Democrats Question Government R&D Role In Mature, Commercially-Ready Coal Technologies
(Washington, DC) – Today the Energy and Environment Subcommittee of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held a hearing entitled, “Advancing Coal Research and Development for a Secure Energy Future.” The stated purpose of this hearing was to examine current Department of Energy (DOE) coal research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) activities and identify future coal RD&D opportunities and priorities. Members heard from three witnesses representing the coal industry, a representative from the Office of Fossil Energy at the Department of Energy (DOE), and from the Executive Director of the Institute of Clean Air Companies (ICAC).
The DOE coal RD&D portfolio has shifted away from focusing on power plant efficiency and control of specific hazardous criteria pollutants for which many commercially-available control technologies exist, to focusing on the difficult challenges of carbon dioxide capture, sequestration, and utilization. Despite evidence to the contrary, Republican Members asserted that this shift would adversely impact the coal industry because the industry is not capable of doing the necessary RD&D to comply with clean air regulations and stay competitive in the energy marketplace without assistance from the government.
Ranking Member Brad Miller (D-NC) said in his opening statement, “In this Congress my colleagues on the other side of the aisle tirelessly pound the drum on a handful of high-level themes they believe are consistent with conservative dogma, captured in catch-phrases such as “Regulations kill jobs”, “Climate change is an unproven theory”, and “Government shouldn’t pick winners and losers.” But, just repeating something over and over does not make it true. As is too often the case in politics, my friends fail to acknowledge that punch lines are inherently inadequate for addressing issues as complex as defining the role of government in protecting the environment and public health and spurring technological innovation in the most powerful economy in the world. In fact, environmental damage is a classic “externality” that honest conservative theorists concede may cause market failure and justify government action.”
Mr. Miller continued, “[W]hen it comes to DOE programs on emerging clean energy technologies…my Republican colleagues do not hesitate to cry foul at the federal support that they consider to be inappropriate government intrusion in the energy marketplace. To them, these are mature industries in which free market forces alone should push the frontiers of innovation, and DOE investments in research merely crowd out what the private sector would otherwise do. After all, they say, it’s not the job of the government to pick winners and losers. If only my colleagues were consistent and didn’t make glaring exceptions to this rule. For instance, they say that the oil and natural gas industry lacks the resources and technological capacity to unlock hydrocarbon reserves in the deep water and unconventional shale formations. They need a $50 million a year research program and billions in tax breaks. Ditto for the nuclear industry. They need $850 million a year in taxpayer-funded research, tens of billions in government-backed liability insurance, and multi-billion dollar loan guarantees…And, coal… DOE needs to stop funding R&D for dealing with the false threat of climate change to instead develop technologies to help the coal industry meet tightening emissions standards and stay profitable and competitive. These are some of the most established and profitable industries in the world, but these poor companies need government support to develop new technologies? Where are the free-market principles my colleagues so steadfastly stand by on other occasions?”
Mr. David Foerter, Executive Director of the ICAC testified that the companies that make up the ICAC are not reliant upon DOE R&D funding to push innovation, but that tightening EPA standards actually create demand for these companies’ products and services and drive innovation and job creation in this sector. The ICAC is the trade organization for companies that research, design, manufacture, install, operate, or maintain air pollution control (APC) and monitoring equipment for power plants. ICAC’s members include a number of firms from individual consultants to very large industrial corporations including Alstom, Hitachi, B&W, BASF, Rockwell, Seimens, and Teledyne. He said, “The science of air pollution control and measurement is well understood by our industry, and technologies are continuously refined through healthy competition – if the demand is there. The energy of our industry comes directly in response to the certainty of demand for these technologies and services, and without this demand, innovation, competition, and jobs are lost, adding to an unhealthy economy.”
He continued, “[D]uring a recent seven year period, the implementation of CAIR Phase 1 resulted in 200,000 jobs in the APC industry…Faced with clean air regulations, now reinforced by judicial decisions, we are hearing the doom and gloom “what if” scenarios of technology availability, energy reliability, and our industry’s ability to meet demand for installations. However, as these issues have all been raised in the past, history shows these predictions were unfounded then, and again will prove to be unfounded.”
Mr. Foerter closed his testimony, “In looking to the future and mapping how fossil fuels can be a sustainable energy resource, innovation needs to come from the private and public sectors, and ideally both to ensure that the skills and tools will be ready when they are needed once again. In regards to hazardous and criteria pollutants, we have all the skills and tools needed, so it is the right time to let our industry get to work.”
Related Content
Next Article Previous Article