Critics slam policy as compromise rather than strategy.
Washington DC
The US Congress slapped an energy bill, four years in the making, on President George W. Bush's desk last week.
The United States uses vastly more energy than any other country on the planet, and the bill was initially seen as a chance to set out a clear strategy for the country in terms of energy efficiency.
But in the end, critics say, the 1,700-page Energy Policy Act is more of a compromise than a strategy. It has been shorn of many of its controversial provisions, and won't do much to make the country's energy use more environmentally friendly, at least in the short term. But its various tax breaks and incentives may change the landscape of energy science.
In the past few months, sections of the bill protecting manufacturers of the water-contaminating petrol additive MTBE and opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling were scrapped so that Congress could finally pass it. The bill sets no emissions limits and does not change fuel-efficiency standards for cars. A proposal that 10% of US electricity should come from renewable sources by 2020 was also ditched.
In fact, energy efficiency and renewables take home just $5 billion of the bill's $14.5 billion in tax incentives, which are spread over ten years. The rest is largely a list of benefits for traditional energy industries, including a $1.5-billion scheme for research and development into drilling for oil and gas in the Gulf of Mexico.
The bill may also pave the way for a resurgence of the nuclear industry in the United States, which has not signed off a new nuclear-plant construction since 1973. Energy companies interested in ending that streak can now count on a tax credit and reimbursement of any losses associated with unforeseen regulations, although it is not yet clear whether the industry will bite.
Science seems to do well out of the bill, with more than $30 billion assigned to various research and development programmes over three years. But these are really just a starting point for negotiations by the appropriations committee, which is widely expected to be more frugal.
One clear change, however, is the creation of an undersecretary for science in the energy department, a position that many physical scientists hope will increase the clout of research in the department's budget wrangles. “This provides a voice at the table where the crucial decisions are made,” says Michael Lubell, head of public affairs at the American Physical Society.
Related links
Related links
Related links in Nature Research
Related external links
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marris, E. US energy bill pushes research but fails to cut consumption. Nature 436, 615 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/436615a
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/436615a
This article is cited by
-
Super savers: Meters to manage the future
Nature (2007)
-
Showdown for Capitol Hill
Nature (2006)