Page images

In addition, the fiscal year 1978 industry program exemplifies an increased degree of integration with other Federal Government activities. An example of this is a joint ERDA EPA project which has the potential to reduce pollution in glass processes while simultaneously achieving significant energy savings.

In the buildings and community systems area, the fiscal year 1978 program includes a diversity of important near-term efforts for example, to develop and commercialize energy-efficient materials for buildings, to produce total energy systems which will satisfy the energy needs of a community while conserving energy and imported fuels, and to provide technological options for utilizing urban waste.

Finally, in the transportation energy conservation area, the fiscal year 1978 transportation program includes efforts in heat engines. for example, gas turbine and Stirling cycle, vehicular systems, including variable transmission and regenerative braking, and development of technology for using non-petroleum-based fuels, in automotive engines.

An important part of the program is the research and development effort we will undertake to support the development of electric cars which I referred to earlier in my statement.

The amended fiscal year 1978 budget also contains a request to implement the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Act. This request includes a suitable amount to initiate procurement of vehicles for the demonstration required under the act. Provisions or loan guarantees, also required under the act, are included in our fiscal year 1978 request.

In closing. I wish to indicate that the fiscal year 1978 program has been broadened and intensified to accelerate ongoing projects and applications as well as to introduce new program initiatives.

I have members of my staff who will briefly cover our individual programs beginning with Mr. F. Parry, director of our electrical energy systems program.

Thank you.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Parry?

Mr. PARRY. The electrical energy systems program is designed to insure to the extent possible that our nationwide electric power network continues to be reliable, is conservative of energy and capital and accommodates in an optimum way new source and storage technologies.

These two latter points, conservation and new technolgy integration I will speak to now. The present electrical system is vast and complex. It becomes more so every day.

As we add new power sources throughout the system, such as solar devices and fuel cells, we will add to its complexity in ways in which we cannot definitely predict.

Whether these are dispersed or concentrated. they have varying characteristics and will require different incorporation and control strategies. For example, the inertia now provided by large rotating machines which affect system stability is not present in the solar reflector or the fuel cell.

The windmill uses vet another variant requiring controls to insure that system frequencies are not upset by the windmill's intermittent, variable input. In addition to these and other new power sources storage technology, whether located at the customer or utility substation, must be integrated properly into the system.

All of these inputs introduce new problems. For each to contribute usefully, the system and the equipment must be mutually compatible, something which will not happen automatically. Our program will look at these critical problems from the electrical system viewpoint. Second, let me speak to conservation on the electric grid. Here, our program emphasizes higher voltage, higher capacity, overhead and underground transmission and distribution systems because they are more efficient, more conservative of energy, permit more power to be delivered over a given right of way, save land, capital and materials. Regardless of the success of conservation, solar heating and cooling and other technology in satisfying electric demand, we must reduce our consumption of oil and gas. This translates into a steadily expanding electric system.

Also, if energy parks become fashionable, more efficient, environmentally acceptable bulk power delivery becomes even more crucial. Our program assumes that both dispersed and concentrated generation will be part of the overall system and aims to develop technology to accommodate both.

Another major conservation effort is in load management. This is the name given to the concept of altering the pattern of electric use in order to, one, improve efficiency of the system; and two, shift fuel dependency from limited to more abundant resources.

Our program will determine the effectiveness and economics of various approaches to load management as well as develop a methodology for evaluating and comparing benefits and costs of various options.

For example, how will the extensive use of electric vehicles impact the electric load? Certainly the introduction of so significant a new demand on the electric system must be carefully coordinated with utilities, as it is in West Germany, or our efforts at load management could receive serious setbacks.

Underpinning both our load management and our new source technology integration efforts is the development of a better understanding of the characteristics of the electric load-about which surprisingly little is known. We plan to learn the details of its composition, its elasticities, and how to accurately model it.

Finally it is perhaps too easy to forget that for many years to come, practically all electricity, no matter how produced, will reach the consumer only through the electric system. Our program will help to insure that the continent-wide system is efficient and dependable.

Mr. McCORMACK. In view of the fact that you do not have written testimony, I am going to ask for questions from the committee at the end of each presentation and I'll lead off. Mr. Parry, are you contemplating any national power grid studies which may or may not include direct current interties?

Are you studying direct current interties and how they might influence energy conservation?

Mr. PARRY. Yes, sir. We are looking at direct current interties. We are not looking at a national grid in the old context. We feel that to some extent there already is an interconnected nationwide system. We do feel, however, that direct current interties between power pools

would be an effective way of being able to move power back and forth more efficiently.

Mr. McCORMACK. To be more specific, the concept of the national grid as it has been advanced from time to time would allow us to wheel power back and forth through various time zones accommodating peakload from east to west as it moved across the country.

Are any studies being conducted on this subject concerning the potential for saving energy?

Mr. PARRY. Just general studies, the sensitivity of interconnections. But they are general, not specifically on that subject.

Mr. McCORMACK. I asked this question because we have recently been told that this would not accomplish anything. It seems strange to me that we could not gain anything from pooling our production capacity to satisfy daytime peak demands as these peaks move across the country or even regional peak demands because of weather, for example. I would appreciate it if this were explored as part of your studies. Mr. PARRY. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCORMACK. Are you studying or contemplating installation of superconducting transmission systems or superconducting storage systems?

Mr. PARRY. With respect to superconducting transmission, we have two very active programs going on, one at Brookhaven and one at Los Alamos, one alternating current and the other direct current. We expect to proceed with those as soon as we overcome the engineering problems.

We feel we will be able to demonstrate in 1980 an alternating current superconducting line.

Dr. MANNELLA. With respect to superconducting storage, this is a long-term project in our storage program.

Mr. McCORMACK. Could it be accelerated to meet an earlier operational date?

Dr. MANNELLA. It could be accelerated if more funds were available. Mr. AMBRO. You estimate by the end of fiscal 1977 you will have paid out $19 million of $23 million requested for superconducting research?

Dr. MANNELLA. That is correct.

Mr. AMBRO. Do you contemplate any large increases in personnel in your division, Mr. Parry?

Mr. PARRY. We would hope that we would have some personnel increase to go along with the increased funds.

Mr. AMBRO. What is the increased funding for? Is it for personnel, for laboratories, for studies, or for some other type of resources.

Dr. MANNELLA. I would like to answer part of that and then have Mr. Parry answer the specifics. The numbers that you see in the budget sheet that accompanied my talk are contractual authority.

They do not cover the cost of the ERDA staff which is covered in the program support element in the ERDA budget. So this is essentially contract authority with all the places where we normally get our work done.

[The referred budget table follows:]

[blocks in formation]

Mr. AMBRO. Why couldn't you spend up to $23 million of your limit in this case?

Dr. MANNELLA. We will commit-in other words sign contracts-up to our limit but the dollar outlay for the work occurs over a period of time.

Mr. AMBRO. Do you think it is realistic then to believe that you will be able to sign contracts for $32 million of research in 1978 for this division?


Mr. AMBRO. Why?

Dr. MANNELLA. Within the context of the ERDA program as a whole, the kinds of contract authority we have listed here is relatively easy to assimilate. The agency is geared for multibillion-dollar research and development programs.

Mr. AMBRO. Who do you contract with for the most part?

Dr. MANNELLA. Quite a variety of organizations, depending on the program area. We are talking about something relatively near-term for commercialization. We like to contract with the industry because that brings us close to commercialization.

As you get into more research and perhaps development areas of the program, we contract with research and development organizations and universities.

Mr. AMBRO. That explains generally what I was after. I will get into more detail with other divisions when their programs are explained.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Ottinger?

Mr. OTTINGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have been concerned for some time about where research ends and where application begins. In conservation this is critical because our needs are so great.

I wondered how you view this transition from conservation research to application.

I get the feeling that in some programs the research phase is almost indeninitely, even after a feasible application is at hand. There appears to be no mechanism for the transfer from your agency to FEA or HUD or other agencies to actually get the knowledge out into use.

Dr. MANNELLA. Mr. Ottinger, we are quite concerned about the need to get the technology that we develop in place in the real world as quickly as possible because the bottom line of our program is energy saved, not development of new technology. We are constantly aware of the need to try to identify as early on in the program the route to commercialization.

It varies from program to program depending on the end-use item in question. The strategies obviously are different in the residential buildings area where if a very small number of companies will commit to production, they can make commercialization occur.

We try to structure each program according to the specifics and the peculiarities of the end group.

Mr. OTTINGER. Let me put it a different way, if I can. Suppose you are working on a heat pump or some similar device and you feel it is ready for industrial commercialization. If cooperative development with industry has been your development strategy and it does not work, what do you do? Do you ask for commercialization help from other agencies or legislative action from the Congress.

It seems to me that nothing has been happening.

Dr. MANNELLA. We can do all of these things. We have worked a few relatively minor examples with FEA of things that are ready for some sort of widespread commercialization effort like insulation blankets for hot water heaters. But basically what we have to do is to demonstrate in a commercial environment that the technology is ready and that the economics are good.

In the case of a battery, it might be utilized by utilities for peak load shaving. We would actually demonstrate the use of that battery in a grid connected system and show the data and the economics.

Mr. OTTINGER. Do you have any system for evaluating each project on a regular basis in order to identify those which are ready to move out of research?

Dr. MANNELLA. We have a system that we use for the selection of projects which includes an evaluation of the barriers or probability of commercial success which we use in the selection of the projects initially, trying to select those that have both the potential for considerable energy saving as well as potential for penetrating the market.

Then during the course of the project, we use the fairly standard procedure of periodic program reviews based on a time frame or a set of goals that we have have laid out as a function of time frame in the meeting of certain milestones.

Mr. OTTINGER. I think that project evaluation and progress monitoring is an area that deserves more attention. Also when there is an industrial concensus for congressional action to facilitate commercialization of conservation techniques, I feel, ERDA ought to pay more attention.

« PreviousContinue »