Political Parties Strongly Disagree on Bush's Energy Policy
ANNOUNCER: Live from the heart of New York City: this is LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE for Thursday, May 17, 2001. Here now, Lou Dobbs.</s>LOU DOBBS, HOST: Good evening. We begin tonight with the president's formal unveiling of his strategy for solving what he views as the worst energy crisis since the 1970s. President Bush's solution: a sweeping plan to increase supply emphasizing exploration, drilling and development. The challenge now for the White House: selling a plan that so far has outraged Democrats and environmentalists. We have complete coverage of today's developments, with senior White House correspondent John King and Tim O'Brien on Capitol Hill. We begin at the White House -- John.</s>JOHN KING, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Lou, much as he sold his tax-cut plan, the president hitting the road, now, to sell a very controversial long-term energy plan. First stop: Minnesota; the president in Iowa tonight. His message to the American people: look around, see short-term, immediate energy concerns in the president's view, evidence of a long-term problem.</s>GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And if we fail to act, this great country could face a darker future. A future that is, unfortunately, being previewed in rising prices at the gas pump and rolling blackouts in the great state of California.</s>KING (voice-over): Close with an effort to disarm the many critics:</s>BUSH: The truth is, energy production and environmental protection are not competing priorities.</s>BUSH: We've yelled at each other enough. Now it's time to listen to each other and act.</s>KING: In the middle of the president's speech and his 163-page report: proposal after controversial proposal: an easing of government regulations to encourage new coal and nuclear power plants; new government powers to clear the war for thousands of miles of gas pipelines and electricity transmission lines; new oil and gas exploration in Alaska and other federal lands now off-limits because of environmental concerns. Outside the vice president's house, one of many protests as administration critics made their case that coal is dirty, nuclear power dangerous, and drilling in pristine wildlife reserves destructive.</s>DAN BECKER, SIERRA CLUB: The president is trying to misrepresent his plan. He's trying to spread a thin veil of energy efficiency to hide a cesspool of polluter giveaways.</s>KING: The president's backdrop was a model of energy efficiency, a combined heat and power plant in St. Paul, Minnesota that uses a mix of coal, natural gas, oil and wood chips to provide low-cost heating, cooling and hot water. But such facilities are rare, and that fit with the president's message: He says the country has no choice but to rely on fossil fuels for now, while investing in technology like this to change the future. To that end, the administration proposes $4 billion in tax credits to purchase energy-efficient vehicles; expanded tax incentives for producing electricity from alternative sources like methane gas; using royalties from Arctic drilling to finance tax credits for wind and solar power projects; and more money to help low-income Americans insulate their homes and deal with high energy costs. But the president noted that California is a leader in the conservation movement, and said its rolling blackouts are vivid proof that efficiency alone won't work.</s>KING: Now this debate now moves to the Congress, where the president has to deal not only with the Democratic critics of his long-term plan -- many Republicans grumbling; they say the president's plan does nothing, not nearly enough, in their view, to deal with the short-term, immediate energy problems -- Lou.</s>DOBBS: John, thank you very much; John King reporting from the White House. The energy issue has galvanized Democrats in a way no debate has since the election last fall, and they were out in force all day bashing the Bush plan as an environmental travesty. Tim O'Brien reports from Capitol Hill.</s>TIM O'BRIEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The administration wants more coal production? It got it today near the driveway of the vice president's home. A half-dozen members of the activist environmental group Greenpeace dropped a truckload of coal. No arrests, but they did have to help clean it up later. Some of the more controversial proposals, such as opening up Alaska's Arctic Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration will need congressional approval. The package didn't get much approval from Democrats today.</s>REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT (D-MO), MINORITY LEADER: It focuses on drilling and production at the expense of our environment and conservation. And it does nothing to help people who need relief right now.</s>O'BRIEN: Mr. Bush said he was moved by the plight of consumers in California, and that his energy package would help them. But not according to that state's governor.</s>GOV. GRAY DAVIS (D), CALIFORNIA: And I fault the president for not providing California with any immediate relief. California is the only state in America that's faced blackouts and astronomical electricity prices. And with all due respect, Mr. President, Californians want to know whether you're going to be on their side.</s>O'BRIEN: The task force report is a slick production. One congressman today lampooned its similarity to an oil company stockholder report. Check the photographs obviously intended to highlight the administration's environmental concerns. Concerns the president's defenders insist are genuine.</s>SEN. PETE DOMENICI (R), NEW MEXICO: Let's make sure everybody understands what's in it. There is a major, major conservation effort here in this document.</s>O'BRIEN: And what no one seems to dispute is that the document contains enough fuel for a knock-down partisan political fight here on Capitol Hill, one that could consume Washington lawmakers straight right into the heat waves of a Washington summer -- Lou.</s>DOBBS: And a lot of reportorial coverage, I suspect as well, Tim.</s>O'BRIEN: Indeed.</s>DOBBS: Tim O'Brien, from Capitol Hill tonight, thank you. Among the most controversial of the president's energy proposals: a renewed emphasis on nuclear power. No nuclear power plant has been built in this country in more than 25 years, after disasters such as Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. Now the industry is promising improved technology, but critics remain. Steve Young has the report.</s>STEVE YOUNG, CNN FINANCIAL NEWS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): America's biggest nuclear power plant operator Exelon buys and sells electricity on its trading floor outside Philadelphia. It hopes to introduce something new to the American scene, power from a so-called peddle bed reactor. It uses hundreds of thousands of enriched uranium spheres, each about the size of a tennis ball. They're placed into the top and slowly drift down, producing heat to generate power. The reactor is cooled by helium gas instead of water. (on camera): Exelon says its tennis ball fuel would be too weak at the end of its life cycle and too securely packaged to be of any use to terrorists. The company also says if an accident led to a loss of coolant gas, no problem: the reactor would automatically safely shut down.</s>EDWARD SPROAT, EXELON: By designing the reactors so they can only reach a certain temperature, you completely eliminate the potential of a meltdown.</s>YOUNG: You said a meltdown is impossible, so I presume you say this is not safe, or this is safe?</s>SPROAT: This is safe.</s>YOUNG (voice-over): But is it foolproof? Though it concedes the design may make a meltdown impossible, the Union of Concerned Scientists, one of the most persistent nuclear energy critics, is worried dangerous radioactivity could escape into the air. That's because, to save money, Exelon wants to enclose the reactor in a barrier building less expensive and less sturdy than current ones. A second design has been developed by Westinghouse, the company that built about half the world's nuclear reactors, which the company also calls foolproof. It has fewer parts. No pumps, and uses gravity to release cooling water if the core should overheat.</s>HOWARD BRUSCHI, WESTINGHOUSE: That operator can just freeze, because nature will take over. As long as gravity works, that water will flow from tanks into a place that needs water.</s>YOUNG: But government inspectors discovered a cooling system in a Michigan plant that was partially dependent on gravity might not have worked for five years, because workers mistakenly plugged up some holes.</s>DAVID LOCHBAUM, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: The vacuum inside the tank kept the water in there, much like if you have a glass of water you turned upside down over a card, and you removed the card, the water stays inside the glass, because there is a vacuum above the water. Gravity can be defeated.</s>YOUNG: Even if the proposed technology is foolproof, it will produce high level nuclear waste that would stay lethal for 10,000 years. And the debate about where to dig a nuclear graveyard for that waste drags on -- Lou.</s>DOBBS: Steve, thank you very much. One of the president's predecessors today criticized the Bush proposal in the opinion pages of the "Washington Post." Jimmy Carter accused some in the Bush administration of using what he termed "misinformation" and "scare tactics" to drum up fears of an energy crisis. President Carter knows a thing or two about energy scare tactics: it was in 1977 he warned, quote: "Within 10 years, we would not be able to import enough oil from any country at any acceptable price," end quote. But back then, a barrel of crude cost close to $35, adjusted for inflation. Today, some 27 years later, oil sells for less than $30 a barrel. Coming up next: we'll go live to Wall Street, where stocks showed some follow-through after yesterday's powerful rally. Citigroup makes a huge push into Mexico. And I'll be talking with Citigroup vice chairman, former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin from Mexico City tonight. And IBM CEO Lou Gerstner, tonight talking for the first time publicly about his likely successor. Stay with us.