Department Of Energy Programs Critical For U.S. In Global Race For Clean Energy Technology
(Washington, DC) – Today the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology’s Subcommittee on Energy and Environment held a hearingto review the Department of Energy’s (DOE) clean technology programs. Testifying before the Committee were representatives from DOE’s Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy (ARPA-E), the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), and the Loan Program Office (LPO).
In his 2011 State of the Union Address, President Obama made clean energy investment one of his top priorities, setting a goal of generating 80 percent of electricity from clean energy sources by 2035. “Clean energy technologies” is a broad category that typically includes renewable energy, energy efficiency, storage technologies, carbon capture and sequestration, and nuclear energy, for electricity, heat generation, and transportation fuels. DOE engages in research and development related to all of these technologies and more.
In a statement submitted for the record, Ranking Member of the Committee, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), stated, “Investments in EERE, ARPA-E, and the Loan Guarantee Program serve to strengthen U.S. scientific and economic leadership as they advance innovation in a wide range of technology areas, support the next generation of scientists, and technology leaders, seed the industries of tomorrow, and ultimately lay the groundwork for a cleaner, more sustainable energy future.”
Ranking Member Johnson asked the witnesses what impacts further cuts to clean energy programs would have. Dr. Arun Majumdar, Director of ARPA-E, responded, “If we do not support clean energy at this point, I believe our children’s and grandchildren’s future is at stake.” And Dr. Henry Kelly, Acting Assistant Secretary of EERE said, “Technologies, businesses, and jobs are going to be abroad and not here.”
In a 2009 National Research Council (NRC) report on energy efficiency, it was found that energy efficiency technologies that exist today or that are likely to be developed in the near future could save considerable money as well as energy. Fully adopting these technologies could lower U.S. energy use 17 percent to 20 percent by 2020, and 25 percent to 31percent by 2030, and could save the country billions in energy costs. When questioned, Dr. Kelly said that EERE activities not only benefit taxpayers by developing new technologies to help save energy and money, but manufacturing those technologies in the U.S. creating jobs too.
The Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, Rep. Brad Miller (D-NC), expressed his concerns regarding incentives for conventional energy sector in the face of significant cuts to clean energy programs. Mr. Miller said, “[A]s my Republican colleagues lobby to make massive cuts or shutdown DOE clean energy programs altogether, they fail to acknowledge their own longstanding effort to subsidize through tax incentives, R&D programs, liability indemnification, and other means the oil, gas, nuclear and coal sectors – some of the most mature and profitable industries in the world. The appropriateness of continued taxpayer support of these sectors can be left for another conversation. I am merely highlighting the inconsistency in my colleagues’ concern over interfering in the free market by picking winners and losers, and appealing for some fairness when determining which sectors are deserving of increasingly scarce federal resources.”
Countering the assertion that Department of Energy R&D programs interfere with the free marketplace and crowd out private investment, Mr. Miller said, “…energy markets are really anything but free. The sector has always been heavily regulated and heavily subsidized by governments, and, in many cases, prices are controlled by cartels and manipulated by complex financial mechanisms that have little relation to simple supply and demand.” He continued, “The sooner we can get beyond the fallacy that free-market forces alone can or will determine, or have ever determined, which technologies are best for the public, the sooner we can have a productive discussion about how to ensure an environmentally and economically sustainable energy future. This is the ultimate goal and what is expected of us as leaders. We are not expected to block the progress of innovation for the sake of standing guard over an outdated economic doctrine.”
Mr. Miller closed his opening remarks by saying,“…in contrast to just a few years ago, there is an unfortunate and growing divide on clean energy, with partisan politics clouding our collective judgment on what is best for our future. I believe that, in the future, we will all see that a diverse and clean energy portfolio is worth the investment.”
Related Content
Next Article Previous Article