With talks of an energy conference at a stand still, what lies ahead for the energy bill? During today's OnPoint, Congressman Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) discusses the future of the energy bill now that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has said she would like to proceed without convening a formal conference. Congressman Inslee, a member of the Energy Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, also discusses his new book, "Apollo's Fire: Igniting America's Clean Energy Economy."

Transcript

Monica Trauzzi: Welcome to OnPoint. I'm Monica Trauzzi. Joining me today is Congressman Jay Inslee, Democrat of Washington. Congressman Inslee serves on the energy subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and on the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. He is also co-author of the new book "Apollo's Fire: Igniting America's Clean Energy Economy." Congressman, thanks for coming back on the show.

Jay Inslee: Yup, thanks for having us.

Monica Trauzzi: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said that she would like to deal with the energy bill without convening a formal conference.

Jay Inslee: Um-hmm.

Monica Trauzzi: Is this the right move and what will this mean for the chances of passing a piece of legislation?

Jay Inslee: Well, the proof is in the pudding and it's the right move if we produce a bill and it gets through both chambers and is signed by the president. So I hope that that's what will happen. Unfortunately, it appears that some of the Republicans in the Senate have been adverse to naming the conferees, and if you can't name the conferees you can't have a conference. So there's another way to resolve it, which is through the leadership to iron out the differences between the two bills, send them back to the chambers and I hope they'll both be successful. We'd like to have a bill this year. You know, the science of this is compelling, both from the bad news and the good news. The bad news is the ice is melting. We lost one million square miles this summer. Time is of the essence here. We just don't have a lot of time to wait. But the science on the good news is that these technologies are blossoming all around the country. They are now becoming commercially viable. They're ready in the gates to get going, let's blow the starter's pistol and get going. So I'm anxious to get a bill through.

Monica Trauzzi: What's right about this energy bill? What's wrong about it? And how does it play into what you talk about in the book, about America's energy policy?

Jay Inslee: Right. As far as it goes it's an excellent bill. It's not the whole enchilada. It's maybe the first of 10 steps that we need to take. But there are some remarkably effective things in this bill. I was actually very pleased on three or four things. First the efficiency standards in lighting perhaps are the best in the world to improve the energy efficiency of our lighting. Second, the efficiency standard for our appliances, our heating and cooling, remarkable steps forward. Third, and no one's talked about this, but frankly this may be the biggest thing that we're going to do this year, is that it has requirements for building codes around the country, to adopt building codes, to save as much as 50 to 80 percent of our energy in our buildings. And that's where the vast bulk of our non-transportation CO2 is coming from. So this is like finding money in the street, to have energy-efficient buildings, and that's remarkable. In the House bill we have the fourth, a renewable portfolio standard. First time the nation has made a real commitment to renewable energy, big, big step forward. Now obviously we want to marry that with the proactive visionary CAFE standards that are in the Senate bill. So if we come out with those five things; efficiency in lighting, heating and cooling, building, a renewable portfolio standard, and a good, strong CAFE standard, it will be a real success for it this year.

Monica Trauzzi: How have things shifted on the clean energy front since you started in Congress?

Jay Inslee: You know, I've been in public life for I guess maybe 14 years on and off, and I've never seen an issue mature so quickly. I've never seen such a big shift take place, both in the American sentiment on Main Street and in what's going on in the U.S. Congress. And I think what's happening is that -- two things that are happening. One, people are recognizing finally that these technologies are available; solar thermal that just signed a big contract in Florida, the plug-in hybrid vehicle, which is ready to get going, wave power developments, advances in solar photovoltaic, the largest biodiesel plant in the world being built in my state, in Washington state. So you're seeing the maturity of these all of a sudden come in right at the right moment. Together with the urgency of global warming and our addiction to Middle Eastern oil, we know the cost of Middle Eastern oil and that's becoming obvious.

Monica Trauzzi: I want to talk about the Dingell factor for a moment, because he's mocked the House Select Committee on Global Warming. He disagrees with many Democrats on CAFE standards and on climate action. He's proposed a carbon tax now. How much of a role do you think he's going to play when it comes down to these energy bill discussions and the pending climate discussions?

Jay Inslee: Well, Chairman Dingell has a critical role and he's played a critical role for decades in the U.S. House, with an incredible record and we intend to have just a continued number of his successes when have an energy bill that really will take the wood to global warming and deal with addiction to Middle Eastern Oil. And I believe he's going to play a positive role in that. It could be a capstone to a really very brilliant career. I believe he is sincere in trying to fight for a cap and trade system. He has come out in support of a cap and trade system, which we desperately need, that will drive investment to these new technology sources. And I think he understands the power of technology and he understands the importance of a price signal to the markets to drive continued investment, magnified investment in these new technology sources. So I'm looking to him to lead us to a great result. It will not be without angst, people being vocal, arguments. Obviously we're going to have a lot on the CAFE standard about where to put that. I'm in a place where we want to be as aggressive as possible. There's no reason on this green earth that we can't have CAFE standards that are at least as good as China's. China has a CAFE standard way above ours. That's not the American way. So we're looking to a success.

Monica Trauzzi: What are you hearing in committee as far as likelihood of passage of a cap and trade program?

Jay Inslee: You know, eight months ago I would have said close to zilch. But, again, because you had this revolution in public thought and members of Congress, we've got a reasonable chance to have a meaningful cap and trade system pass both chambers of Congress. Now getting it through the president is going to take an epiphany, an epiphany that we hope he will eventually have. If he doesn't, then we'll get a new president and make this law. The country demands it, the science demands it and the technology demands it. The economy demands it. We have just a flood ready to come forward of investment in these new technologies once we eliminate this enormous subsidy to the oil and gas industry of essentially saying you can put your CO2 into the air for free. The fossil fuel industry is using our common atmosphere as their personal dumping ground right now. Well, that's got to end. There's got to be a charge associated with that and we've got to limit the amount of that CO2. Once that happens you're going to see that companies like I just alluded to be the recipients of the massive amounts of capital to move forward. And part of the existing industry will participate in that as well. They're ready to rock 'n roll.

Monica Trauzzi: Let's focus in on the book. You use the word Apollo in the title of the book and it refers back to the Apollo project of the 1960s. Your co-author Bracken Hendricks is the founder of the Apollo Alliance. Are you at all fearful that by using a word like that it's a bit dated you're not going to reach out that under-40 crowd that you really need to engage if you want to be successful in moving forward on clean energy?

Jay Inslee: Well, I suppose we could have named it after a hip-hop song, but we weren't totally in touch with that unfortunately. No, I think people still recognize, even those who weren't alive in July 20, 1969, who understand the allure of space and the thrill. And I think it is a metaphor that endures and I think it's a very good one because it involves number one, a goal and a challenge that we need leadership to do. And number two, it's based on good old American confidence. You know the reason we haven't dealt with global warming is people have been afraid that we can't. And this book, "Apollo's Fire," is a dose of optimism and hope and confidence in ourselves. And when Kennedy went in front of the House on May 25, 1961, and said we can go to the moon, he had this innate sense of America's technological, creative abilities. And that type of character is still healthy in the American soul and it's ready to go. It just needs that spark. So I think it's a pretty good metaphor and we're getting a good response. And I've really enjoyed working with Bracken Hendricks, who made that a reality when he helped found the Apollo Alliance, which was an alliance of businesses, labor, and environmental groups to grow this blue-green alliance which has been so helpful to us in Congress.

Monica Trauzzi: There was a recent hearing in the Senate relating to the green-collar job market and a variety of opinions were expressed about what switching to clean energy to reduce global warming could mean. Some say it might boost jobs, others say it could cripple the labor market. How can we proceed with something if we're not entirely sure that we're going to have a positive outcome?

Jay Inslee: Well, I guess it's the same reason we decided to go to the moon. We weren't sure the first moon launch was going to work, but we took that because we realized that we should be confident enough in ourselves and in our technologies to surmount that challenge. Any new adventure involves risk, but you know inaction is much riskier. There's really two courses for us here; the status quo, inaction, and then a revolution in the energy. And we can tell you the status quo is doomed for economic loss. What people don't understand who argue we should do nothing about this, they don't understand that that course of inaction has been calculated to have billions of dollars of damage to our economy through lack of irrigation of agriculture, through having to deal with rising sea levels, with health issues related to global warming. Not to mention the fact that we're involved in a war costing us $80 billion a year right now in the Mid East and we've got to be aware that addiction to Middle Eastern oil. So there's a real price of inaction here too. The Stern report from Europe helped us to analyze that and concluded that we would save four percent of our GDP if we have a new horizon in energy. So I'm very confident that this is economically viable. And the reason is, is when I wrote this book with Bracken what we found is every time we found a new business and we got excited about them, you know like Martin Rosenshrine, he's an Internet guy who did well. He now is developing a photovoltaic, it's called a thin cell photovoltaic, and it can reduce the cost 20, maybe 30 percent for photovoltaics. But as soon as I meet him I'm meeting another guy who's got a different approach, then I'd meet another fellow like Vinod Khosla, who has a solar thermal facility that can reduce it even further by using mirrors to concentrate the sun's energy into steam. So these people are all over the country and if you get to know them and if you read the book I think you'll come away with a sense of optimism.

Monica Trauzzi: There's a chapter entitled Reinventing the Car and I wanted to talk about Detroit auto makers for a moment. They're very fearful that increased fuel efficiency standards would damage their bottom line essentially. What's the future of this industry if they don't step into the clean energy?

Jay Inslee: Well, someone is going to -- here's the one thing I know, someone is going to build fuel-efficient cars. It is going to be necessary, because the world is going to demand it. Even if the United States did not, the world is going to. We see what's happening in Europe. Even South America is moving on this subject. So the world is going to beat a path to the auto manufacturers who can build electrified cars, who can build plug-in hybrid cars, who can someday perhaps move to a hydrogen fuel cell, particularly in buses and trucks and the like where it's easier to refuel them. We want those to be Americans. I want Americans building fuel efficient, plug-in hybrid cars to put in those empty ships that are coming from China right now and ship China those cars. That is a vision that is realistic for the United States if we play our cards right. By the way, I'm very high on these plug-in electrics. I know you plug it in, they go 40 miles, zero CO2, one cent a mile, gasoline is nine. Then you get 100 miles a gallon on the gasoline you burn or the cellulosic ethanol. GM is moving forward in this. I brought the GM Volt, a concept at the moment, but they believe in five and six years it could be coming off the manufacturing line. So yeah, I think it's a bright future if we decide it's going to be an American destiny to do it and I think it should be.

Monica Trauzzi: The price of ethanol has risen 30 percent since May. What do you tell the average American who's looking at ethanol right now and thinking, no way, I'm sticking with gas?

Jay Inslee: What I would say is the same Americans who sat there at Kitty Hawk and watched the Wright Flyer takeoff and it was a bunch of balsa wood and canvas and there was only one guy on it, it just wasn't a very -- it looked like kind of a toy, rather than an aeronautic -- but they didn't realize that was the first-generation. And corn ethanol is the first generation of biofuels for us. The good news is there are second, third, and fourth-generation biofuels who are ready to become commercially viable. We had the first round of financing for the first cellulosic ethanol plants that use the whole plant. Corn ethanol just uses the kernel. We waste all the carbohydrates in the rest of the plant. Well, cellulosic ethanol, by using an enzyme or a reactivity, uses the entire plant and it's two to three times more productive per acre. And we have new feedstocks coming in. I was in a company called Mendel Biotechnology in California a couple of weekends ago and they've developed this Miscanthus grass. It grows 10, 12 feet high. You can grow it all through the Midwest and it gets four times as much per acre as corn ethanol. If we simply replace corn with Miscanthus we would meet the president's entire goal for biofuels by the year 2025 and that's a realistic goal for us.

Monica Trauzzi: All right. We're going to have to end it right there. I wish we could talk a bit more.

Jay Inslee: You bet.

Monica Trauzzi: Thanks it coming on the show.

Jay Inslee: And I hope you enjoy "Apollo's Fire."

Monica Trauzzi: I did, thank you.

Jay Inslee: Yes, thank you.

Monica Trauzzi: This is OnPoint. I'm Monica Trauzzi. Thanks for watching.

[End of Audio]