Republicans for Environmental Protection views energy as one of the most pressing problems that will face our country in the 21st century. The issue is not just one of reliable supply, but also of affordable cost, appropriate types, and environmental consequences.

Most importantly, it is about a secure future for America. Dependence on foreign oil is a threat to our economy and national defense, as is (in the long run) dependence on non-renewable fuels. Developing and implementing new technologies has been and continues to be America’s strong point in leading the world’s economy. Our governmental and private sectors need to join together to cause this to happen in the energy arena, as well.

REP urges an energy policy for the U.S. which will emphasize and reward efficiency and conservation, maximize renewable energy use, minimize fossil fuel combustion and air and water pollution, encourage alternative transportation, encourage innovation and new business opportunities in the private sector, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and internalize environmental costs of energy production.

REP believes that a high level of efficiency and conservation in the production and use of energy makes sound business sense, and increases productivity and profits.

We believe in energy diversity. We feel that reliance on just a small number of energy resources, especially non-renewable ones, is inadvisable, and that having a mix of energy options available is less risky for the American economy.

We strongly support the expanded use of many proven types of renewable energy, including incentives to research, develop, and purchase energy from renewable sources. Renewable energy sources are vital to both our economy and national defense.

We support increased efficiency in energy utilization, including the judicious use of energy efficiency standards. The U.S. Department of Energy has stated that by 1992 energy efficiency measures were saving American consumers $150 billion every year, and were reducing carbon emissions by 300 million metric tons – the equivalent of 168 coal-fired power plants.

We emphasize the need for conservation of energy resources, by which we mean not deprivation but rather the elimination of waste and unnecessary energy use wherever practicable. The Natural Resource Defense Council has estimated that, with only a modest promotion of conservation, electrical energy savings in California alone since 1980 has equaled the output of 11 new power plants.

Finally, we urge development and use of forms of energy that entail the least environmental pollution and landscape disruption.

We believe that if the above guidelines are adhered to by government, industry, and individuals, America need not fear a future of energy scarcities and escalating energy prices, or a degraded landscape resulting from frenzied efforts to avert the foregoing.


Part II: REP supports the following energy policies

This section outlines specific policies that we endorse. Technical elaboration of several of these policies is provided in Part III: Glossary and Elaboration.

A. Energy efficiency and conservation

1. REP believes that improving energy efficiency is a key component of a secure energy policy for America. As Republicans we applaud when employers strive for more productivity and efficiency in their businesses. Similarly, we should demand more productivity from our energy, accomplishing more with less, as well as continual development of new technologies that are more energy efficient than their predecessors.
   
   Energy efficiency is not just a short-term emergency response to shortages. Efficiency must be a long-term, routine, business-like strategy for reducing costs, improving workplace productivity, making sound use of taxpayer dollars in government installations, and managing fuel price risks.
   
   We endorse strong efforts to use energy more efficiently, including federal support for research and development on new high-efficiency technologies, as well as efficiency retrofits of buildings, industrial motors, and other energy using equipment.
   
   
2. REP supports the use of efficiency labeling on consumer appliances, and we support the Department of Energy’s "Energy Star" program.
   
   
3. We support local ordinances that reduce use of non-essential advertising and off-hours business lighting and assist in achieving "dark sky" goals.
   
   
4. We endorse strong efforts on behalf of energy conservation. Energy conservation helps control demand-side price escalation. High energy prices not only raise the cost of gasoline and home heating and cooling, but also force all businesses to increase consumer prices to maintain profits. This adversely effects us all, especially those at the bottom of the economic ladder.
   
   
5. In response to California’s energy problems, Governor Gray Davis in Jan. 2001 asked residents to strive for an 8% reduction in their energy use. REP America believes our country would be well served if all its citizens and industries achieved at least that much of a reduction in their personal energy consumption.
   
   
6. All new federal facilities should be built with energy efficiency as a primary design factor. They should, where appropriate, include passive solar design, natural daylighting, efficient appliances, on-site photovoltaic and/or fuel cells producing power and heat, indoor air quality measures, and on-site water and materials conservation and recycling. Federal programs have often taken the lead in developing new technologies that later enter the civilian market and create business opportunities. For example, today’s personal computers are direct descendants of systems developed by NASA for the space program.
   

B. Electricity production

1. A mix of generation types should be employed, with the mix reflecting regional needs and resources.
   
   
2. Cogeneration is an excellent local source of additional electrical energy, and its use should be encouraged to the maximum extent possible.
   
   
3. We endorse the development of pump-storage hydroelectric plants in environmentally acceptable locations as a preferred way of generating peaking power, with the provision that their construction and operation will not adversely affect aquatic life.
   
   
4. Additional development of nuclear power should be a local decision, made with the explicit support of the people in the utility’s local service area.
   
   Regardless of the extent of future nuclear deployment, we need to resolve the waste disposal issue. There are still many doubts that Yucca Mountain is sufficiently safe. Nor do we known how to make high-level waste repositories safe for millennia, and identified so that future cultures that may speak different languages won't inadvertently open the site and release its contents.
   
   
5. Although coal-fired power plants are a serious atmospheric polluter, particularly with regard to carbon dioxide, REP recognizes that they can not be eliminated in the short term due to their dominant position in our current energy economy. We believe that at the end of their useful life spans, coal-fired power plants should be replaced by superior, more efficient, less polluting technologies such as cogeneration, fuel cells, wind, solar, and geothermal.
   
   We also recommend a transition from central station power generation and long-distance transmission to a more efficient system of distributed, networked generation. We support continuing research into the effects of mercury and other hazardous emissions from energy production on the human body and supporting ecosystems.
   
   
6. Although significant technical difficulties have yet to be overcome, we feel the long-term potential of fusion reactors is sufficiently great that the Department of Energy should support ongoing research into this option. It should also resume research on the "fail-safe" fission reactor.
   

C. Fossil fuels

1. We endorse efforts to reduce America’s dependence on oil, and to find substitutes for present oil intensive technologies, such as internal combustion engines.
   
   
2. We note there are many additional uses of oil other than as a fuel, including products such as lubricants, plastics, pharmaceuticals, etc. These should be considered as important reasons for conserving this non-renewable resource.
   
   
3. Given that natural gas is the cleanest of the fossil fuels, we encourage research into the utilization of the "covert" forms of this resource, such as tight sandstone formations and Devonian shale, deep coal seams, geopressured resources, and suboceanic methane hydrates.
   
   We encourage direct use of gas for space and water heating, and for combined heat and power plants (a type of high-efficiency cogeneration). While stand-alone gas-fired power plants are cleaner than coal-fired plants, they are a relatively inefficient use of gas, and produce large amounts of CO2.
   
   
4. We oppose exploitation of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil exploration and extraction. We do not believe there is any demonstrated necessity at present to take such a step, and it would not address present energy needs.
   
   
5. We oppose exploitation of the oil shale deposits in the basins of the Utah - Wyoming – Colorado three-corners region. The potential environmental damages and water use requirements of currently proposed extraction technologies would be too great.
   

D. Utilization of renewable energy resources

1. We strongly support widespread use of passive solar technologies for heating homes, swimming pools, and other buildings. This would be the most cost-effective application of domestic solar energy.
   
   
2. Solar water heating systems are a simple, proven, and relatively inexpensive technology that can reduce home power consumption by about 25 percent. We strongly support tax credits for homeowners and businesses that either retrofit these systems in existing buildings or incorporate them in new structures.
   
   
3. The use of photovoltaic (PV) cells should be encouraged wherever practicable. We strongly urge the Department of Energy to increase its research and development support towards making PV technology more easily manufactured, more cost effective, and more widely available.
   
   
4. The federal government should help reduce the price of photovoltaic arrays and fuel cells by buying these items in bulk for federal buildings and military facilities. The U.S. Postal Service distribution center in Anchorage, for example, has installed a 1-megawatt fuel cell that provides the facility with both power and heat.
   
   
5. As with photovoltaic cells, we encourage greater Department of Energy support for speeding the widespread development and commercialization of fuel cell technology.
   
   
6. Expanded use of wind energy is encouraged, with the provision that all such installations utilize effective techniques to minimize noise and bird mortality.
   
   
7. We endorse greater use of pump-storage hydroelectric plants (see above under "Electricity production").
   
   
8. There should be provisions in federal law requiring power grids to purchase excess energy generated by photovoltaics, fuel cells, and other renewable sources in private homes and businesses that generate in relatively small quantities.
   
   
9. We endorse tax credits for individuals and businesses purchasing or installing solar energy systems, fuel cells, alternative fuel vehicles, and energy efficiency measures.
   

E. Energy use in transportation

1. New vehicles that continue to use internal combustion engines must be made more efficient. REP supports the establishment and enforcement of increasingly strict CAFE (fleet fuel efficiency) standards for cars (including SUV’s) and light trucks.
   
   
2. The production and employment of low emission vehicles (LEVs) should be emphasized. Continued research and development on fuel cell power plants should be encouraged. The Department of Energy should support research into LEV technologies.
   
   
3. REP supports state and federal funding in support of mass transit systems in our major metropolitan areas, particularly systems that will serve commuters. We endorse a reasonable percentage of federal gas tax monies being allocated for this purpose. Here, too, the federal government should be helping to drive down prices and build markets by buying LEV vehicles.
   

Colin Campbell and Jean Leherrére, "The End of Cheap Oil", Scientific American, March 1998.

---

© 2001 REP America (Republicans for Environmental Protection)
This paper was written by REP director Philip R. Pryde, Ph.D., with input from REP Policy Director Jim DiPeso and REP Director Vince Williams.