"We just want to make sure the policy apparatus can walk and chew gum at the same time _ that by focusing on climate, which is an urgent issue, it does not delay similarly urgent consideration of breaking oil dependence," he said.
Lovins argues that energy efficiency and greater use of natural gas and biofuels not related to food could displace much U.S. oil use.
A move away from oil could be speeded up with policies like "feebates" for cars: People who buy inefficient cars would pay a fee, and those who buy more efficient ones would get a rebate. Lovins said such a program in France has been a "stunning success" in getting people to buy fuel-efficient cars.
The Obama administration has shifted U.S. energy policy's emphasis to efficiency and renewable energy "to a much greater extent than we've seen previously," Lovins added. "I think that ultimately will bear fruit for getting us off oil as well as reducing carbon emissions. But this does take a more specific focus on oil dependence than what we've gotten in the climate bill."
A gathering of energy, security and environmental experts brought together by RMI and the Brookings Institution in December produced some consensus ideas for how to cut U.S. oil use.
They said that the United States should reduce the use of cars through increased funding for public transit and other measures; increase the fuel-efficiency of cars; reduce the amount of fuel needed to move freight; and encourage development of alternative sources of energy for transportation.
Anne Korin of Set America Free, an alliance that promotes ways to reduce dependence on foreign oil, argued that the climate bill does very little to increase energy security. She argues that Congress should require all new cars to be equipped to run on ethanol as a way to help break the near total dependence of U.S. transportation on oil.
A recent report by Environment America, an advocacy group, tallied the costs of continued U.S. dependence on oil and other fossil fuels.
The report, based on an analysis of government energy data, found that by 2030, the United States is expected to spend $360 billion more per year on fossil fuels than the $921 billion it spent in 2006. If oil prices rise, the spending increase could soar to $750 billion more per year, the group estimated.
More than 70 percent of fossil fuel spending each year is for oil, and oil prices are expected to rise much more than coal prices.
"The United States cannot afford to wait to break our dependence on fossil fuels," the report concluded. "The cost of fossil fuels to our economy and our environment will continue to mount in the years to come unless the nation takes bold steps now to embrace the benefits of a clean energy future."
____
ON THE WEB:
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy analysis of the climate bill: http://aceee.org/energy/national/WMSavingsUpdate0624.pdf
___
Kevin G. Hall contributed to this report.
___
(c) 2009, McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
Visit the McClatchy Washington Bureau on the World Wide Web at www.mcclatchydc.com.
For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.
A service of YellowBrix, Inc.
