Energy and
Colorado’s public lands                                

By Steve Bonowski,
conservation committee chairman

As this is written in early December, the President’s energy bill has just gone down to at least a temporary defeat in the U. S. Senate. The bill had bipartisan support in the Senate, and there was also bipartisan opposition. As with any controversial bill, the energy bill generated a lot of “heat” on both sides. Supporters cited the need to decrease America’s reliance on imported oil,  the need to drill for more natural gas as supply shortfalls loom, and a need to avoid further power blackouts. Opponents criticized the $25 billion in subsidies for energy producers and the failure to have reasonable conservation efforts in the bill. Who knows what 2004 will bring for Colorado recreationists who value the experience of hiking and skiing on Colorado’s energy-rich public lands.

It seems there has to be a better way to solve the nation’s energy problems than drilling in every pristine part of the backcountry—places such as Colorado’s Roan Plateau and Vermillion Basin. Two non-profit entities have written at length about the nation’s energy situation and have devised reasonable science-based ways to solve the problem. Note that I say “problem;” both seem to agree that there is no “energy crisis.”

Colorado’s own Rocky Mountain Institute (www.rmi.org), based in Snowmass, has long advocated efficiency in energy use. RMI is an advocate of Natural Capitalism as a path to sustainability. RMI takes the position that efficiency in energy use can yield expanding rather than diminishing returns. RMI advocates that reductions in energy demand with efficiency is better than a total reliance on increase in supply. And, it can be done without setting the thermostat at fifty degrees and wearing two wool sweaters.

The second entity may be a surprise to some: Republicans for Environmental Protection  (www.repamerica.org).  REP is very blunt: the U.S. has four percent of the world’s oil reserves, yet accounts for twenty-five percent of the world’s annual consumption. REP is an advocate of greater use of America’s abundant sources of renewable energy and maintains these are as cost effective as fossil fuels: wind, solar, geothermal, ocean, and biomass energy. REP notes that industrialized Holland gets over fifteen percent of its energy from wind and that Scandinavian countries, not the U.S., lead in production of wind harvesting equipment. Both RMI and REP advocate for fuel efficient vehicles. Foreign manufacturers are far ahead of Detroit in development of vehicles, even SUVs, that use far less fossil fuels.

I encourage all CMC members concerned about energy to visit these groups’ web sites. Feel free to let your Senators and Congressmen know what you think about how best to solve the nation’s energy problems. P