-53 public policy debates, and the possibility of achieving economic growth without energy growth will be lost in the next decade. What Role Can the Individual Play in Achieving the Audubon Targets? We can reduce energy waste in our own lives. Addi tionally, each of us has an important role to play in furthering public awareness and influencing government and business leaders. We can examine our states' energy plans to see if they include as much energy conservation and reliance on renewable energy as the Audubon Plan recommends. Does the state plan call for emphasizing energy efficiency? Are renewable energy sources going to provide 25 percent of the primary supply? Are state public utility commissions requiring utilities to provide long-term financing for energy improvements in homes? Are they promoting cogeneration? Do state agencies require minimum efficiency standards for appliances as well as energy information labeling? We can discuss with our congressional leaders the environmental and economic damage that will result from subsidization of nuclear power and synthetic fuels. We can urge them to eliminate institutional obstacles which hinder cogeneration and which hinder banks from providing mortgage money for solar and conservation improvements. We can assure them that they have a valid and important role in protecting the interests of individual citizens by setting minimum standards for automobile mileage and appliance efficiency. (The energy marketplace is hardly "perfect." Most citizens do not have the technical knowledge about energy to act as the idealized consumers who would, according to -54 economic theory, bring the economy to its optimal point of effi ciency. Nor can individual citizens be expected to comprehend the precise relationship to national security of choosing between equipment with different energy ratings.) Finally, we can keep reminding our leaders that the development and use of energy have powerful effects on the natural environment. These effects can be benign or malignant, depending on the choices we make. -55 REDUCING DEPENDENCE ON IMPORTED OIL Since reducing dependence on imported oil is one of the nation's key energy goals, it is useful to compare some of the options that have been proposed for this purpose. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute has listed the following five steps which it feels are needed to cut imports in this decade by 4 million barrels a day (8 quads). First, allow more energy production on federal lands, which hold an estimated 37 percent of our undiscovered oil, 43 percent of our undiscovered natural gas and 40 percent of our remaining coal; Second, develop more flexible environ- Nu Third, reach consistent decisions that encourage orderly growth of nuclear power. clear power will fall short of its potential contribution unless the government soon establishes consistent policies on enrichment, storage of spent fuel, licensing and safety. Fourth, promote--rather than preempt-private development of a commercial synthetic fuels industry; and Fifth, rely more on market incentives to encourage increased efficiency in both energy consumption and production. Public Affairs Group, American Petroleum Institute, November 24, 1980. _/ As for the first step, the claim that energy on public lands is locked up is unsound. Huge areas currently leased for coal, oil, and gas development are not being developed. Only a small percentage of the public lands of high energy production potential are "locked up. 88-213 0-82-47 -56 The second step: With current energy prices there is little evidence that environmental regulations are blocking energy production. We agree that the United States can produce energy and protect the environment but not by dismantling environmental legislation. As for the third and fourth steps, nuclear power and synthetic fuels will be discussed below. Only the fifth step is a significant part of the Audubon Plan. It is interesting to note that no mention at all is made of improving the mileage standards of transportation vehicles. Yet most oil in this country is consumed in the transportation sector (see Figure 3). Were the actual 15-mile-per-gallon fleet average of our automobiles (embarrassingly low by European standards) raised to 40 miles per gallon (as achieved by some foreign cars), 3 million barrels of oil a day would be saved (6 quads). Should the mileage rating of our fleet of light trucks be raised by the same factor, another million barrels a day could be saved (8 quads), or more than half of all our imports. Source: Frank von Hippel in The Dependence Dilemma, Daniel Yergin, Editor, Harvard University Center for International Affairs, P. 95. The potential savings from greater gasoline efficiency dwarf the most optimistic projections for the savings from the third and fourth steps on the American Petroleum Institute list, synthetic motor fuels and nuclear power.* *One criticism of the automobile efficiency strategy is that traffic accidents might become more serious. It is correct that lighter cars can be less safe than heavier cars (especially during the transition period when a significant number of heavy cars remain on the road), but they do not need to be. The Audubon Society will press Detroit and Washington to make sure that increased safety features accompany increased mileage efficiency. Audubon will also work to keep the 55 mph speed limit. |