Energy bill, RFS halted in 2003
December 9, 2003
Ethanol producers and supporters were dealt a setback when Congress failed to pass the energy bill before the Thanksgiving holiday, pushing further discussion of the bill, and its renewable fuels standard (RFS), to January 2004.
A week before this letdown, the House of Representatives approved the bill, which would have doubled ethanol consumption by 2012, by a vote of 246-180. The bill stalled when many Senate Democrats and moderate Republicans filibustered on Nov. 21, citing MTBE lawsuit protection as a sore spot. Other Republicans tried to garner a majority vote to end the filibuster but fell two votes short of the 60 required.
"We are profoundly disappointed that America must wait even longer for an energy bill that would stimulate economic growth, benefit consumers, create jobs and set a course toward greater use of renewable energy," Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) President Bob Dinneen said.
The MTBE lawsuit protection would have shielded oil companies that have come under fire from the discovery that MTBE pollutes water sources. Several entities filed lawsuits in September, prompting the lawsuit protection language to be added to the energy bill, blocking any lawsuits filed after Sept. 5. The MTBE industry says it deserves the protection because the federal government promoted the oxygenate as an additive to make cleaner burning gasoline. If oil companies are protected from lawsuits, the cost to clean MTBE out of groundwater could shift to taxpayers.
When the vote to end the filibuster failed, the Bush administration asked the House and Senate to drop the MTBE lawsuit protection from the energy bill. House Republicans strongly refused.
The bill's main sponsor, Senate Energy Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., vowed to bring the bill back for consideration in 2004 when Congress reconvenes. However, some people have said it is more unlikely to pass the energy bill then. Because of the election year, Democrats and Republicans could be further divided.
RFA spokesman Monte Shaw said the RFA would push for a RFS separate from the energy bill, which included loan guarantees to build an Alaskan natural gas pipeline, funding for a nuclear power reactor in Idaho and modifications to America's power grid among other things.
The energy bill would have been the biggest overhaul of U.S. energy policy in a decade, according to Dow Jones.
A week before this letdown, the House of Representatives approved the bill, which would have doubled ethanol consumption by 2012, by a vote of 246-180. The bill stalled when many Senate Democrats and moderate Republicans filibustered on Nov. 21, citing MTBE lawsuit protection as a sore spot. Other Republicans tried to garner a majority vote to end the filibuster but fell two votes short of the 60 required.
"We are profoundly disappointed that America must wait even longer for an energy bill that would stimulate economic growth, benefit consumers, create jobs and set a course toward greater use of renewable energy," Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) President Bob Dinneen said.
The MTBE lawsuit protection would have shielded oil companies that have come under fire from the discovery that MTBE pollutes water sources. Several entities filed lawsuits in September, prompting the lawsuit protection language to be added to the energy bill, blocking any lawsuits filed after Sept. 5. The MTBE industry says it deserves the protection because the federal government promoted the oxygenate as an additive to make cleaner burning gasoline. If oil companies are protected from lawsuits, the cost to clean MTBE out of groundwater could shift to taxpayers.
When the vote to end the filibuster failed, the Bush administration asked the House and Senate to drop the MTBE lawsuit protection from the energy bill. House Republicans strongly refused.
The bill's main sponsor, Senate Energy Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., vowed to bring the bill back for consideration in 2004 when Congress reconvenes. However, some people have said it is more unlikely to pass the energy bill then. Because of the election year, Democrats and Republicans could be further divided.
RFA spokesman Monte Shaw said the RFA would push for a RFS separate from the energy bill, which included loan guarantees to build an Alaskan natural gas pipeline, funding for a nuclear power reactor in Idaho and modifications to America's power grid among other things.
The energy bill would have been the biggest overhaul of U.S. energy policy in a decade, according to Dow Jones.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Upcoming Events
