Those supporting the amendment, which passed on a 62-37 vote, said it would save lives and money.

“Our military is on the cutting edge technologically, but much of our fighting capability relies on foreign fossil fuels and decades-old power systems. That dependence has very real human and economic costs. Today’s strong bipartisan vote affirms that we should allow our military leaders to continue to develop and use advanced alternative fuels in order to bring down costs and improve mission capabilities," Udall said in a Wednesday statement.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sen. James InhofeJames (Jim) Mountain InhofeOvernight Defense: Biden participates in NATO summit | White House backs 2002 AUMF repeal | Top general says no plans for airstrikes to help Afghan forces after withdrawal Top Republican proposes leaving 1,000 US troops in Afghanistan into next year The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Citizens' Climate Lobby - Biden floats infrastructure, tax concessions to GOP MORE (R-Okla.) introduced the measure that blocked the Defense Department’s option to spend on biofuels when the Senate Armed Services Committee was considering the bill. The House defense authorization bill contains similar language.

Inhofe argued that biofuels are too expensive, with $500 billion of defense cuts slated for the next 10 years as part of sequestration. 

Inhofe, along with other Republicans, opposes using military spending to commercialize energy technology, though several senators argued the Defense Department has a history of investing in less mature energy sectors.

Still, Inhofe said biofuels are something the Department of Energy should be spending money on, not the Department of Defense.

“This is something [the Department of Energy] should be doing if anybody is going to be doing it,” Inhofe said on the floor Wednesday. “This one amendment, more than any other, would take money away from readiness.”

But the amendment's Senate proponents said biofuels could help keep military energy spending down by reducing the military's exposure to oil price shocks.

The program has the support of Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who also contend it would stabilize energy costs. They call the program vital for energy security, saying it gives the military more fuel options and loosens it from foreign oil’s grip.

Sen. Barbara BoxerBarbara Levy BoxerBottom line Trump administration halting imports of cotton, tomatoes from Uighur region of China Biden inaugural committee to refund former senator's donation due to foreign agent status MORE (D-Calif.) asked if the Senate has to once again have a fight about oil.

“Is big oil calling the shots here?” Boxer said Wednesday before the vote. “I would hope not, but I don’t understand why this section Sen. Udall is trying to strike is in this bill when the military says it’s critical to them.”

Republican senators voting with Democrats to approve the amendment included Sens. Roy BluntRoy Dean BluntGOP senator: I want to make Biden a 'one-half-term president' GOP Rep. Vicky Hartzler launches Missouri Senate bid Cryptocurrency industry lobbies Washington for 'regulatory clarity' MORE (Mo.), Thad CochranWilliam (Thad) Thad CochranBottom line Bottom line Alabama zeroes in on Richard Shelby's future MORE (Miss.), Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsOvernight Energy: Schumer to trigger reconciliation process Wednesday | Bipartisan bill would ban 'forever chemicals' in cosmetics | Biden admin eyes step toward Trump-era proposal for uranium reserve Bipartisan lawmakers introduce bill to ban 'forever chemicals' in cosmetics as study finds them prevalent Cosmetic chemicals need a makeover MORE (Maine), Chuck GrassleyChuck GrassleyOn The Money: Schumer to trigger reconciliation process on Wednesday | Four states emerge as test case for cutting off jobless benefits McConnell presses for 'actual consequences' in disclosure of tax data First major Democrat announces 2022 bid for Iowa governor MORE (Iowa), John HoevenJohn Henry HoevenLobbying world Hillicon Valley: Facebook to resume some political donations | Microsoft says Russian hackers utilized email system used by USAID to target other groups | Senate confirms Biden's top scientist Khanna, Mace introduce bill to strengthen federal cyber workforce following major hacks MORE (N.D.), Dick Lugar (Ind.), Lisa MurkowskiLisa Ann MurkowskiHundreds in West Virginia protest Manchin's opposition to voting rights legislation How Biden can get the infrastructure bill through Congress Senate confirms Garland's successor to appeals court MORE (Alaska), Olympia Snowe (Maine) and John ThuneJohn Randolph ThuneSanders won't vote for bipartisan infrastructure deal Bipartisan infrastructure deal takes fire from left and right McConnell warns he's willing to intervene in 2022 GOP primaries MORE (S.D.). Democratic Sens. Joe ManchinJoe ManchinProgressives rave over Harrison's start at DNC US, EU pledge to work together on climate amid reported dissension on coal Senate to hold hearing on DC statehood bill MORE (W.Va.) and Jim Webb (Va.) voted against the amendment.

Collins, who serves on the Armed Services Committee, missed the May committee vote on the Inhofe amendment, which passed by one vote.

The Truman National Security Project's Operation Free campaign, which aims to wean the U.S. off oil, praised the Senate for passing the amendment.

"Our dependence on oil as a single source of transportation fuel endangers our national and economic security. We spend billions of dollars every year securing strategic chokepoints in the global oil supply line, and any rise in oil prices leaves the DoD on the hook for millions or even billions in additional fuel costs," Mike Breen, executive director of the Truman National Security Project, said in a Wednesday statement.

Biofuels groups said the vote showed the nation is committed to alternative fuels.

"Reports of the demise of biofuels political currency appear to be premature. Americans clearly support reducing our dependence upon foreign oil and strengthening our national and economic security via domestic renewable fuels," Renewable Fuels Association CEO Bob Dinneen said in a Wednesday statement.


— This story was last updated at 11:59 a.m. Thursday.