Different people do different things with the "epiphanies" they have while working for giant corporations. Some cast off the golden handcuffs and sail around the world. Others, like John Hofmeister, take on causes related to their work, and campaign for things they couldn't take on while employed. And pursue big thoughts, like a Federal Energy Resources Board.
Hofmeister was president of Shell until last year, when he left to found Citizens for Affordable Energy, which has a wide-ranging array of interests, with a theme that appears to be: What America needs is a comprehensive energy policy.
Speaking Tuesday at a meeting in Greenwich, Connecticut, he called for an energy equivalent of the Federal Reserve to manage energy and energy infrastructure needs, including new supply, technology, carbon management and power transmission.
"How could so many people do such a bad job?" he asked, reports our colleague Bill Holland, from the IHS Herold Pacesetters Energy Conference. Hofmeister referred to the nation's system of energy regulation: 13 agencies overseen by 16 congressional committees. "Structurally dysfunctional and unfixable in its current form." And eight presidents and 18 Congresses since energy independence was named as a goal.
The Federal Reserve model would serve to pull things together, he recommended, since he said it has produced 90 years of "relative financial stability." The US has yet to "get a grip on what it takes to be a modern country when it comes to energy and the environment."
"Political time" -- the election cycles -- can't manage energy projects that operate over 30- to 50-year horizons, Hofmeister said. And the political parties are leading the country into an "energy abyss" that should appear by 2018. Plenty of energy is there, he says in a video on his group's web site; man-made problems block use of them for affordability, environmental stewardship and economic growth.
The Federal Energy Resources Board would have governors with six-year terms, regional offices, and professional technical staffs. It would tackle long-term problems. In one of them, technology, "we're throwing billions against the wall right now, and we know little of it will stick," he said.
All too true. But can such a central-planning vision win votes in a nation where "let 1,000 flowers bloom" has more meaning than probably anywhere else? First, let's get one committee in Congress to relinquish its jurisdiction over something. OK, now go.
Leave a comment