The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“AMENDMENT NO. 4380” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Energy was published in the Senate section on pages S5177-S5179 on June 21, 2010.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
AMENDMENT NO. 4380
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I rise to speak in morning business on my amendment to the extenders package, Bunning amendment No. 4380.
First, let me explain why this amendment is needed. When the Senate passed the first version of the extenders package in March, the bill extended all parts of the alternative fuel credit that expired at the end of last year. This included the coal-to-liquids portion of the alternative fuel credit.
I was pleased to hear President Obama mention coal to liquids as an important part of our energy strategy in his State of the Union Address earlier this year. That is why I am surprised to see coal to liquids deliberately excluded from the extenders package, first in the Reid substitute and again in the Baucus substitute.
Let me be clear: The bill doesn't just omit or remain silent on the coal-to-liquids credit. This bill specifically says that the coal-to-
liquids credit expired on December 31, 2009, and isn't renewed. That is in the bill.
My colleagues probably know that I have many problems with the underlying bill. It adds tens of billions to our national debt and it contains job-killing tax increases. Options to pay fully for this bill by cutting spending have been offered and rejected, so our children and my grandchildren will foot the bill. But I thought that one element both parties could agree on is that expired tax provisions that taxpayers count on--and have been extended routinely in the past--
should be extended.
My amendment is simple: It ensures that the coal-to-liquids portion of the alternative fuel credit will be extended until the end of the year, just like the other expiring parts of the alternative fuel credits included in this bill. The Senate already voted to extend all parts of the alternative fuel credit when it passed the extenders package last March.
Many difficult innovative fuels qualify for the alternative fuel credit, but coal to liquids is the only one that specifically requires reduced emissions. The reduction was originally 50 percent but was raised to 75 percent last year as a bipartisan agreement. I do not understand why the extenders package fails to extend the only part of the alternative fuel credit that called for reduced emissions.
My colleagues who are deficit hawks will be glad to know that this amendment will not add one dime to the deficit. This is because no coal-to-liquids projects will come on line in 2010, so no tax credit will be received. However, if the credit is allowed to remain expired and is not renewed, this will have a very damaging effect on investments in this extremely promising technology.
My amendment is also bipartisan. I am grateful to Senators Rockefeller, Byrd, and Enzi, who are cosponsors. I know that the Senator from Montana, who is the manager of the extenders package and the chairman of the Finance Committee, is familiar with the coal to liquids because of its potential benefit to his home State.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an article from the Billings Gazette entitled ``Crow Coal-To-Liquids Plant Could Be Boon for Montana,'' at the conclusion of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. BUNNING. The article describes the efforts of the Crow Nation to build a coal-to-liquids plant on a reservation in Montana in one of the poorest counties in the entire Nation. The project will be designed with carbon capture and storage. The Crow Nation hopes to begin producing the fuel 6 years from now, but losing the benefit of the alternative fuel credit would be a serious setback. The tribe is already hearing about investors who are now reluctant to invest in the project because of the uncertainty around coal to liquids.
Because the Senator from Montana has a reputation for fighting to keep jobs in his home State, I hope he will support the Crow Nation's request to extend the coal-to- liquids credit in the extenders package.
Failing to extend the credit has the potential to destroy thousands of jobs that are planned in an extremely poor county in Montana.
This is not something that can wait for a yet-to-be determined energy bill. Almost all of the alternative fuel credit is already contained in the extenders package.
It makes no sense to specifically exclude parts of the alternative fuel credit in this bill, with the promise that it will be looked at later. It will only become more difficult, the longer the credit is expired.
It will only make extending coal-to-liquids that much harder if it is delayed to a bill that has not been written yet and will probably be filled with controversial items.
I am certain the Senator from Montana understands the political reality that the extenders package is the last best opportunity to extend a provision that is very important to his home State.
I hope the Senator from Montana will support the Bunning-Rockefeller-
Byrd-Enzi amendment and include it in any new substitute he introduces to the extenders package.
Coal-to-liquids is an important part of our national energy strategy. President Obama has recognized this in his State of the Union Address.
We will never end our dependence on foreign oil until we develop alternative sources of fuel.
Coal is abundant and it is here in America. It is not owned and used as leverage against us by hostile nations.
American coal can be used in a way that both reduces emissions and fuels our energy needs.
It would be a tragic mistake to turn our backs on coal-to-liquids when it is a crucial part of America's strategy to end our dependence on foreign oil.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Exhibit 1
Crow Coal-to-Liquids Plant Could Be Boon for Montana
(By Matthew Brown)
Crow Agency, MT.--A $7 billion coal-to-liquids plant proposed for southeastern Montana's Crow reservation promises an economic boon for the region, but must first overcome economic and political hurdles that have kept any such plant from being built in the United States.
The Many Stars plant--a partnership between the tribe and Australian-American Energy Co.--would convert the reservation's sizable coal reserves into 50,000 barrels a day of diesel and other fuels.
State officials said Friday it represents the most valuable economic development project in Montana history.
``We're talking about one of the most technologically advanced, sophisticated energy projects on the planet,'' Gov. Brian Schweitzer said at a news conference detailing the project.
Covering the plant's $7 billion price tag will be a challenge in the current economic slowdown. And environmental groups have pledged to step in to oppose the plant if it does not include measures to capture greenhouse gases.
Yet Australian-American Energy Chairman Allan Blood said he was 90 percent certain the Crow project would be completed.
``In my country we have a record of people who have visions and dreams and make them happen,'' Blood said.
Over the next several years, the company plans to sink $100 million into preliminary engineering and environmental work, with a goal of starting construction on the plant by 2012. It could begin producing fuel by 2016.
For Crow leaders, the project offers an opportunity to lift the tribe out of poverty. Up to 4,000 people would be employed during its construction. And up to 900 permanent jobs would be created with the plant and a new mine on the reservation that would supply the coal.
``Our kids will have something to look forward to,'' said tribal Chairman Carl Venne. ``Not the six or seven or eight dollars an hour they are making now just to get by. You're looking at $70,000, $80,000--even $100,000-a-year jobs.''
But representatives of several environmental groups said they remained wary. An agreement between the tribe and Australian-American Energy calls for the Crow to commit up to 50,000 acre-feet of water annually to the project. One acre-foot is equal to nearly 326,000 gallons.
That prospect is raising flags for southeastern Montana's ranching community, which is worried the project could deplete precious water supplies.
Also, while the tribe and company have pledged to capture 95 percent of the plant's emissions of carbon dioxide--a main contributor to global warming--environmentalists said living up to that promise could be difficult.
Without capturing those emissions and storing the gas underground, coal-based liquid fuels can churn out significantly more greenhouse gases than conventional petroleum, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
``(Coal-to-liquids) developers have been saying we'll do something about carbon, but they've been unwilling to put it into their permits. It's been a lot of empty promises,'' said Bruce Nilles, director of the Sierra Club's national campaign against coal plants.
Officials with Australian-American Energy said the Crow plant would be built on the assumption that Congress, in the next few years, will pass legislation compelling companies to capture carbon dioxide. Such laws do not yet exist.
Working in the project's favor are high oil prices and the idea of replacing imported oil with homegrown fuels derived from coal. Despite a recent slide, crude prices closed above
$115 a barrel on Friday.
Still, industry officials said the economic downturn has reduced investors' willingness to sink cash into large projects such as the Many Stars plant. Meanwhile, costs have soared due to rising global demand for construction materials and skilled labor.
``You have the optimum oil scenario playing out with prices skyrocketing, but you have the bottom dropping out of Wall Street,'' said Corey Henry with the Coal-to-Liquids Coalition, a group funded by the mining industry. ``It's been tough sledding to try to get the money to build these plants.''
About a dozen coal-to-liquids plants are on the drawing boards in the United States. Only two such plants exist worldwide; both are in South Africa.
The biggest hurdle in the United States will be getting the first few plants built, Henry said. Once those are operational, he predicted investors would be more willing to fund similar plants.
Blood said he was not concerned, noting he initiated one coal-to-liquids project in Australia that was later sold for
$5 billion. In June, he announced a second project in Australia, a $2 billion plant to convert coal into liquid fertilizer.
``You hear about the problems in the capital markets, but what people don't hear is there are dozens and dozens of projects, hundreds of projects, being funded,'' Blood said.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kaufman). The Senator from Montana.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I note with great interest the comments of my good friend from Kentucky, Senator Bunning, about the need for coal-
to-liquids technology. I agree. I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, as the Senator from Kentucky undoubtedly knows, I have urged this technology. He also knows regrettably the other body is opposed to this technology. We have had some difficulty in finding a way to resolve coal to liquids in both the House and the Senate.
I might say to my friend from Kentucky, I am not sure that adding this provision is going to speed the passage of the so-called extenders bill. In fact, I might tease my good friend from Kentucky by saying I think my friend from Kentucky is opposed to passage of the extenders bill.
Maybe, if I could ask the Senator, if he would support passage of the extenders bill?
Mr. BUNNING. Most of them.
Mr. BAUCUS. Again, Mr. President, I am teasing. I ask my friend, somewhat in jest, if he were to fully support passage of the extenders bill if this provision he mentioned were in the bill? The fact is, we are having a hard time passing the extenders bill. Anything we add to the extenders bill is one more additional weight. I do not think that would further the passage of the bill at this time. Rather, I think the appropriate place for coal-to-liquids technology will be in the Energy bill and there will be an Energy bill, of that I am positive. There is a question of what will be contained in that energy bill, but there will be one, I am sure, brought up on the floor of this body to help make this country more secure in its national energy position so we are less reliant on foreign countries to produce energy.
____________________
