Subcommittee Focuses on DOE FY08 Budget
(Washington, DC) Today, the House Committee on Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on Energy and Environment heard testimonies from heads of five federal offices that oversee civilian energy research and development programs within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
“Addressing the momentous and diverse energy challenges that face the nation requires research and development programs that balance near-term solutions with long-term vision, and consistently support innovation and a broad array of technologies,” said Subcommittee Chairman Nick Lampson (D-TX). “The President’s budget attempts to address these challenges, but it favors a few high-profile projects at the expense of crucial programs in areas like energy efficiency, grid modernization and some renewable technologies.”
The Administration’s FY08 budget request for DOE contains $7.2 billion for civilian energy R&D, divided among five offices: the Office of Science, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), the Office of Nuclear Energy, the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability and Fossil Energy R&D. “Sometimes absent from the energy debate is the role of DOE’s Office of Science – a long-time steward of world class scientific facilities,” added Chairman Lampson. “The Office is at the vanguard of the nation’s global technological competitiveness. I am glad to see the President’s budget request recognizes the unique role they play in cultivating the richest scientific talent in the world.”
The Office of Science funds basic research at universities and 10 national laboratories and is the single largest federal supporter of physical sciences research. The FY08 budget request for the Office of Science is $4.4 billion - an increase of approximately $600 million or 16 percent over the FY07 enacted level. However, this falls $189 million short of the funding levels authorized in Title IX of Energy Policy Act of 2005.
The DOE budget contains significant funding increases for some renewable energy technologies including hydrogen, solar and cellulosic ethanol. These initiatives are greeted enthusiastically by alternative energy advocates; however the increases come at the expense of support for other areas including efficiency programs for low-income consumers, heavy industry, vehicle manufacturers and even the federal government. Other programs short-changed in the budget include geothermal, hydropower and ocean energy – all areas that would benefit greatly from increased R&D.
Chairman Lampson continued, “We are compelled by the triple threat of climate change, national security and record high prices, to get serious about exploring all possible alternatives. This requires a level of investment that is not reflected in the President’s budget.”
While the total budget for energy research and technology development has risen in recent years, it is still a fraction of the robust levels seen when the nation responded to the energy crisis of the late 1970’s. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office the Department of Energy’s budget authority for energy R&D fell 85 percent from 1978 to 2005 (inflation-adjusted).
Despite growing interest in the role of wind, solar and geothermal energy technologies, the large bulk of the nation’s renewable energy portfolio comes from hydropower and still comprises only 6% of total electricity generation. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that
“The energy landscape has to change,” concluded Lampson. “We must leave no stone unturned in our efforts to ensure a clean and secure energy future for our children.”
The Science & Technology Committee has jurisdiction over all civilian research and development programs of the federal government.
###
110.033
Related Subcommittees
Next Article Previous Article