A new "Manhattan Project:" Energy challenges for the next president

The Brookings Institution held a discussion on energy challenges for the next president of the United States, where Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) spoke about his Seven “Grand Challenges” for the next five years. The 5-year proposal, which he calls “A New Manhattan Project,” includes integration of plug-in electric cars and trucks, carbon capture for coal-burning power plants, cost-competitive solar power, nuclear waste management, advanced biofuels made from inedible crops, green building construction, and fusion energy.

Alexander said that the idea behind the original Manhattan Project, which was implemented during World War II to help America secure a nuclear weapon before Germany, is relevant to today’s energy situation because “it needs to proceed as fast as possible along several tracks to achieve the goal.” Centralized leadership that channels the talent of many great minds, Alexander said, is necessary to the invention of revolutionary energy ideas so that America need not be “held hostage” by oil-rich foreign nations.

While some people feel that election year is “no time for bipartisan action,” Alexander said he “can’t think of a better time” and expressed his support for presidential candidate Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) decision to dedicate this week of his campaign to energy independence discussion. Alexander called Republicans the “party of supply” and Democrats the “party of demand” in reference to their respective solutions to both energy independence and climate change.

Gas prices making us reach for change

Consumers are being tipped upside down by the big oil companies, with money being shaken out of their pockets at the pump. This statement made by Chairman Edward Markey (D-MA), was widely echoed by all members of Congress present at the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. President Bush, he said, refuses to use our oil reserves, and not only is that something that can be done, it is something that should be done. Congressman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) echoed that by adding that they need to put aside bipartisanship and releasing the reserves was essentially paying attention to Economics 101.

Congressman Jay Inslee (D-WA) made an even stronger statement, saying ‘when your house is on fire it is more important to get the hose instead of take out another insurance policy.’ Why is it, he said, that we regulate wheat but not gas? Speculation is driving up prices, and the administration has refused to help us.

And that speculation of world condition is 1/3 of the price per barrel, according to Dr. Mark Cooper, Director of Research at the Consumer Federation of America. America uses 1/4 of the oil in the world, and that 1/3 price is actually $38 dollars a barrel [as of today]. A side effect of high gas prices, is that trucks deliver almost all the consumer goods in the United States, Dave Berry, Vice President of the Swift Transportation Company, Inc, added. The high prices of gas and/or diesel are causing prices in consumer goods to go up, since they are trucked from place to place.

Kevin Book, Sr. Vice President & Senior Analyst for Energy Policy, Oil, & Alternative Energy, summed up the crisis as follows: We need to save energy on a daily basis and quit our oil addiction. This element was not expanded on, and instead all the questioning reverted to whether or not the panel thought that President Bush should deploy the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The answer was a very enthusiastic “yes” from Dave Berry. We’d like the President to stop filling the SPR, he said, and consumers at the pump will see the benefit.