home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=92TT1267>
- <title>
- June 08, 1992: An Energetic Compromise
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1992
- June 08, 1992 The Balkans
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- THE WEEK, Page 24
- NATION
- An Energetic Compromise
- </hdr><body>
- <p>The House votes thumbs up on a comprehensive energy bill
- </p>
- <p> The Energy Bill approved by the House last week had something
- for everyone to hate. Conservationists didn't like the
- streamlined rules for approving new nuclear power plants, or the
- absence of stricter fuel-economy standards for cars.
- Conservatives were bugged by the banning until 2002 of new
- offshore oil drilling along most of the U.S. coast. But there
- was something for every interest group to love as well, and
- while nobody was entirely satisfied with the patchwork that
- finally emerged from committee, the legislation sailed through
- in the end.
- </p>
- <p> Environmentalists probably had the most to celebrate. The
- House bill not only bars new offshore drilling for the next
- decade but also offers incentives for companies that develop
- alternative, renewable energy sources like solar and wind power.
- It requires the government to buy vehicles that run on
- non-gasoline fuels, including natural gas and electricity, and
- promotes energy-saving standards for private construction,
- appliances, electric motors and lights. Like the Senate version,
- it does not permit oil exploration in the Arctic National
- Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, which President Bush had wanted to
- allow.
- </p>
- <p> Some probusiness sections of the bill are at least
- palatable to environmentalists as well. One provision that
- reduces the regulatory barriers to construction of natural-gas
- pipelines pleased the gas companies but also promised increased
- use of this relatively clean energy source. Even the
- nuke-licensing provisions are less threatening than they seem:
- although it would take fewer steps to get a nuclear power plant
- licensed, antinuclear sentiment still runs strong, and the
- prospect of any new plants in the foreseeable future is nil.
- </p>
- <p> One thing the bill avoided was any strong action to deal
- with the nation's excessive appetite for oil. Besides avoiding
- new auto standards, it neither raises gasoline taxes nor forces
- oil companies to pay for expanding the Strategic Petroleum
- Reserve to reduce reliance on foreign oil. That made
- environmentalists cringe, but also made the House and Senate
- energy bills compatible; the final legislation could become law
- by summer's end.
- </p>
-
- </body></article>
- </text>
-
-