Editorial: President shucks bid to conserve

Friday, April 6, 2001 | 10:13 a.m.

Stories in two national newspapers on Thursday illuminate perfectly the radical new course on environmental and energy policies that President Bush hopes to steer the United States. USA Today reported on its front page that the Interior Department is considering the possibility of opening up millions of acres of federal land -- which contain protected wildlife and scenery -- for oil and gas drilling. Meanwhile, the New York Times reported that not only is the Energy Department recommending that the Bush administration cut programs that help factories and buildings use less energy, but the department also wants to slash funding for programs intended to generate more power from the sun and wind. All of these worrisome developments come about as Vice President Dick Cheney -- a former energy executive -- goes about drafting a plan to deal with the nation's ene rgy crisis.

Bush's kinship with oil industries and big energy companies is no secret, but it is surprising that he would so eagerly embark on policies whose only sizable support comes from these special interests. There is a shortage of available fuel to meet the nation's rising demand for energy, but it doesn't automatically mean there is a need to adopt extreme policies that are out of step with public opinion. For instance, when Bush repeated again early in his administration that he wanted to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to drilling, opinion polls consistently showed the public opposed this. When members of Congress, especially moderate Republicans in the Senate, also started saying they would oppose drilling in this Alaskan wilderness, the president eased off -- somewhat. Instead he signaled that if he couldn't get his way on the Arctic N ational Wildlife Refuge, well, he would look to open up other federal lands in the Lower 48 for drilling. This is quite a r! eversal from candidate Bush, who kept telling people how he would be a "steward" of the Earth.

Another area that suggests the administration isn't about to offer a sensible energy policy is that it has given short shrift to promoting clean renewable energy and conservation. For example, the New York Times story noted that the Energy Department's spending on energy efficiency and renewable energy would be reduced by 15 percent, nearly $180 million. The newspaper also reported there was talk in the administration of cuts by as much as 30 percent in this area. The Clinton administration, to its credit, aggressively promoted energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Renewable energy sources -- solar, wind and geothermal -- recently have been made more cost effective, making them more feasible. Indeed, the West itself is trying to use more renewable energy, including right here in Nevada. To start cutting money into research of renewable energy development is terribly shortsighted. For that matter, turning its back on energy efficiency regulations would be a blunder as well. But apparently the administration is seeking to derail a Clinton-era proposal that would impose stricter efficiency standards for common household appliances -- such as new clothes washers and central air conditioners. It's been estimated that these standards could improve by 20 percent the efficiency of air conditioning units, which can make a huge dent in energy consumption. Of course, it's not too surprising the administration has cooled to this idea after some air conditioning makers opposed the new standard.

Instead of taking this energy crisis seriously, which would include promoting conservation and supporting the development of clean renewable energy, it looks as if Bush is using this as an excuse to plunder our public lands for special interest groups. The "steward" of the Earth, so far, is a misnomer for the new president.