Bipartisan Energy Security
If there is one issue that cried out for a bipartisan response, it’s energy security. The US is in the absurd position of having our high oil process fund our enemies and those of our allies. What would the situation in Lebanon look like today if oil money had not been used to build separate power in the south? What role has oil money played in the funding of extremist madrassas? For our security, but also for our economy and for the protection of our environment, the US needs a comprehensive, bipartisan approach to energy security. This means a much stronger push towards energy diversification and efficiency, with a particular focus on renewable energy sources. To do this, we need to set ambitious national goals for the percentage of our energy that will be from renewable sources over time, use regulatory tools like CAFÉ standards to conserve energy, strengthen national standards for energy efficiency in homes, workplaces, and in appliances and other equipment. We also must super-charge the development process for new technologies. One approach to doing this might be to establish an Energy Advanced Research Projects Agency, modeled after the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, that would provide seed funding and advance research for energy projects. We also need an energy security czar, who can coordinate US energy security and efficiency efforts and be a strong advocate for stronger measures. Do any of the readers of this blog thik there’s any reasons why Democrats and Republicans alike can’t come together to support these proposals or others like them?
Related posts:
[...] In a post yesterday, Jamie Metzl proposed several useful ideas for promoting energy security. Today I’d like to present an alternative idea that I think can and should gain bipartisan support – a gas tax refund. Many others have proposed this idea, but I’ve been surprised that it has gained so little attention by our lawmakers. The basic idea goes something like this. Right now our country is overreliant on oil. I say overreliant because our consumption of oil provides revenue to regimes that wish us harm and it forces our military to be involved in quite unstable areas. Burning oil also releases greenhouse gasses that lead to environmental degradation and global warming. Most of the oil in the US is consumed in the form of vehice fuel. So, it makes sense that we should figure out ways to decrease our consumption of oil based fuels. There are plenty of alternatives fuels and technology solutions out there – corn based ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, hybrid vehicles, lightweight materials, etc. The problem is that these alternatives are relatively expensive compared to oil based fuel or have other downsides which makes them less attractive than cheap gasoline. Granted, the price of gasoline has risen recently, which has started to encourage the adoption of these alternatives. However, even these higher prices still fail to reflect the overall cost of our fuel consumption. [...]
Pingback on September 7, 2006 @ 11:51 am
cheaptrickiwantyoutowantme
Comment on February 22, 2007 @ 1:54 am
Vse promolchat nikto ne skazhe. Gawain Bernadine.
Comment on April 21, 2007 @ 10:51 am
Ne v dengah ne v muzejnoj pyl. Delilah Anantha.
Comment on May 1, 2007 @ 8:56 am
qzsbhnmb
Comment on June 11, 2007 @ 12:18 am