Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The next witness is the Honorable Ernest Moniz, Under Secretary of Energy. Dr. Moniz.

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE ERNEST MONIZ, UNDER SECRETARY OF ENERGY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, WASHINGTON, DC

Dr. MONIZ. Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to come before you today and discuss climate change and DOE's energy R&D programs. I would just note that I joined DOE 3 months ago, I might add, after serving for a year and a half under this distinguished gentleman earlier. And at DOE, the Secretary has assigned me broad responsibilities for science and technology programs across the mission areas. Accordingly, I look forward to working closely with this Committee in the years ahead.

The connection between climate change issues and energy is, of course, quite clear. And today, I want to discuss the interplay between our national energy interests, the Department's R&D programs, and environmental stewardship. The enhanced energy R&D investments provided for in DOE's Fiscal Year proposal-Fiscal Year 1999 proposal, excuse me would indeed result in lower greenhouse gas emissions, but they also provide the United States with many other tangible energy, economic, national security, and environmental benefits.

DOE is, at it's core, a science and technology agency. And its R&D capabilities are a national resource for advancing a robust energy future, the importance of which is certainly evident to this Committee. Energy is an economic driver; energy offers economic opportunities; energy is a strategic global commodity; and energy affects the environment at local, regional, and global scales. Smog, acid rain, and particulates affect the quality of life at local and regional levels. On a global scale, there is no serious doubt that human activities associated with energy production and use have significantly altered the composition of atmospheric gases. Prudence demands a measured but strong response to ensure that sustained innovation positions America for continued prosperity and quality of life.

In that context, the Administration has recently released for comment a draft framework of a comprehensive energy strategy. The first public hearing is today in Houston. The draft strategy is organized around five common-sense, high-level goals: improve the efficiency of the energy system, ensure against energy disruptions, promote energy production and use in ways consistent with environmental quality, expand future energy choices, and cooperate internationally on energy issues. Technology is the common thread in our efforts to realize all of these goals. Our success in reaching these goals tomorrow clearly depends on our energy R&D plans today..

A broad and balanced R&D portfolio is essential. And indeed there is no one silver bullet that will solve our future energy needs. PCAST recognized this and advocated a substantial and sustained increase across the entire portfolio.

In the remainder of this testimony, I will very briefly describe

are in our portfolio. And I would note that with the exception of carbon sequestration, each of these pathways addresses multiple goals. Carbon sequestration is obviously geared uniquely towards mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. But each pathway demands a strong federal role, particularly as the R&D headlights are lowered in the private sector because of both restructuring and global competitive pressures.

One pathway is to increase our domestic energy supply. Fossil fuels will clearly continue to be the world's dominant energy source for some time. There are many examples given in my written testimony, I would just note that of a novel ceramic membrane, for example, which may make the conversion of natural gas into liquids available for transportation from remote areas much easier, therefore, allowing a shift to less carbon intensive fossil fuels.

A second approach, of course, is efficiency. U.S. energy intensity is about 50 percent higher than that of other industrialized countries, giving us lots of areas for improvement. The plain fact is that 90 percent of the energy we consume today comes from fossil and nuclear fuel. So energy efficiency is not some green alternative to the real business of traditional energy investments; rather, it is grounded in better use of our dominant energy resources. And again, many examples are spelled out in my written testimony.

A third pathway is clearly clean energy for a cleaner environment. Renewables may hold the key for appreciably slowing global warming in the longer term, while offering myriad additional benefits. Examples include: increased use of natural gas and advanced turbines in the near term, to methane hydrates in the long term; life extension of existing nuclear reactors; and renewables such as advanced wind turbines, solar and photovoltaic; co-firing of coal plants with forest and agricultural biomass.

A fourth pathway, which gained substantially more emphasis in this year's budget request, is that of carbon sequestration-the removal of atmospheric carbon dioxide through natural or induced methods. Again, the dominance of fossil fuels in our energy portfolio suggests the importance of this high-risk, high-payoff research. Examples include: the capture of combustion gases, the use of micro algae to convert power plant CO2 to biomass, and injection of CO2 in various geological formations.

Finally, we, of course, have a strong investment in basic research proposed. This continues to provide the foundation both for new technologies and for the policy framework that will evolve as the human health, environmental, and climate impacts of energy use become increasingly well understood. Many areas of basic research underlay future capabilities. Dr. Gibbons referred already to the biological sciences. In addition, some of the important cutting-edge research tools that will have broad applications will be specifically of use in this arena as well; for example, materials research and the new neutron source being proposed, and the great expansion in our simulation capabilities over the next decade originally driven by our needs to have a secure nuclear stockpile.

All of these pathways are part of our balanced energy R&D portfolio and are, in fact, rather consistent with the PCAST rec

In using the public's funds for the public good, we do have the responsibility to manage those funds effectively-a point that you made very clearly, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Dr. Moniz, your 5 minutes are up. Could you wrap it up in a couple of minutes so that we can

Dr. MONIZ. I will indeed. I will just note that in a previous hearing we did hear strong business and state support for many of the DOE partnerships. And also that we are advancing a number of internal reforms. And I would just highlight the fact that we have an aggressive road-mapping strategy going on right now which will better link our programs to missions and to budgets.

So in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, again, I believe our budget proposal represents a prudent response to the challenge of global warming and with many concomitant benefits in terms of national security, economic, and environmental consequences.

The Department's missions are clearly linked by science. Our public investment is a key catalyst for insights and advances on many fronts, and certainly, on the front of reducing environmental impacts locally, regionally, and globally. I look forward to working with this Committee to advance those key R&D programs. Thank you.

[

r. Moniz's prepared statement and biography follow:]

STATEMENT OF

DR. ERNEST MONIZ UNDER SECRETARY OF ENERGY

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 12, 1998

INTRODUCTION

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify before your Committee on climate change and the Department of Energy's (DOE) energy research and development programs. These programs serve a broad range of the nation's energy, national security and environmental interests. The connection between climate change issues and energy is clear: fossil fuels supply 84 percent of the primary energy consumed in the United States and are responsible for 98 percent of U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide. Today, I would like to discuss the interplay between our national energy interests, the Department's energy research and development (R&D) programs, our FY 1999 budget request, and environmental stewardship.

In his speech at the National Geographic Society last October, President Clinton outlined the Administration's climate change policy framework, noting that the risks justified sensible preventive steps. Several of these steps -- making R&D investments to encourage the development and deployment of energy efficient technologies, the promotion of a broad range of energy efficient products, and a comprehensive review of Federal procurement activities to ensure that the Federal government is a leader in energy efficiency -- are advanced by the Department's FY 1999 budget submission.

The enhanced energy R&D investments provided for in DOE's FY 1999 budget request will indeed result in lower greenhouse gas emissions, but they also provide the United States with many other tangible energy, economic, national security and environmental benefits. The DOE is, at its core, a science and technology agency. In the FY 1999 Administration budget proposal, 40 percent of the DOE budget, approximately $7.2 billion, is devoted to R&D. DOE's basic science programs address Americans' passion for discovery -- probing energy and matter at the most fundamental level, decoding genetic secrets, revealing the properties of novel materials. DOE's technology programs, many in partnership with the private sector, sustain the nuclear peace, help provide abundant clean energy, and promote environmental stewardship. DOE's unique national laboratories and cutting-edge major research facilities continue to define new frontiers. The success of this system over many years, and its importance to American society in the future, is highlighted by the prestigious 1997 R&D 100 Awards, no fewer than 36 of which went to DOE supported work. Our energy R&D programs will draw upon these world class scientific and technical resources.

ENERGY AND THE NATIONAL INTEREST

Affordable and abundant supplies of energy are critical to economic, environmental and national security. Energy is key to economic performance; it offers new market opportunities for business; it is a global commodity of strategic importance; and energy impacts the environment.