The energy bill currently under debate in the Senate seems so obvious, we wonder why similar… The energy bill currently under debate in the Senate seems so obvious, we wonder why similar legislation hasn’t been passed before.

The bill, which has ranked high on the Democrats’ agenda since they took control of both houses of Congress this January is relatively simple: It aims at redistributing government subsidies, taking away tax breaks from oil companies – who, let’s face it, do pretty well – and re-investing in the development of alternative energy sources.

Specifically, the bill will raise about $14 billion from oil companies over 10 years, which would mostly be redistributed as incentives for solar power, wind power, cellulosic ethanol and several other alternative fuel sources, according to The New York Times. Another proposal, which is likely to be adopted, would raise an additional $10 billion from foreign oil companies that drill for oil and gas in federal waters but do not currently pay royalties to the U.S. government.

With gasoline prices closing in at around $3 per gallon, an ever-diminishing oil supply and the carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline usage perpetuating the problem of global warming, we need to do something about energy.

And investing in alternative fuels seems like the natural thing to do.

Some gasoline alternatives – like using hybrid technology and ethanol – have already been developed but could become more cost efficient with further investment. Other funding can go toward research and development of new fuel alternatives and those that are only in the early stages of development.

Critics of the bill worry that it might actually increase dependence on foreign oil, because it would take money away from exploring and drilling domestically. This prediction might be true – but only for the short term.

In the long term, the bill’s effects will be much more valuable. Realistically, we have to develop alternatives to oil and coal as energy sources. These nonrenewable resources might be depleted in this century, and if our government doesn’t take steps to develop alternative fuels now, we will be up the creek and without a paddle – literally – when that time comes.

Like any new technology, we will have to start from the beginning, and it will take time. But skeptics of alternative fuel dependence only have to look at the Internet and advancements in our current oil industry as proof that enough investment in industry can yield successful businesses.

But until these innovations come, there are several things that we can do now to curb carbon emissions and reduce gas use.

First of all, we can funnel more money into public transportation. Pittsburgh Port Authority is not the only city transit agency in the country that is floundering, mostly as a result of state and local budget cuts. If we let this public agency continue to deteriorate, more people will be forced to drive, consuming gas and increasing the demand for foreign oil.

Secondly, as individuals, we need to work to reduce our own energy use. In some ways, it’s as easy as turning off the lights when we leave a room; in others, it’s taking a walk instead of driving.

Finding a solution to the energy crisis is a global responsibility – one that every government and citizen on planet Earth should be committed to work toward. And this bill is a good first step.