The House leadership has proclaimed this week "House Energy Week," as if nomenclature alone could conjure up a useful response to the country's dependence on foreign oil, or the threat of global warming, or even $3-a-gallon gasoline, which — let's face it — is what really worries our elected representatives as they head home to face the voters over the July 4 recess.

As the nickel-and-dime agenda suggests, "energy week," which may not last even five days, is a joke. There is one bill calling for further research into hybrid cars, another subsidizing solar demonstration projects, another encouraging more efficient tires. All are useful, all terribly modest given overall needs. And then there's our personal favorite for the fox-in-the-henhouse award, a proposal to give $10 million to the automobile and oil industries to teach the public how to save gasoline.

The only big item is a bill from Representative Richard Pombo, the California Republican, that would end a longstanding federal moratorium on oil and gas drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, subject to state approval. While perhaps three-quarters of known coastal oil and gas reserves are already open for drilling, mainly in the Gulf of Mexico, and while the environmental problems of further drilling are obvious, Mr. Pombo's proposal would be worth entertaining if it were linked, say, to a serious effort to reduce demand by sharply raising fuel economy standards.

But the House is dominated by people who believe that a country that consumes one-quarter of the world's oil while possessing 3 percent of the world's reserves can somehow drill its way to energy independence. And that means that the worthy proposals that do exist to increase conservation and efficiency won't get the time of day.

If there is any serious conservation to be had this year on energy, it is likely to take place in the Senate, which has before it two similar, comprehensive bills aimed at reducing oil dependency and, in the bargain, sharply reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These bills would require that oil consumption be cut by 50 percent over the next quarter-century and would provide a broad array of tools to get there — loans, direct subsidies, tax breaks and other incentives to encourage the production of fuel-efficient cars, for instance, as well as alternatives to gasoline like cellulosic ethanol.

Just getting a start on one of these big bills would be a plus. House members have introduced 267 energy-related bills this year, and senators have introduced 210. Everyone wants to be seen to be doing something. What those numbers really add up to is close to 477 excuses to do next to nothing.