Brittle Power- PARTS 1-3 (+Notes) - Natural Capitalism Solutions

298National Energy Securityresulting federal energy policy is inconsistent not only with the Administration’sfree-market preferences, but also with its stated preparedness objectives.Fourth, renewable technologies and technologies to increase efficiency areevolving very rapidly. Some key technical issues require early analysis and federalpolicy action—such as the preparedness aspects of grid integration and theencouragement of multifuel capability in cars (Chapter Sixteen and AppendixTwo). Without proper handling of these issues, many of the potential preparednessbenefits of efficiency and renewables programs will not be realized.The few analytic groups that had begun to consider such questions, notably atthe Solar Energy Research Institute, have been disbanded, along with many ofthe best solar programs at the National Laboratories. The private sector hasno incentive to take over such research on national preparedness.Making policy coherentMore broadly, the patterns and processes of federal thinking about energyneed to be leavened by a greater awareness of the nature of vulnerability andhow to combat it. The best federal energy preparedness planning todayappears to be in the Department of Defense—as exemplified by impressive efficiencyand renewables programs at some military bases—but the details andrationale of this work are not well known to civilians, even in the Departmentof Energy. (The improper diversion to other programs of up to a quarter of abillion dollars earmarked for energy-saving programs during the 1979 and1980 Fiscal Years 14 implies that such programs face opposition even within thePentagon.) The Department of Defense proposed some years ago to have a liaisonin the office of the Secretary of Energy to ensure that vulnerability gotproper attention, but this was never done. Over the years, diverse Secretariesof Energy have continued, incrementally and unknowingly, to increase the vulnerabilityof America’s energy system, apparently assuming that the ArmedForces will somehow be able to defend whatever systems are built.National energy preparedness also demands better coordination among theDepartments of Energy, Interior, and Commerce and the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency to ensure that the concerns which are FEMA’s statutoryresponsibility receive due weight in, and are not undercut by, other agencies’decisions taken on other grounds. (For example, recent Department of Energydecisions have largely removed federal authority for ensuring that military fuelneeds can be met in an emergency.) It would also be worthwhile to improveliaison with those members of Congress who have shown particular expertiseand interest in energy resilience (as in Senator Percy’s study of a possibleNational Defense Alcohol Fuel Reserve). Currently, in both the executive and