Why the Senate Energy Bill, S. 517, is Unacceptable in Its Current Form

Under Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's leadership, the Senate Energy bill began as a promising vehicle to meet our nation’s energy needs. But polluters are plundering the bill, removing the oil-saving measures and weighing it down with give-aways to energy industries. The following amendments have weakened the bill so much that as it stands now, the bill does nearly nothing to reduce our consumption of foreign oil, to increase our energy security, to protect families from electricity price gouging, or to safeguard our environment.

1. PRODUCES NO OIL SAVINGS

Won’t Boost Miles-per-Gallon Standard for Cars and SUVs: The energy bill originally had language raising miles-per-gallon standards for new cars, SUVs and pickup trucks to 35 miles per gallon by 2013. It would have saved one million barrels of oil each day by 2013, equal to what we currently import from Iraq and Kuwait combined, or several times the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge’s projected daily yield. But an amendment from Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Christopher Bond (R-MO) (SA 2997, accepted 62-38) removes this oil-saving provision, and merely calls for another study of fuel economy standards.

Pickup-Truck Drivers Prevented from Enjoying Fuel Savings: Sen. Zell Miller’s (D-GA) amendment (SA 2998, accepted 56-44) weakens existing law by exempting pickups from future increases in Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards. The amendment freezes average fuel economy standards for pickups at 20.7 miles per gallon, and “pickup trucks” could be redefined, creating a new loophole, whereby automakers could evade the standards by reclassifying more vehicles as pickup trucks.

2. REQUIRES VERY LITTLE PROGRESS ON RENEWABLE ENERGY

Wind and Solar Power Left in the Dust: The bill originally contained a requirement for 10 percent of America’s electricity be produced from clean, renewable sources like solar or wind power by 2020 (it excludes small electric suppliers, so the actual requirement would be up to 7.7 percent). But an amendment by Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) adds to the exclusions and weakens that standard to require only about 4-5 percent new renewable energy by 2020. Ambiguous definitions may allow toxic mercury-emitting garbage incinerators to be counted as renewable energy.

3. GIVES TAXPAYER SUBSIDIES TO DIRTY ENERGY SOURCES

AsksTaxpayers to Subsidize Insurance for Dangerous Nuclear Reactors: An amendment (SA 2983, accepted 78-21) by Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) reauthorizes the Price-Anderson Act for 10 years, limiting the nuclear industry’s liability in the event of a nuclear reactor accident. Created because insurance companies view nuclear reactors as too big a risk, the Act subsidizes the nuclear industry by reducing the cost of obtaining liability insurance and places the industry on unequal footing versus safer energy sources.

4. WEAKENS DRINKING WATER PROTECTIONS

Jeopardizes Clean Drinking Water: Sens. Bingaman & James Inhofe’s (R-OK) amendment SA 2986, accepted 78-21, weakens Safe Drinking Water requirements to allow increased oil and gas exploration. It blocks regulation of coalbed methane wells during studies of hydraulic fracturing, a process where high-pressure injection of water, sand, and toxic chemicals breaks oil- and gas-bearing rock, thereby polluting drinking water supplies. The amendment could suspend existing drinking water protections of all other oil and gas wells when the studies end, even though courts have found hydraulic fracturing should be regulated.

5. REDUCES CONSUMER PROTECTIONS IN THE ELECTRICITY SYSTEM

The bill repeals the pro-consumer Public Utility Holding Company Act, which is meant to prevent Enron-like trading deals. The Senate passed additional amendments that could even further weaken consumer protections by decreasing the effectiveness of energy efficiency initiatives and penalizing renewable energy sources.