The Energy Policy Act of 2026
The next Congress needs to make energy a top priority
“When I talk about energy, I am talking about jobs. Our American economy runs on energy—no energy, no jobs. In the long run, it is just that simple.” President Gerald Ford, 1975
Following the passage of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, House Majority Leader Thomas “Tip” O’Neill (D-MA) drolly observed, “It is extremely difficult to write an energy bill.” Representative Jim Wright (D-TX) who helped lead the writing of the bill was more explicit, “In total candor, I must say…that what began as a thrilling and dramatic enterprise has degenerated at times into a farcical comedy of frustrations.”
Regardless the outcomes of the upcoming U.S. 2024 election, the Congress should take on as a top priority the passage of comprehensive energy policy legislation — I’ve got a name for the bill, the Energy Policy Act of 2026. History tells us to keep expectations in check, but at the same time, comprehensive federal energy legislation is today necessary and more important than ever.
Despite the “farcical comedy of frustrations,” the 1975 legislation — passed in response to the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo — has been highly consequential in the almost half-century since its enactment. For instance, that legislation created the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for autos, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and a ban on U.S. oil exports (reversed in 2015).
Federal energy policy reverberates over many decades. Decisions made in the 2020s will shape U.S. energy policy through the 21st century — and energy policy affects the economy, national security, the environment and more. It is an awesome and critical responsibility.
Consider that federal decisions made in the 1970s, in partnership with industry, led directly to the many technological innovations that underpin the dramatic expansion of U.S. energy production over the past decade. The U.S. is today the world’s global energy superpower. Policy now needs to catch up — Now what?
Over the past five decades, Congress has often passed legislation with significant effects on U.S. energy policy (such as the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022), but the last time that it took on comprehensive energy policy legislation was arguably in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (or maybe even as far back as 1992) — which passed both the House and the Senate with large, bipartisan majorities.
A lot has happened in energy and in energy policy since 2005. Among the most significant changes:
The U.S. has become the world’s energy superpower, having massively increased oil and natural gas production;
Domestic electricity demand, which plateaued for much of the past two decades is set to increase dramatically, requiring new supply;
The U.S. grid shows signs of strain and vulnerability;
Production of electricity by wind and solar have grown in capacity and are expected to continue to expand, based on generous federal subsidies;
The U.S. president signed on to the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, which has aggressive targets for emissions reductions, and the U.S. has implemented a range of legislation designed to accelerate decarbonization;
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has reordered global energy geopolitics, leading to greater reliance by Europe on U.S. natural gas supplies;
China has come to dominate energy supply chains, critical minerals, and low-emission technology manufacturing in areas such as solar panels and electric vehicles;
Countries around the world are increasingly focused on security of energy supply and the prices paid by their citizens for energy and energy products and services (which is to say — everything);
The U.S. has largely abdicated any federal role in supporting the continued development and deployment of nuclear power, ceding leadership to other countries, even as nuclear power is experiencing new interest around the world;
The U.S. lacks a coherent policy on its role in supporting energy development around the world, seemingly conflicted about the role of fossil fuels in supporting economic growth in poor countries.
I could go on . . .
Energy policy is of critical importance to the U.S. economy, geopolitics, national security, and climate change. In 2024, with the state of American politics the way that it is, it may seem impossible that Congress would ever reach agreement on an energy policy bill. Perhaps so — However, by expanding the scope of policy to consider energy comprehensively, it may be possible to reach areas of political agreement that are impossible when issues are focused more narrowly.
For instance, Democrats who want to see more rapid decarbonization might find agreement with Republicans who want to secure the U.S. role in the liquified natural gas export market in provisions to accelerate the shuttering of coal plants domestically, and supporting such retirements overseas. The single most consequential action to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the near term would be to exit from coal energy. Similarly, nuclear power offers a prime opportunity for bipartisan cooperation.
No one should expect the MAGA Republicans or progressive Democrats to be on board with such political compromises. As we’ve recently seen with military aid for Ukraine, a bipartisan majority is possible by leaving behind the most extreme wings of each party. That is where comprehensive energy policy should focus — that’s also where most Americans are as well.
Our tendency to focus American politics on the president should not obscure the fact that Congress is a co-equal branch of government. Leadership can come from Congress — there is no need to wait for the next president, whomever he is, to call for a new look at U.S. comprehensive energy policy. In fact, whether or not legislation is ultimately passed, opening up a broad discussion of U.S. energy policy in the next Congress will well serve the nation.
In future posts, I’ll follow up with discussions of what specific elements of a comprehensive energy policy might look like, meantime, I welcome your thoughts, opinions, recommendations, and discussion.
❤️Click the heart if you think energy policy matters!
Thanks for reading. Your support makes THB possible. Please subscribe!
Roger,
The "exit from coal energy" cannot occur without corresponding expansion of other dispatchable generation. The "all-electric everything" transition would require further expansion of other dispatchable generation. Arguably, existing intermittent renewable generation could be rendered dispatchable with the installation of massive energy storage. Further expansion of dispatchable renewable generation would also be possible with the inclusion of sufficient storage. However, current storage is extremely expensive. and is not suitable for all of the electricity storage needs of the grid. There is also the issue of who would fund the storage. Renewable developers have no interest in doing so because it would destroy their "cheapest generation" argument.
Energy policy development is its own "wicked problem". ;-)
Roger, as you note, no new energy legislation has come out of Congress for some time. Most recent energy policy has come as a result of opaque regulations from federal agencies. To be beneficial, the 2026 Act will need to reverse many of these regulations and undo the magical thinking that motivated them. The goal must be to improve the lives of ordinary Americans by making energy cheaper, more abundant and more accessible. Regulations which make energy more expensive, make movement of goods or services less economical, and limit the population's mobility and freedom must be pole-axed.