When well thought out and reflecting consensus, environmental regulations can certainly provide benefits to the American people. But when regulations are placed into effect without adequate thought, they are likely to do more harm than good. Poorly designed environmental regulations are and will continue to be a large contributor to the energy problems.
We, as nation, need to rethink the manner in which we approach regulation. We all need to keep an open mind. During the debates on various regulatory reform initiatives, I was very dishearten to hear that these were "sneak attacks on the environment." In fact, it is the opposite. If we rethink regulation, we can be in a better position in the future. We could find ourselves in a place where we can have far greater environmental protection and more reliable and diverse energy sources.
Congress and the Executive Branch must also do a better job of understanding how these various layers of regulations impact sects of industry. For example, refiners, who are currently working at 100% capacity, are going to be simultaneously hit with a number of regulations in the next few years, such as the Tier 2 and sulfur diesel rules. Now is the time to work together on these and other regulations to not only achieve the environmental goals, but also ensure no disruption in fuel supply -- which would cause price spikes.
As many of you know, Sen. Breaux and I recently sent a letter to Vice President Cheney in his capacity as the Chairman of the National Energy Policy Development Group that EPA's New Source Review ("NSR") enforcement of flawed and confusing policies will continue to interfere with our nation's ability to meet our energy and fuel supply needs. We strongly urged that the Administration take into account these concerns in developing its national energy plan. I look forward to hearing from panelists on this critical issue today.
Finally, there has been a lot of talk and negative press about President Bush's decision on carbon. But the press and environmentalists have neglected to give him any credit for supporting a streamlined process, which will significantly reduce mercury (which has health effect), N0x (which is a precursor to ozone), and S0x (which causes acid rain). These are the types of initiatives we need to examine if we, as a nation, are going to provide an energy supply and protect human health and the environment.
As he has stated, President Bush will take meaningful steps to address this issue as appropriate, but not in the name of our energy supply and economy. Make no mistake, the Kyoto Protocol is nothing but smoke and mirrors, which will sink our economy while doing nothing to address carbon concentrations in our atmosphere.
President Bush can not continue to place layer after layer of regulations without any consideration of their energy implications. The environmental community does not have to answer to the American people when energy prices go through the roof (though they often should) or to worry about the national security implications of greater dependence on foreign energy sources. However, the President does.