The last thirty years have been a huge wasted opportunity. Since the so-called energy crisis of the 1970s almost nothing has been done to address the fundamental issues of scarce fossil fuels, and our over-reliance on them.

We were lucky back when the problem was only a temporary disruption to the supply chain, along the lines that we saw after Katrina when prices spiked for a brief period. Now the situation is different. Demand is steadily increasing as developing economies, especially India and China, begin to demand more fossil fuel. Supply, however, is relatively static. Increasing production requires at best ten years of lead time and massive investment of exploration, drilling equipment and transportation infrastructure. Moreover, we are clearly seeing the deferred cost of global warming from hydro-carbon emissions, and that cost will only increase.

The future belongs to a new emerging source of energy, and the U.S. is under-equipped to lead the development of that new industry. Half of all Chinese college graduates major in engineering, and only 5% do so in America. And when the Chinese engineers develop a new energy option, it will be priced for their economy, which means that it will be far cheaper than the kinds of solutions our energy companies are talking about.

What this means is that a solution to our energy problems requires several solutions bundled together: we need to increase research, and the intellectual capacity for research, in the sciences; we need to encourage reduced fossil fuel use; and we need to address the burden of high-energy costs on those working families least able to bear the added expense.

This situation calls for consensus between moderate legislators on both sides of the aisle who are willing to work together. I’ve built my career on bringing differing interests to the table, and I intend to do the same thing to achieve results in Congress.