The Senate Energy Bill passed on June 22 did not go far enough to reduce our oil dependence or address global warming pollution—but it was a very important step in the right direction. In all, this bill was a strong start that the House of Representatives must build on to create a genuinely clean Energy Bill.

Here is how things stand on the core issues of this bill:

Cleaner Cars & Fuel Economy

THE GOOD: the Senate passed a substantial increase to the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standard of the nations' fleet of cars and trucks for the first time in more than 30 years—setting a target of 35 miles per gallon by 2020. The fact that a majority of the Senate supported an actual fuel economy miles per gallon number is a huge step, especially considering that for a generation, all legislative efforts to improve CAFE standards have failed. Further, efforts to reduce the 35 miles per gallon target, or to undermine state or federal authority to regulate global warming pollution from autos, has been shut down in the Senate and during the House committee process.

THE BAD: The Senate bill does not guarantee the 35 miles per gallon outcome in 2020 since the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the discretion to lower the standard. A bad administration could set interim standards in a way that could guarantee this discretion will be used. Thus far, House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman John Dingell (D-MI) has not included any fuel economy proposal in his version of the Energy Bill, and may attempt to try and exclude a vote on increasing fuel economy standards on the floor. Additionally, a weak fuel economy bill (H.R. 2927) akin to the defeated proposal by Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) has been introduced in the House by Representatives Baron Hill (D-IN) and Lee Terry (R-NE).

THE FINAL VOTES: The strong, guaranteed standards of the Fuel Economy Reform Act (H.R. 1506), already cosponsored by 144 House members, should be the language adopted in the House Energy Bill. Any weak substitutes akin to the Levin proposal should be rejected. Any efforts on the House floor to undermine or delay state or federal authority to regulate global warming pollution from vehicles should be similarly rejected.

Clean, Renewable Energy

THE GOOD: With 50 senators signing a letter endorsing a strong federal renewable electricity standard, it is likely the Senate would have passed a renewable standard had a vote occurred. Senator Jeff Bingaman’s (D-NM) standard, which he introduced as an amendment to the bi-partisan energy bill he moved out of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, would have required utilities to produce 15 percent of their electricity from clean, renewable sources such as wind, solar, and biomass by 2020.

THE BAD: Opponents of the bill used procedural maneuvering to block a vote on the renewable standard in the Senate. A small group of Republican senators denied a request for unanimous consent to vote on Senator Bingaman’s renewable standard. As in the Senate, there is currently no renewable energy standard in the House version of the Energy Bill.

THE FINAL VOTES: A “clean” renewable energy standard (a standard excluding coal or nuclear power) should be voted on and passed into this energy bill. H.R. 969, calling for 20 percent renewable electricity by 2020, has 121 cosponsors, and should be included in the Energy Bill. In prior sessions of Congress, the Senate has passed a renewable standard three times, only to be defeated in the House. However, many newly elected members of Congress campaigned in favor of renewable energy, and with new leadership in the House and a high level of public support for renewable energy, we are more hopeful than ever that the House will finally pass this critical legislation.

Smart Biofuels as Part of the Climate Solution

THE GOOD: Efforts to include a production mandate, loan guarantees, and tax incentives for liquid coal were all defeated in the Senate Energy Bill—leaving the final version clean of any promotion of this climate unfriendly fuel. The Senate also agreed to increase the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) mandate to a sevenfold increase over current production of ethanol—36 billion gallons a year by 2022. While that in itself is not necessarily a good thing, they did agree that 17 billion gallons must be “advanced biofuels,” meaning non-corn based. Also amendments were added to reduce the effects on land from biofuel production and prevent "backsliding" on air quality from ethanol plants. Further, the bill does require ethanol produced to satisfy the RFS to have 20 percent lower carbon emissions than gasoline. Click here for more information about smart biofuels.

THE BAD: The RFS legislation passed by the Senate is better than the original version, but is by no means perfect. While the emissions goal language is positive, it still has no method to actually track total global warming emissions akin to California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard. No RFS was included in the House version of the Energy Bill during the committee process.

THE FINAL VOTES: Biofuels—energy produced from organic matter like corn-based ethanol—can play a positive role in our fuel future, but only if we guarantee that their environmental and health effects aren't worse than the fuels we use now. The House should follow the Senate’s lead and keep liquid coal out of the Energy Bill entirely. This dirty fuel would produce nearly twice the global warming pollution of gasoline, setting us back decades in our work to curb climate change. The House should pass a RFS that better safeguards against the potential adverse health, agricultural, and ecosystem effects of unsustainable biofuels development and mandates a full life-cycle tracking of global warming pollution from biofuels from seed to tailpipe.

Economy-Wide Cuts in Global Warming Pollution

Scientists tell us we have a good chance of avoiding dangerous climate change if we cut U.S. global warming emissions at least 80 percent by mid century. If included in the final Energy Bill, the clean energy and efficiency provisions outline above will be a critical first step towards reaching this goal. Unfortunately, it won’t be enough.

In addition to strong fuel economy, renewable energy, and smart biofuels legislation, Congress must pass an economy-wide cap on global warming pollution.

The Senate Energy Bill excluded any economy-wide cap on emissions, and the House Energy and Commerce Committee also failed to include such a provision on its version of the bill. Therefore, we do not expect this Energy Bill to include such a provision.

However, leadership in both chambers have agreed to address the need for an economy-wide global warming emission reduction policy in the coming months, separately from this debate on energy legislation. We will be contacting activists this fall to urge their senators and representative to pass this critical legislation.