Date: 1981-06-03
Speaker: MARVIN STONE (republican)
Chamber: S

Editor. U.S. News and World Report. Washington. D.C. DEAR MARVIN: Your thoughtful editorial. "Three Billion Well Spent" in the June 1 edition of. U.S. News and World Report. is valid. This Nation needs secure domestic supplies of. fuel. Your words concerning the possibility of upcoming foreign supply Interruptions because of renewed Mideast conflict are accurate. Such beliefs were also accurate in 1943 and in 1961. I spoke then in the House of Representatives and before the Senate Interior Committee emphasizing that. "every year that passes in which we become more and move dependent on foreign oil to buttress our economy and security perhaps is one year nearer to disaster. We are gambling with our countrys future." The concept of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve highlights our national preoccupation with minimizing the shortterm effects of inadequate domestic energy supplies while failing to forge a policy to solve longer term problems. Recognizing this fact. t!e Synthetic Liquid Fuels Act of 1944 was introduced and passed during the Roosevelt Administration. This legislation mandated development of new technology to produce ethanol. methanol and other liquid fuels from coal. oil shale. and agricultural products. In 1955. the decision was made by the then current Administration to eliminate all government -participation in alternate synthetic fuels projects. The assumption was that if needed. private industry would anticipate and respond that the country have adequate fuel supplies. If we had continued government support for synthetic fuels initiated in the early forties. as in my bill. we would have realized domestic commercial production today. When the Strategic Petroleum Reserve concept was acted on in 1975 I refused to support that shortterm effort until we had developed. as a first priority. legislation we could use to recreate a synthetic fuels industry in the United States and establ1sh complete energy independence. Passage of the Energy Security Act of 1980 sent the message to OPEO that we again were encouraging the construction of synthetto fuel plants. not only through subsidy support where needed to assure early commericialization. but through protection against unwarranted regulation and inflationary impacts. It also signaled domestic energy industries that we were asking for immediate action on synthetic fuels by allowing the President to initiate necessary activities to reach this goal under the Defense Producton Act of 1950 while the Synthetic Fuels Corporation was being organized. It is important now that we do not take a step backward in our longterm national commitment to synthetic fuels. The President must appoint the final two members of the Corporation Board and provide personal leadership in the activities of the organization to guarantee its vitality. If these steps are taken by he new Administration on synthetic fuel dci.Iopment. full funding of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve will be a necessary and correct secondary step to take. Filling the oil reserve will guard against supply Interruptions while our synfuels capacity is being ccstructed. We. however. can not use funds set aside for synthetic fuel development to pu chase foreign oil. To borrow three billion dollars from appropriations for the Synthetic Fuela Corporation would erode public confidence In the governments ability to establish and consistently pursue policies to assure eventual and permanent energy Independence. Such a funding scheme would be unacceptable. A coordinated and balanced program en. couraging an oil reserve and synthetic fuels industry wil serve our Nation well. Neither are subsidies. but are investments for our future generations. Truly.