. International |
Thomas E. Capps
Chairman, Dominion |
Energy.
Whether from petroleum, coal, nuclear, or alternatives, energy
powers the American way of life.
We take abundant, inexpensive energy for granted until supplies
stop, like they did in the Arab oil embargo of the early 1970s.
Waiting in line for expensive gasoline was a huge shock to Americans.
And it was a shock to the industries that depended on secure supplies
of low cost energy, such as the automobile industry.
A decade later, when the price of oil collapsed, industry leaders
warned our ability to produce sufficient energy was being compromised,
but most folks just enjoyed the low prices.
The Reagan administration re-directed energy policy toward a more
market-oriented framework, which resulted in lower prices and greater
industry efficiency.but the last time Congress passed comprehensive
energy legislation was in 1992.However, most legislation involving
energy over the past two decades has focused on protecting the environment.
Meantime, keeping America supplied with energy requires more technology,
expertise and capital… while demand for electricity, industry
fuel and transportation fuel keeps going up.
In 2000, candidate George Bush promised a rational, comprehensive
policy to ensure our energy future. After victory, he fulfilled
that promise with a draft policy that drew criticism from many.
In August of last year, the U.S. House followed suit with a new
energy bill, and now, the U.S. Senate has its version of the first
new energy legislation in a decade.
Both houses agree that a stable sources of energy is are vital to
the economic health of our country.
Strategically, there are many other areas of agreement. We know
that domestic crude oil consumption is now over 50% dependant upon
Mideast crudeimports, and agree that this balance puts us in a vulnerable
position. There is broad support for increasing consumption of natural
gas, the hydrocarbon that produces least emissions.
Both houses want more energy conservation. But changes in auto
fuel efficiency standards are hotly contested, with the Senate wanting
more stringent regulations. The Senate bill is also more aggressive
in attempting to cutting back electricity usage.
Both houses call for a more diversified fuel portfolio, with greater
emphasis on renewable sources such as ethanol, biomass, wind and
solar.
Both houses also agree we need to increase domestic oil and gas
production, but they disagree on how to achieve it. The House wants
to open more of the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge to petroleum exploration,
while the Senate is against it, preferring to put money in other
areas.
Both houses realize our national electric generating and transmission
system needs upgrading. Both houses want more research for non-polluting
nuclear energy and to develop clean methods for utilizing America’s
huge coal deposits.
And both say they are committed to protecting the environment.
But the Senate wants to spend much more money on new bureaucracy
federal programs and climate change research than the House does.
What policies will work… and which ones are ill-conceived?
Sponsored By:
|
