http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/front/1380276 Important Exerpts: ------------- After a six-week partisan struggle, a breakthrough was achieved when Democrats caved in to the demands of <b>Sen. Phil Gramm</b>. The Texas Republican had held the energy bill's tax provisions hostage by threatening to tack on a permanent repeal of the estate tax. ---------------- In August, the House passed a very different energy plan that parallels President Bush's energy strategy. Unlike the Senate bill, which focuses on energy conservation, the House measure promotes oil, gas, coal and nuclear energy production. ----------------- And House GOP leaders, with help from labor unions, included a provision allowing oil exploration in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a cornerstone of the president's energy plan. The Senate, by contrast, killed attempts by Republicans to add a similar provision to its version of the bill. ------------------ This week, the Senate could take up a variety of pending issues, including attempts to strip provisions that would require more <b>clean-burning ethanol in gasoline</b>. Senators may also revisit the debate over passenger vehicle fuel efficiency. Last month, senators from big auto manufacturing states killed provisions that would have required automakers to produce more fuel-efficient cars, SUVs, minivans and light trucks. ---------------------- My comments First excerpt: I hate politics. Its like a freaking pissing contest. Second. I think energy conservation is a good thing, but I like TV too. It seems the Senate bill is an environmental bill and the House is a energy only bill. Hopefully, a compromise can be found, but see comments on first excerpt. I think a good energy bill will supplement energy production measures with energy conservation. third. Don't know much about area or the environmental impact it would have, but worth putting the excerpt out there hoping someone knows something more. I am interested in the science, not the "Not in my backyard" arguments. Fourth. The article doesn't mention that ethanol production isn't very efficient now. It is debatable if the environmental impact of ethanol production is small enough to be offset by fact that it will reduce car emissions. I think in some areas, ethanol is highly environmentallyu friendly, but in others...not so much so. I believe ethanol is the way of the future for cleaner, but will require funding to make it more profitable to be environmentally efficient to produce ethanol on consistently in most States (small states with limited feedstocks will be very dificult). Without it this, I see it as democrats catering to lobbies that support them and not an active environmental solution. If this bill contains a provision helping the ethanol plants, I apologize to legislators.
