March 2013 Archives

How, if at all, should Congress change the renewable fuels standard?

Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., and ranking member Henry Waxman, D-Calif., last week released the first in a series of white papers on Wednesday seeking input on how--or whether--Congress should change the mandate for production of biofuels as gasoline blends.

The Renewable Fuels Standard, which requires increasingly large amounts of biofuels each year, was part of a comprehensive energy bill signed by President George W. Bush in 2005 and expanded two years later during a drive to make the country more energy-independent. Most of the mandate is currently met with corn-produced ethanol; advanced biofuels made from products other than corn are not coming to market as quickly as the law had originally envisioned. The mandate came under intense bipartisan scrutiny amid last summer's historic drought, which sent corn prices soaring.

Should Congress try to fix the mandate? And, if so, what are the major areas lawmakers should focus on? Should lawmakers instead try to defend the policy as it stands? Or, should lawmakers just eliminate the mandate?

Are there other policies, such as a low-carbon fuel standard, that could achieve the same end as the RFS without some of the concerns lawmakers cite about the biofuels mandate? 

27 responses: Dennis McGinn, Amy Harder, Janet Larsen, Amy Harder, Charles Drevna, Richard Revesz, Bill Lapp, Jack Gerard, Amy Harder, Daniel Simmons, Marlo Lewis, David Holt, Anne Steckel, Tom Buis, William O'Keefe, Susan Dudley, David Murphy, Tammy Klein, David Friedman, Bernard L. Weinstein, Amy Harder, Brooke Coleman, Bob Dinneen, Rich Deming, Scott Sklar, Brent Erickson, Michael Canes

What risks do cyberattacks pose to America's energy infrastructure?

Over the past few months, Washington and the rest of the country have become increasingly aware of hackers attacking the Internet components of the country's economy. Last week, White House Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said cyberattacks are now among the top threats to national security.

One disconcerting threat would be a cyberattack on the infrastructure controlling pipelines moving oil and natural gas, or the electrical grid that powers the entire country. Experts say that a big cyberattack could cause blackouts and other disruptions stemming from the country's dependence on energy resources.

In a sign of how integral the energy industry is to the cybersecurity debate, President Obama invited several top energy executives to a meeting at the White House last week on the topic. According to Bloomberg News, the meeting included Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson, American Electric Power CEO Nicholas Akins, and Marathon Oil CEO Clarence Cazalot Jr.

Despite the growing alarm about cyberattacks, Congress has not passed legislation that would strengthen the country's ability to prevent such attacks. Obama signed an executive order last month to strengthen the nation's cybersecurity, but Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said last week that the order was not enough and that Congress must act too.

What more does Washington need to do to ensure that the country is protected from cyberattacks? What are the pros and cons of recent legislation proposed in Congress to strengthen the nation's cybersecurity? How can Washington strike the right balance between guarding against cyberattacks and protecting the privacy of companies and individuals?

Will it take the occurrence of a major cyberattack to get Washington to act?

7 responses: Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., David C. Brown, William O'Keefe, Bernard L. Weinstein, Tom Kuhn, Don Santa, Scott Sklar

What do President Obama's nominees for the Energy and Interior departments and the Environmental Protection Agency say about his second-term agenda on these issues?

All the top Cabinet aides overseeing Obama's energy and environmental policies are leaving, and the president has announced his choices to replace them: Sally Jewell, chief executive of the outdoor-gear retailer REI, for Interior secretary; EPA's current assistant administrator for air and radiation, Gina McCarthy, as the agency's administrator; and MIT professor Ernest Moniz as Energy secretary.

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a confirmation hearing for Jewell last week, and hearings are expected soon for McCarthy at the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and Moniz at the Energy and Natural Resources panel.

With Congress gridlocked on energy and environmental policy, any major progress Obama hopes to make on these issues will likely be done within EPA and the Energy and Interior departments, in coordination with White House aides, including Obama's top energy and environment adviser, Heather Zichal.

What do Obama's picks say about how ambitious he hopes to be in the next four years? What agency will be the most active in forming policy? If these nominees are confirmed by the Senate, what advice would you give to Jewell, McCarthy, and Moniz as they prepare to accept Obama's key energy and environment Cabinet posts?

13 responses: Gene Karpinski, Christine McEntee, Jim Kerr, Tom Kimbis, Kateri Callahan, Marlo Lewis, Craig Rucker, Roger Platt, Bernard L. Weinstein, Kevin Knobloch, David Holt, William O'Keefe, David Conover

As the sequester's across-the-board cuts go into effect and Washington stares down a month's end deadline to pass legislation to keep the government running, what's at stake for energy and environment policy?

Before sequestration kicked in on March 1, the White House warned that the cuts would slow down the Interior Department's process to review oil and gas permits; media reports have said the Environmental Protection Agency's oversight of Superfund sites, oil spills and pollution laws could also be at risk.

Are these concerns overblown? Or have they not been mentioned enough? What other energy and environment programs could be at risk? How will Washington and local governments be able to document how much, if at all, sequestration has impacted their programs, including energy and environment policies?

Washington is familiar with this kind of fiscal fight, with each party adamant its position is more right than the other's. Each time, policymakers seem to come to some sort of last-ditch solution, but no such solution ever creates a sense of long-term policy certainty that the private sector has said it wants from Washington. What kind of impact do these continual fiscal showdowns have on energy and environment policies?

11 responses: Christine McEntee, Jack Rafuse, Kathleen Sgamma, Peter Iwanowicz, Tammy Klein, Jamie Williams, William O'Keefe, David Conover, Scott Sklar, Bill Snape, Kevin Crapsey