Full Title: Analysis of the National Academy of Sciences’ Report “America’s Energy Future” and Proposed Congressional Energy Legislation -- DRAFT FOR COMMENT
Author(s): H. Specter, et al.
Publisher(s): RBR Consultants
Publication Date: February 1, 2010
Full Text: Download Resource
Description (excerpt):
Various studies, such as the those by the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration, the EPA analysis of the House of Representatives energy bill H.R. 2454 (See Figure 2), and the recent report by the National Academy of Science’s “America’s Energy Future” (AEF) all project very high levels of U.S. petro- leum use for several more decades. However, such high levels of petroleum consumption would prevent the greenhouse gas (GHG) limits in present Congressional legislation from being achieved (See Figure 4). Further, the majority of the projected petroleum consumption comes from imported oil and presents a severe national security threat. Neither H.R. 2454, nor its Senate counterpart S.1733, call for reductions in imported petroleum according to a specific timetable. Yet both of these energy bills are quite specific when dealing with the issue of climate change: both energy bills proposed a timetable by which specific GHG reductions must be achieved. Both of these energy bills claim to address the issue of energy indepen- dence and national security, yet no specific actions to accomplish this are incorpo- rated into the text of these energy bills. This analysis shows that: Continuing our high levels of petroleum use, particularly imported petroleum, would defeat the climate change intentions of both Congressional energy bills while increas- ing threats to our national economy and security. However, by placing first emphasis on energy independence, national economy and security goals could be achieved as well as climate change goals. The nation needs to restructure its energy priorities.