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.
“OUR NATIONAL ENERGY SUPPLY--RUNNING ON EMPTY” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Energy was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E1970-E1971 on Oct. 28, 2000.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
OUR NATIONAL ENERGY SUPPLY--RUNNING ON EMPTY
______
HON. JOE KNOLLENBERG
of michigan
in the house of representatives
Thursday, October 26, 2000
Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, our Federal Government's approach to energy reminds me of the teenager that has a number of intense priorities--none of which involve filling the family car up with gas. As recent sharp increases in prices for gasoline, heating oil, natural gas, and electricity, and regional fuel shortages indicate, the United States is running on empty and no one wants to pull over and fill up the tank. In fact, running out of gas appears to be an affirmative policy of the regulatory and land-use agencies of this administration.
During the past decade, the Federal Government has actively discouraged exploration, production, transportation and use of conventional energy sources. The sudden increase in energy costs and reliability problems are symptomatic of a fundamentally flawed federal energy policy with serious adverse economic consequences that are only beginning to bubble to the surface. Although the Congress protected the public from their ill-conceived Clinton/Gore Btu-tax early in their administration, Clinton and Gore appear to have achieved their anti-
people goals through restrictions on energy production and use through the back door. By using the regulatory powers of the Federal agencies, the Clinton/Gore administration has increased the price of energy to all Americans. How quickly some have forgotten the lessons of the recent past such as the Arab Oil Embargo of the 1970's.
My district in Michigan has many small and large businesses that support the automobile-manufacturing sector. I am very aware of how energy costs affect not just the economy, but the very prosperity so many working Americans have been enjoying.
Our prosperity, and particularly the driving force of our prosperity, the manufacturing sector, which generated almost 30 percent of growth of the gross domestic product and was pivotal in creating 22 million new jobs in the 1990's, is still dependent on adequate and reliable energy supplies at internationally competitive prices. And the current situation is not good. The loss of 133,000 net manufacturing jobs in a broad range of industries in August, and another 66,000 lost jobs in September, is primarily due to higher energy costs. Because firms cannot raise prices in this competitive environment, they must respond to higher energy costs by reducing costs elsewhere. Despite the high value that is placed on American workers, sometimes they become the victims of bad federal energy policy.
To maintain affordable energy supplies, all sources of energy need to be on the table. Unfortunately, the Clinton/Gore administration has been encouraging only the politically correct arrows in our energy supply quiver: conservation, non-hydro renewables and, as
``transition'' fuel, natural gas. This is an detrimental and dangerous energy strategy. Instead, in addition to continuing efforts to encourage energy efficient choices and develop alternative energy sources, increasing the supply of all conventional energy sources remains critical for sustained economic growth.
Currently, the most glaring policy disconnect is between the projections of natural gas demand over the next decade compared with supply realities. Some of the most promising energy efficiency technologies--combined cycle gas turbines and this generation of fuel cells--require natural gas. Several organizations, including the Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration (EIA) and the National Petroleum Council, predict there will be approximately a 30 percent increase in the use of natural gas over the next 10 to 15 years. Yet U.S. natural gas production has remained stagnant for the past 6 years. Canada already has increased its exports to the U.S. by more than
More importantly half of American households depend on natural gas for heating. The American Gas Association estimates that their bills this winter will increase at least 40 percent over last year, and that is if we have an average winter. In addition, our economic prosperity itself is also in jeopardy. The tens of millions of working Americans who depend on natural gas for space heating, process energy, and product feedstocks, are finding the spot prices for natural gas increasing 2 to 3 times over what it was in January of this year. For many energy intensive businesses, such a those that support America's automobile manufacturing sector, this is a very serious matter. And this pain, this crisis, is largely the result of the Clinton/Gore policies of the past eight years. The Clinton/Gore administration has systematically denied access to natural gas resources and discouraged adding natural gas infrastructure to bring natural gas to market.
The irony is that everyone knows where there is plenty of natural gas, but federal policies do not allow it to be developed. The Outer Continental Shelf and the multiple-use public lands on the Eastern Slope of the Rocky Mountains contain trillions of cubic feet of natural gas reserves that cannot be produced due to moratoria or numerous Clinton/Gore policies and regulatory actions that impede or prevent their development and production.
And natural gas is just one energy source that suffers from federal policies. Coal and oil resources are similarly being locked up by federal land use restrictions on multiple-use lands. Only one new base-
load coal plant and two expansion units have been built since the late 1980's, and none since 1996. No new major oil refinery has been built in 25 years.
We haven't started construction on a nuclear plant in a decade, and no major hydroelectric dam has been built in memory. Moreover, federal policies have actively discouraged continued operation of even existing energy facilities. For example, the relicensing schedule for hydroelectric dams is an inexcusable eight years.
It seems that, for the current administration, atrophy and diminishment are the only energy policies they'll consider, as indicated by their support of the flawed Kyoto Protocol, which would use international pressure to coerce Americans into massive cuts in fossil fuel use. Unconstitutionally, this treaty has never ever been submitted to the U.S. Senate for consent, and the Clinton/Gore administration has indicated no intention of ever submitting the resolution to the Senate. To negotiate a treaty against the advice of the U.S. Senate and to have no intention of ever submitting the treaty to the Senate for consent is blatantly and flagrantly unconstitutional.
Via the Kyoto Protocol, the Clinton/Gore administration would commit the United States to what amounts to a 31 percent reduction in fossil energy use over levels otherwise projected by 2010. I oppose the attempts by the federal agencies to implement the protocol without Senate ratification and without implementing legislation. I thank my colleagues who have continued to support reasonable limitations on the Federal agencies that have forgotten how fundamentally important an adequate supply of energy is to our economic and social well-being.
I would like to introduce into the Record a resolution by the Board of Directors of the National Association of Manufacturers expressing their concern for current energy supply policies. This resolution, which the NAM Board adopted earlier this month, notes that in order to sustain economic growth, this country must have adequate supplies of energy at internationally competitive prices. I agree with their analysis that all energy options must be on the table for us to maintain and grow our economy, and that energy supply considerations must be part of the overall federal regulatory policy. I commend the attention of my colleagues to the NAM resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I submit the NAM resolution be inserted in the Record at this point.
Resolution of Concern Over Energy Supply Policies
An adequate and secure energy supply at globally competitive prices is necessary for the nation's economic growth. The NAM--and its more than 14,000 member companies and associations, including 10,000 small and mid-sized manufacturers--supports the development of markets and policies that provide adequate, reliable and competitively priced energy resources with minimal government intervention. The NAM understands the critical importance of an economically viable mix of energy sources, consistent with prudent environmental policies. The NAM is concerned that current federal policies are at odds with the fundamental need to maintain adequate future energy supplies for the economy and the welfare of the American people.
Overall, U.S. manufacturers continue to strive for improved efficiency in the competitive world marketplace, including increasing energy efficiency. The remarkable productivity gains of this past decade however, have tended to raise energy use. Simultaneously increasing productivity and energy efficiency in the face of foreign competitive pressures has required developing and installing innovative equipment and processes in all aspects of the manufacturing sector.
Despite manufacturers' ongoing investments to increase energy efficiency, and federal and private efforts to develop economically viable alternative sources, increasing the supply of traditional energy sources remains critical in order to sustain economic growth. For example, the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and the Outer Continental Shelf should be opened for environmentally responsible oil and gas production. With respect to electricity, federal legislation should be enacted that would strengthen reliability and efficiency of supply, and facilitate wholesale and retail competition as soon as possible.
Energy warning signs are not just flashing because of this past summer's regional electricity disruptions. Also this year, the United States has been experiencing tight supplies of natural gas and transportation fuels, and the Department of Energy has even announced plans to dip into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve out of concern for heating oil prices this winter. The drastic step of withdrawing oil from the SPR is a wake-up call that current federal policies are jeopardizing economic growth and prosperity.
The current Administration has created an unbalanced national energy policy by focusing only on energy efficiency, natural gas and non-traditional energy sources, while limiting the development and use of other energy sources. There are limits to how much energy-efficiency measures and alternative energy sources--some of which remain of speculative economic viability--can contribute to meeting the energy requirements of our growing nation. Of particular concern is the policy disconnect between projections of increases in natural gas consumption to meet new energy demands, contrasted with current federal policies that discourage the production and delivery of new natural gas supplies. If federal policies will not allow more natural gas to be produced and delivered, then natural gas will not be able to fulfill its potential to sustain economic growth.
By undermining the development of domestic oil, gas, nuclear, coal and hydroelectric power, this Administration has created ``supply-side'' disincentives that add up to what is essentially a policy of planned energy dependence by the United States on foreign sources. Historically, the federal government has caused enormous economic waste when it tries to pick ``winners'' and ``losers'' in the energy marketplace. It has also caused waste when its energy policies are not coordinated with other policy objectives or considered in the context of economic growth.
Current federal policies that discourage energy supplies and distort energy consumption jeopardize economic growth. To meet the challenges of a growing population and increasing prosperity, while ensuring national security and environmental protection, America must fully utilize all of its energy options. The next Administration and Congress must make the availability of adequate supplies of reliable and competitively priced energy a national priority.
As adopted by the NAM Board of Directors--October 4, 2000.
____________________
