The media is abuzz that Bush will unveil new energy proposals in the State of the Union address. But it really is a “dog bites man” story.
Has any president ever talked so much about a problem while doing nothing to address it? The President’s sweeping rhetoric on energy independence, unfortunately, has never been accompanied by serious policies–he actually has cut the funding for the key energy-saving technologies–which is one reason our dependence on imported oil has kept rising throughout Bush’s presidency. So we should take any new words in the 2007 address with many, many grains of salt.
Here are the relevant excerpts about energy from Bush’s State of the Union addresses:
2001: As we meet tonight, many citizens are struggling with the high cost of energy. We have a serious energy problem that demands a national energy policy. The West is confronting a major energy shortage that has resulted in high prices and uncertainty. I’ve asked Federal agencies to work with California officials to help speed construction of new energy sources, and I have directed Vice President Cheney, Commerce Secretary Evans, Energy Secretary Abraham, and other senior members in my administration to develop a national energy policy.
Our energy demand outstrips our supply. We can produce more energy at home while protecting our environment, and we must. We can produce more electricity to meet demand, and we must. We can promote alternative energy sources and conservation, and we must. America must become more energy independent, and we will.
2002: Good jobs also depend on reliable and affordable energy. This Congress must act to encourage conservation, promote technology, build infrastructure, and it must act to increase energy production at home so America is less dependent on foreign oil.
2003: Our third goal is to promote energy independence for our country, while dramatically improving the environment. I have sent you a comprehensive energy plan to promote energy efficiency and conservation, to develop cleaner technology, and to produce more energy at home.
… Tonight I’m proposing $1.2 billion in research funding so that America can lead the world in developing clean, hydrogen-powered automobiles. A single chemical reaction between hydrogen and oxygen generates energy, which can be used to power a car — producing only water, not exhaust fumes. With a new national commitment, our scientists and engineers will overcome obstacles to taking these cars from laboratory to showroom, so that the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free.Join me in this important innovation to make our air significantly cleaner, and our country much less dependent on foreign sources of energy.
2004: Consumers and businesses need reliable supplies of energy to make our economy run — so I urge you to pass legislation to modernize our electricity system, promote conservation, and make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy.
2005: To keep our economy growing, we also need reliable supplies of affordable, environmentally responsible energy. Nearly four years ago, I submitted a comprehensive energy strategy that encourages conservation, alternative sources, a modernized electricity grid, and more production here at home — including safe, clean nuclear energy. … And my budget provides strong funding for leading-edge technology — from hydrogen-fueled cars, to clean coal, to renewable sources such as ethanol. Four years of debate is enough: I urge Congress to pass legislation that makes America more secure and less dependent on foreign energy.
2006: Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. And here we have a serious problem: America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world. The best way to break this addiction is through technology. Since 2001, we have spent nearly $10 billion to develop cleaner, cheaper, and more reliable alternative energy sources — and we are on the threshold of incredible advances.
So tonight, I announce the Advanced Energy Initiative — a 22-percent increase in clean-energy research — at the Department of Energy, to push for breakthroughs in two vital areas. To change how we power our homes and offices, we will invest more in zero-emission coal-fired plants, revolutionary solar and wind technologies, and clean, safe nuclear energy.
We must also change how we power our automobiles. We will increase our research in better batteries for hybrid and electric cars, and in pollution-free cars that run on hydrogen. We’ll also fund additional research in cutting-edge methods of producing ethanol, not just from corn, but from wood chips and stalks, or switch grass. Our goal is to make this new kind of ethanol practical and competitive within six years.
Breakthroughs on this and other new technologies will help us reach another great goal: to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025. By applying the talent and technology of America, this country can dramatically improve our environment, move beyond a petroleum-based economy, and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past.
RSS
Subscribe by Email
Follow Climate Progress on Twitter
[...] Bush must understand that calling for the authority to act is no longer acceptable–He has the power to toughen the standards himself right now. Bush needs to take a bold step to show he is serious. After all, he has been President for 6 years and we have heard the rhetoric in six SOTU’s. The CAFE standard sits at 27.5 miles per gallon and has not been raised since 1990. Last year when Bush called for the authority to improve CAFE, Democrats in Congress shot back that the power to do so was already at his fingertips. [...]
In his State of the Union speech for 2007, Bush made three fundamental mistakes:
1. He neglected to mention New Orleans in any way
2. He calls for the two parties to work together, but first, when Republicans controlled Congress, he had the phrase ‘you’re either with me or against’. Second, his interpretation of working together is having congress pass his proposals with no opposition, and then veto any bills that he dislikes, because if he does’t like them, they are ‘unpatriotic’.
3. His short-sighted solution to Iraq is bound to fail because it has the same inherent flaws as the current occupation. Bush has just seen Iraq in a new cut-and-dry way. To him, and to some of the nation at the beggining of the war, the idea (other than WMD’s and terrorists) was that it would be as easy as going in, spreading Democracy, and see freedom flourish throughout the Middle East, while ignoring the basic, and sometimes more complex, balance of power and Islam, and the deep historical hatred of anything resembling a Western crusade, in Iraq. Now there is a power vacuum, because enough of the population doesn’t support the new Iraqi ‘leader’.
the best way to void all those issues is to find an alternative to oil.
[...] Bush talks a good game on energy security, he doesn’t back the rhetoric up with action. That is especially true when it comes to his [...]
I have seem a lot of funding to the issues, but a few of actual actions have been taken recently.
I think Bush, and whomever is going to take his place, will have a difficult if not impossible job.
Thanks for writing about this, I missed that article.
Good information thank you for this text.