The Senate has an energy bill that over-subsidizes fuel sources such as coal, gas and ethanol, under-subsidizes wind power, geothermal and solar; it favors production over conservation; looks minutely for new sources of energy and ignores the polluting effects of the use of all this new energy. It barely recognizes that the United States is falling behind other nations in energy efficiency while calling for the oil and gas exploration of the biologically fragile outer continental shelf. If these are the result of the vice president’s 2001 Energy Task Force, the reason the administration tried so hard to keep its records hidden becomes clear: policies like these are not for the environmentally sensitive.

Most egregious for Maine is the energy bill’s requirement that the Department of Interior inventory oil and gas resources on the Georges Bank off the Maine coast. Georges Bank is not only valuable as a rich biological area, it has been a reliable fishing ground for centuries. To risk this for invasive testing and, eventually, drilling is shortsighted, and Sen. Susan Collins has been properly adamant in trying to remove this portion of the bill.

The Energy Policy Act before the Senate has other disturbing elements.

It speeds the laying of oil and gas pipelines on federal lands, provides royalty relief and incentives and eases permits for other energy projects. The bill does nothing to advance fuel economy standards, nor does it require utilities to generate a portion of their power from renewable sources, as last year’s bill did.

If the Senate is to rescue this act, it will need substantial amendments and, fortunately, several have been offered. Sens. Bob Graham and Dianne Feinstein have proposed an amendment to remove the testing provision for the outer continental shelf. Sens. Collins, Olympia Snowe and others have put forth an amendment raising the fuel economy standards of vehicles. Additionally, Sen. Collins has proposed an amendment that would fund the study of potential effects of abrupt climate change, a sobering view of the effects of changing global temperatures that could cause huge shifts in the way the planet lives.

The primary redeeming feature of the Senate bill is that it is not the House bill, which is worse in several respects and can be saved only in the reconciliation conference with the Senate’s. Maine’s senators have very good records on the environment; they deserve public support to help improve the Senate version as much as possible before it is reconciled with its House counterpart. They should be encouraged to back amendments that will shift the emphasis to greater efficiency and to create policies that recognize all the new production comes at a high price for the environment.