|
| |
Promoting New Energy in D.C.
New Energy Movement vice president, Steve Kaplan, recently returned
from spending a month and a half briefing various Congressional offices
regarding new energy technologies and promoting legislation that would support
new energy.
by Steve
Kaplan
for Infinite Energy
magazine
Joel Garbon, left, President of the New
Energy Movement, converses with Steve Kaplan, Vice President and
Executive Director of the New Energy Movement. Both are
founding members of the New
Energy Congress. Kaplan has had years of experience in
public policy-making, which included serving as a legislative aide
for former Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, one of the early
pioneers in the environmental movement.
Photo by Sterling D. Allan (Ref.) |
|
|
|
WASHINGTON, DC, USA -- From January 9, 2007 to February 14, 2007, I worked in
Washington, D.C. on behalf of the New Energy Movement to educate Congressional
aides about the realities of new energy R&D and our legislative initiative
to increase support for the field. What follows is my report on what occurred,
what was and was not achieved and what needs to be done in the future.
First, a few words of introduction to set the background and context for the
trip.
For some time it has been clear to all working in the new energy field that
progress
has been impeded by the lack of capital from both private and public sources.
There has been an ongoing effort to raise private capital. To launch a public
initiative, the leadership of NEM, working with other leaders in the new energy
field, drafted the Energy Innovation Act of 2007, which sets up an Office of
Energy Innovation with a mandate to provide grants and loan guarantees to new
energy scientists and inventors. The bill provided for a citizen review process
to ensure that the intent of the proposed law was fully achieved. (www.newenergymovement.org
see link to Energy Innovation Act of
2007 on home page).
I was assisted in this work by a number of NEMs scientific advisors,
including board member Dr.Tom Valone, President of Integrity Research Institute
and convener of two pioneering future energy conferences, and two authorities on
cold fusion research, Dr.Scott Chubb, an editor at Infinite Energy magazine, and
Dr. David Nagel, an engineering professor at George Washington University who
once headed a cold fusion research program conducted by the Naval Research
Laboratory. I also received invaluable assistance from Joel Garbon, NEM
President and Eleanor LeCain, a veteran consultant in Washington, D.C.
Briefings were provided to legislative aides working for the following members
of Congress or Congressional Committees:
- Senators: Barack Obama, Maria Cantwell, Ron Wyden, Orin Hatch, John
McCain, Gordon Smith, Barbara Boxer.
- Representatives: David Wu.
- Committees: House Committee on Science and Technology, Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Senate Committee on the
Environment and Public Works
In addition, background papers were distributed to aides who could not attend
the group briefing sponsored by the Senate Environment Committee. These aides
worked for Representatives Pelosi, Inslee, and Bartlett and Senators Domenici
and Lautenberg.
The typical briefing included a brief introduction to the New Energy Movement by
me followed by power point presentations on global warming and new energy
innovations by Tom Valone and on the history and current status of cold fusion
research by Scott Chubb.
Joel Garbon and I had in-depth conversations about the NEM legislative proposal
with legislative aides working for Congressional Dennis Kucinich and Senator
Maria Cantwell. We also had one meeting with Congressman Dennis Kucinich. We
focused on the need to provide support for research and development for a broad
range of unconventional energy technologies.
Although our views were heard, we did not end up with the same perspective on
what was needed and the kind of legislation that deserved support. In the case
of Congressman Kucinich, he was insistent that the new legislation he wanted to
sponsor must be technology neutral. By that he meant that it would provide
support for the entire range of alternative energy, not just
unconventional alternative energy.
Senator Maria Cantwell has introduced energy legislation which sets up an Office
of Advanced Research (Sec.501) very similar in concept and intent to our
proposed Office of Energy Innovation. Amit Ronen, Senator Cantwells energy
assistant, listened openly and respectfully to our ideas about Sec.501. However,
he did not agree with us that the new office should not be placed in the
Department of Energy. He also did not reveal which of our ideas, if any, would
be incorporated in the final version of Section 501.
To sum up, we were heard by those who help frame the energy laws of our nation,
and we laid a foundation for further work on the Hill toward getting new energy
a place at the legislative table. Still, very few on the Hill have any knowledge
or understanding regarding new energy. Therefore, our major objective in the
future should be to advocate more forcefully that spokespeople for our still
little-known or understood field be given a chance to be heard at future
hearings to be held by Congressional committees dealing with global climate
change and energy issues.
I believe that the case for our participation in future hearings was made and
heard most successfully in conversations with the staff members at the Senate
Environment Committee and the Senate Energy Committee. We need to follow-up with
more efforts to reach and educate additional members of Congress and their
aides, possibly through events of various kinds (conferences, demonstrations of
devices etc.) we can conduct with allies in the D.C. area.
Some of our colleagues have been arguing we need to attempt to get funding for
new energy through earmarked appropriations. This would be a quicker way
to secure resources than the normal process of legislation. While there is much
to be said for this option, currently there is a negative atmosphere in Congress
regarding earmarks, and more members of Congress are opposed to this
traditional pork barrel way of money raising. Every legislative aide with
whom I discussed earmarking said the likelihood of this being a viable option
was near zero.
Of course, pork will still be dished out in this and future sessions of
Congress. However, the chances of it being used to obtain funding for a
completely new program without an established funding location is highly
unlikely. Moreover, given the record and attitude of some of the potential
locations for such earmarks, such as the Department of Energy, it is not clear
how valuable it would be to send earmarked or directed money to agencies whose
commitment to spend the money on new energy is so questionable.
Some brief summary impressions: I came to D.C. with no illusions that it would
be easy to get proposed legislation on new energy considered by the staffs of
our lawmakers. As I originally assumed, it is clear that far too few on the Hill
are even aware that potentially viable unconventional energy technologies exist.
Even under the best of circumstances, getting any new legislation passed is a
lengthy and challenging task. Given the close divide between Democrats and
Republicans, the persistent opposition from the advocates of conventional energy
technologies, and the ever present threat of veto from President Bush, the
likelihood of major energy legislation being passed this session of Congress is
very slim. I dont expect to see much progress until after a new President is
elected in 2008. Given this reality, the friends of new energy can be pleased
that the work we have done thus far has paved the way for future Congressional
consideration of new energy legislation.
Considering the global energy challenges we are facing, any rational
government would launch Manhattan or Apollo Project scale projects to find
energy technologies to replace our suicidal dependence on fossil fuels and
nuclear power. There is little indication that this will be done soon.
Therefore, we need to push forward in our effort to raise capital and other
forms of material support for new energy from the private sector.
Immense private wealth exists in this society. Our task is to find the most
imaginative and powerful ways to sound the alarm, demonstrate viable energy
options and enlist private resources to get the job done.
# # #
See also
|
|
|
Page posted by Sterling
D. Allan Feb. 24, 2007
Last updated February 25, 2007
|
| |
|
Feed