Posted: 10/14/2003
Energy Conferees Work to Resolve Final Issues
NCPA Experts Available to Discuss ANWR, Electricity, Natural Gas and Fuel Additive Issues
October 15, 2003 – Experts from the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) are available to discuss the remaining divisions among House and Senate energy conferees, and provide insight as to the comparative benefits of each approach. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) and House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) are scheduled to meet today with the two energy conference leaders, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) and Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-LA), to resolve the lingering differences.
- WHAT: Analysis of Energy Bill Sticking Points
- WHO: Scholars from the NCPA’s E-Team
- WHEN: Available Upon Request
- WHERE: Contact NCPA E-Team at 800-859-1154
The major sticking points include tax subsidies for construction of a natural gas pipeline and allowing oil exploration and drilling on a small portion of the Alaskan Natural Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
In addition, senators from the Northwest and Southeast are seeking a delay in nationwide standards for selling electricity on the wholesale market, and Senator Trent Lott (R-MS), who is a conferee, is seeking power plant assessments nationwide for cost of new or upgraded power transmission lines. Yet according to NCPA scholars, forcing a uniform market design on our heterogeneous geography is a central-planning type folly, but resistance to open markets in the southeast (by large holding company utilities) and northwest (by people protecting cheap hydro resources) is equally anticompetitive.
However, the issue that may actually make or break the energy bill is the question of the gasoline additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) – an oxygenate additive to gasoline, which current law requires be added to fuel. The Senate is seeking a ban on MTBE. The House not only doesn’t want to ban it, they want to create a safe harbor from liability for its producers.
NCPA scholars warn that MTBE can be tomorrow’s asbestos and the trial lawyers know this. There are ways to protect against imprudent handling of MTBE today that the law can (or should) already be able to reach, but there is no reason to go after its producers for unforeseeable consequences.