Senators on Wednesday passed a comprehensive energy reform bill by a wide bipartisan margin.
The Energy Policy Modernization Bill passed the Senate 85-12 after months of being considered. The bill has long had strong support but was bogged down for months after senators from Michigan attempted to attach funding for Flint, Mich., to the bill.
The bill would expedite the approval of natural gas exports, require increased energy efficiency in buildings and increase the research on energy storage technologies. The bill also would make several small changes that aim to increase electric grid reliability while keeping costs low.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who is chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and Sen. Maria Cantwell, the top Democrat on that committee, were the primary sponsors of the bill.
“My energy policy boils down to three simple words … energy is good. And I think that’s what we have concluded with passage of the Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2016,” Murkowski said.
The bill was widely expected to pass since it left committee last year, but debates over Flint’s lead-contaminated water held up its consideration on the floor.
Michigan Democrats Sens. Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters wanted to attach a $250 million funding package for Flint and other cities with lead water crises to the bill. Stabenow placed a hold on the larger bill, effectively keeping it from coming to the floor during negotiations over Flint.
However, Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee blocked the Flint deal, which would have seen the Michigan senators give up a prized advanced vehicle funding program to pay for infrastructure fixes in Flint and other cities around the country. Lee refused to budge and Stabenow eventually relented and allowed the energy bill to come to the floor.
Despite that clash, the story after the vote Wednesday was bipartisanship.
Cantwell lauded Murkowski’s work on the bill in a press conference and said it was an example of how the upper chamber should be able to work.
“The Senate definitely did its job today,” she said.
Senators now must conference with the House, which passed its own comprehensive energy bill in December. Murkowski says the big challenge is not ideological differences but scheduling.
Given the 2016 election year, the Senate will be out of session for much of July and all of August before more long breaks in the fall. The House also will have extended time off for campaigning.
Murkowski said the Senate and House need to be in town at the same time to conference on any final bill, so the goal is to get moving as soon as possible.
“We have some issues that we have some differences on, those can be challenges,” she said. “But, as we demonstrated with the process we have used on the Senate side … we can work through issues. Calendar is a little more challenging.”
Murkowski’s counterpart in the House, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., said he looks forward to talking with Murkowski about the bill.
He noted that parts of the House’s energy bill were included in the Senate’s bill, so they already have some common ground. Among those provisions are expediting liquefied natural gas exports, extending the licenses of two dams, directing the federal government to explore training more minorities and women in energy jobs, and exempting some lighting and ceiling fan technology from Department of Energy regulations.
“We’ve made significant progress toward modernizing and protecting our energy infrastructure, promoting innovation and energy efficiency while strengthening U.S. energy security and jobs. But more work needs to be done,” Upton said.
“Our newfound energy abundance has completely flipped the script, and it’s time our energy laws caught up to the 21st century.”
A top oil industry group cheered passage of the bill Wednesday.
American Petroleum Institute President and CEO Jack Gerard said the bill’s provisions allowing for more natural gas exports would be a boon for the nation’s economy.
“Allowing American natural gas to compete in the world marketplace will benefit consumers, enhance our national security interests, and bolster our global allies’ independence from nations that would use their energy resources as a diplomatic and economic weapon,” Gerard said.
Unsurprisingly, environmental groups were less than thrilled.
Despite the bill containing a provision permanently reauthorizing the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a federal fund that takes royalties from offshore drilling and puts it toward maintaining natural areas, many environmentalists said there was too much in the bill that they could not swallow.
Sierra Club Legislative Director Melinda Pierce commended the senators for getting a comprehensive energy bill through the Senate for the first time in eight years, but said it would harm the environment.
“Unfortunately, problematic provisions remain in this bill that would boost dirty fossil fuels and dangerous nuclear projects while undermining the president’s Clean Power Plan and U.S. climate progress,” Pierce said. “It is clear that a significant amount of bipartisan effort went into this legislation, but, at the end of the day, the balance of this bill favors the dirty and dangerous fossil fuels of the past at a time when we need to move full speed ahead towards an economy powered by clean, renewable energy.”
