House Republicans Fire Up Energy Debate

By J.R. Pegg

WASHINGTON, DC, June 17, 2004 (ENS) - The U.S. House of Representatives approved legislation Wednesday to expedite approval of new oil refineries by granting greater permitting authority to the U.S. Energy Department. The bill passed easily despite fierce opposition by Democrats, environmentalists and state pollution control officers who believe the measure is unnecessary and undermines protection of public health and the environment.

The legislation allows the secretary of energy to designate any area that has experienced mass manufacturing job layoffs, contains an idle refinery or has an unemployment rate of at least 20 percent above the national average as a "Refinery Revitalization Zone."

The Energy Department - instead of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - then would be the primary agency for siting and operation of refineries in these zones and would be authorized to limit environmental review in order to expedite approval.

Proponents note that refinery capacity in the United States has dropped by some 50 percent in the past two decades - and that refineries are currently operating at near 100 percent.

The last new refinery in the United States was built in 1976.

"This will increase the domestic supply of gasoline," said Texas Republican Joe Barton, the bill's primary sponsor. "We are not changing any environmental law nor are we waiving any environmental law."

Critics contend House Republicans focus too much on the production side of the energy equation at the expense of public health and the environment. (Photo courtesy Oak Ridge National Laboratory)

According to state pollution control officials, the bill weakens emissions control technology requirements for refineries in these new zones and interferes with state and local efforts to clean the air.

"The bill would give unprecedented authority to the Energy Department and is based on the premise that environmental regulation is hindering refinery capacity," added California Democrat Lois Capps. "There is no evidence that this is the case."

The refinery bill passed by a vote of 239 to 192 - the legislation is part of a package of energy bills acted on by the House this week.

The debate over the energy proposals was marked by sharp partisan disagreement over the direction of the nation's energy policy.

During discussion of the refinery legislation, Georgia Republican Charlie Norwood said, "I cannot believe nitpicking little ... excuses that [Democrats] are coming up with to not support this bill."

Maine Democrat Tom Allen told Norwood "if you have asthma, clean air is not a petty excuse."

Florida Democrat Alcee Hastings blasted Republicans for how the debate was conducted - all the energy bills were brought forth under an accelerated timeframe with limited debate.

"The majority has skirted the legislative process, shut members out, and stifled debate before it even begins," Hastings said. "All this so it can pass a few politically driven bills that do nothing to address escalating gasoline costs and have zero chance of becoming law."

The centerpiece of the House Republicans' "energy week" was the re-passage of the $31 billion energy bill that has been stalled in the Senate since last fall.

The House passed the bill on Tuesday by a vote of 244 to 178 - it is the third time it has approved the legislation, which is based on the Bush administration's 2001 national energy plan.

But the bill has been blocked in the Senate primarily because of a safe harbor provision that protects manufacturers of the fuel additive methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) from litigation. The measure has also been widely criticized as a massive giveaway to the oil, gas and nuclear industries.

Workers remove a leaking underground storage tank that may have introduced MTBE into local groundwater. (Photo courtesy EPA)

The bill contains some $24 billion in tax breaks - with more than two thirds earmarked for coal, oil, gas and nuclear industries - and doubles ethanol production to five billion gallons a year. It also contains provisions to increase production of renewable energy and House Republicans say opponents need to look at the bigger picture.

"While Rome burns, Nero fiddles, and that is what we seem to be doing here in Washington," said Illinois Republican John Shimkus, who blamed Democrats for focusing on "little problems … and [disregarding] all the humongous benefits that we have in this bill."

Texas Republican Ralph Hall argued "those who oppose a comprehensive energy bill seem to forget that they use the very resources that the energy bill seeks to produce, the very resources that are now in short supply."

House Republicans are doing little more than "beating a dead horse," said Michigan Democrat John Dingell.

"This is quite obviously an attempt, and has been so described by my Republican colleagues, as an effort to embarrass the Senate into moving that legislation," Dingell said.

Even House Republicans acknowledge that the move is unlikely to work, but they hope to gain some advantage from pressuring the Senate to act.

"The reason that we are bringing it up again is because the other body has not seen fit to even bring it to a vote," Barton said. "We are hopeful that if we pass it yet once again that at some point this summer the other body may see fit to at least bring it up to a vote."

Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham praised the House for passing the bill again and urged the Senate to move forward with the legislation.

"For three years, some in Congress have balked at addressing America's energy challenges," Abraham said. "They should put political differences aside and pass an energy bill that lessens our dependency on foreign oil and secures America's energy needs into the future."

In addition to approving the energy and refinery bills, the House voted 229 to 186 to pass a measure designed to accelerate environmental approval of renewable energy projects.

None of the energy bills debated this week in the House address fuel efficiency, which many believe is key to reducing the nation's dependence on foreign oil. (Photo courtesy Capital Beltway Study)

The renewable energy bill streamlines the process under the National Environmental Policy Act for these projects by eliminating the requirement that alternatives to the project under review are considered. It also cuts the public comment period on proposed projects to 20 days.

"If you are in favor of doing renewable energy projects, then you have to support this bill," said California Republican Richard Pombo, author of the legislation. "There is nothing in this bill that eviscerates, guts, dissects, or any other thing, our nation's environmental laws. All it does is it makes the system more efficient by reducing the number of alternatives that have to be looked at on a renewable energy project."

Democrats say the bill is unnecessary and add the broad definition of renewable energy in the legislation makes it applicable to trash incinerators and hydroelectric dams.

"This bill is the ultimate Trojan horse," said Representative Sherwood Boehlert, a New York Republican. "It is an attack on fundamental environmental policy dressed up to look like an effort to promote alternative energy."

Environmentalists blasted the House efforts this week and said the legislative proposals were unrealistic and wrongheaded.

Debbie Boger of the Sierra Club said, "This not a serious attempt by the House to pass real energy solutions, it is a political play."