Aw gee.
Republican opponents said the legislation ignored the need to produce more domestic oil, natural gas and coal. One GOP lawmaker bemoaned ''the pure venom ... against the oil and gas industry.''
What we spend in a day or two to keep, say, Halliburton shareholders happy, Democrats in Congress have just "thrown away" on something as patently absurd as "providing... tax breaks and incentives for renewable energy and conservation efforts."
Now, I admit $16 billion seems like a lot of money to me, but it's a drop in a Republican bucket. If you have to choose between going to war at huge costs to lives and treasure to protect a dying energy source and spending a tiny fraction of that on new and renewable sources of energy, only lamebrained Republican members of Congress from Texas (most notably Lamar Smith and Joe Barton, predicting a presidential veto) would snarl and fight to keep soldiers dying.
Well, not exactly. Undoubtedly there are several million dunderheads who are humming "tax and spend," but who will drive right up the Renewable pump when it becomes available to fuel their Navigators at a buck a gallon.
On one of the most contentious and heavily lobbied issues, the House voted to require investor-owned electric utilities nationwide to generate at least 15 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources such as wind or biofuels.
The utilities and business interests had argued aggressively against the federal renewables mandate, saying it would raise electricity prices in regions of the country that do not have abundant wind energy. But environmentalists said the requirement will spur investments in renewable fuels and help address global warming as utilities use less coal.
''This will save consumers money,'' said Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., the provision's co-sponsor, maintaining utilities will have to use less high-priced natural gas. He noted that nearly half the states already have a renewable energy mandate for utilities, and if utilities can't find enough renewable they can meet part of the requirement through power conservation measures.
The bill also calls for more stringent energy efficiency standards for appliances and lighting and incentives for building more energy-efficient ''green'' buildings. It would authorize special bonds for cities and counties to reduce energy demand.
I wonder why Republicans get so darned nervous about letting go of oil. Could it be that they can't imagine who's going to pay 'em to run for office and earmark their bills if not the oil companies? Will they [shudder] have to find other jobs?
