Energy Bill is Low on Energy and Loaded with Subsidies

By: BRIAN BILBRAY - Commentary | Sunday, February 10, 2008 7:25 PM PST ∞

Before adjourning for the year, the Democratic-controlled Congress attempted to address Americans' "pain at the pump" by passing the so-called Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Unfortunately, this misguided bill boils down to a pack of huge subsidies for special interest corn growers that not only picks our pockets but pollutes our air.

If there is anything redeeming about this bill, it's that it contains new fuel economy benchmarks for cars and trucks that exceed what is currently spelled out in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy regulations. These new provisions will help reduce our demand for oil by setting a national fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020.

Overall, however, this bill will do more harm than good. It will cost taxpayers $582 million over the next four years, increase the price of gasoline, and dramatically expand the use of environmentally damaging biofuels, such as corn-based ethanol. For these reasons, I joined 163 of my House colleagues in opposing this legislation.

Some would have you believe that ethanol is the panacea for reducing our appetite for fossil fuel. However, according to a recent report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, biofuels such as ethanol "offer a cure [for oil dependence] that is worse than the disease." In fact, the proposed ethanol quota would reduce our reliance on imported oil by only 7 percent, while increasing our natural gas imports.

But the real pain is going to be felt by American consumers, as well as the environment.

According to the Lundberg Survey, the average price of gasoline in the United States last month was about $2.97. For ethanol to be economically competitive, it would need to sell for less than $1.50 a gallon. Since the cost per gallon for ethanol far exceeds that amount, California motorists would wind up paying more than $6 per gallon for enough ethanol to obtain the energy equivalent of a gallon of gasoline.

Environmentally, the most prevailing argument for ethanol is that it will reduce emissions and help improve our air quality. However, a 2007 report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency states that "ozone levels generally increase with increased ethanol use."

On top of that, valuable habitat areas have already been abandoned and replaced with cornfields to produce ethanol ---- a practice that will only intensify.

Many of us in Congress have been outspoken in our efforts to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and increase the use of alternative fuel technologies. As a member of the House Committee on Science and Technology, I have voted to expand the use of geothermal energy, and authorized funds to establish a research and development program on storage technologies for concentrating solar power.

Sadly, the bill I voted against will do little to solve our energy problems. In the end, it was simply a victory for lobbyists who spent a lot of time and energy of their own to expand the use of ethanol. While this will be of great benefit to the ethanol industry, it will exact quite a toll on the rest of us.

Congressman Brian Bilbray, R-Solana Beach, represents the 50th District. He is a member of the House Committee on Science and Technology.