Hearing of House Committee on Energy and Commerce - Department of Energy's Fiscal Year 2006 Budget Proposal and the Energy Policy Act of 2005: ...
HEARING OF HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE - DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S FISCAL YEAR 2006 BUDGET PROPOSAL AND THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005: ENSURING JOBS FOR OUR FUTURE WITH SECURE AND RELIABLE ENERGY
February 9, 2005
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
Mr. Secretary, the Energy Information Administration, a part of the Department of Energy, in analyzing H.R. 6, determined that there would be, over the next 20 years, if that bill passed, the bill that was passing in the House and the Senate last year, that there would be an 85 percent increase in our oil dependency on overseas of--taking us up to 80 percent total dependency upon imported oil.
Now the reality, Mr. Secretary, is that we put 70 percent of all of the oil which we consume in the United States into gasoline tanks. And what we are seeing is a dramatic decrease in the energy efficiency of the vehicles, which are being sold in our country, making us more and more dependent upon imported oil and bringing us deeper and deeper into the problems of the Middle East and the disease, which is caused by the pollution, which goes into the atmosphere.
Mr. Secretary, if you accept that premise of your own analytical subgroup, the Energy Information Administration, doesn't it make sense for us, Mr. Secretary, to begin the process of putting in place a set of regulations that require that vehicles that are sold in the United States become more efficient, not less efficient for the sake of succeeding generations to the one that lives today?
Secretary Bodman. First, Mr. Markey, it is nice to see you again, sir.
Mr. Markey. Good to see you, sir.
Secretary Bodman. Second, I would not challenge, although I am not familiar with the details of the EIA report. I would suggest to you that this administration has taken a number of steps that will start us on the path of lessening the dependency on foreign oil. We have made significant investments in hydrogen, significant investments in the nuclear area, significant investments in other novel programs, coal advancements, that would help us remove the pressure on oil, the pressures caused by our increasing dependency on oil.
As to the CAFE requirements, which is what I think you are suggesting, those are not my province. Those are the province of the Department of Transportation, and I would note that in passing. I will comment on it, but I want to make it clear that I have a lot of things to do here, but that is not one of them.
Mr. Markey. Well, let me just--let me then move over to something that you do have jurisdiction over.
Secretary Bodman. Okay.
Mr. Markey. And that is the legally mandated Energy Efficiency Standards. There are 22 rulemakings that are not moving forward at Department of Energy on air conditioners, on furnaces, on 22 different areas----
Secretary Bodman. Right.
Mr. Markey. [continuing] that could save our country the need to build 100 large coal or nuclear-fired power plants over the next 10 or 15 years.
Secretary Bodman. Right.
Mr. Markey. What are you going to do, Mr. Secretary, to help our country work smarter, not harder, so that we improve our technology and not have the Department of Energy sit on legally mandated rulemakings that this committee produced in 1987 as part of my Energy Efficiency Act and the 1992 Energy Act? What are you going to do?
Secretary Bodman. I have actually queried the staff that are working on that particular matter, in part in preparation for this hearing, and in part because I was interested in having read the long article in the Washington Post on this exact subject, which you probably have seen yourself, sir.
Mr. Markey. I was quoted in it, yes, thank you.
Secretary Bodman. I had forgotten that. Forgive me.
In any event, I have become convinced, one, that significant effort is underway, two, that there were changes that were made de facto in the late 1990's in terms of what the approach to setting efficiency standards would and should be. And these were decided by both the manufacturers on the one hand and the efficiency advocates on the other hand as to what approach it would be. And the decision was that it would be a transparent process. It would be very rigorous, but alas, unfortunately, very time consuming. And it does take a long time to go back and forth if everybody is going to have a look at it and understand it. I am informed that we are in the late stages of being able to propose tentative rules for commercial air conditioning, for residential furnaces, and I have forgotten the third----
Mr. Markey. Over what time period?
Secretary Bodman. I would think over the next few months, I would think. I don't have a fixed timeframe. Sir, I have been there 7 days, and so you know, I would ask for your indulgence.
Mr. Markey. We have 3 percent of the world's energy reserves. That is our weakness. We are America's and the world's technology leader.
Secretary Bodman. That is true, sir.
Mr. Markey. That is your background----
Secretary Bodman. That is right.
Mr. Markey. [continuing] and I hope that you impress us upon an Energy Department that has ignored that for a generation.
Secretary Bodman. Would you say that again? I didn't understand that.
Mr. Markey. I hope that you impress it upon this agency----
Secretary Bodman. Oh.
Mr. Markey. [continuing] that has ignored technology improvement for a generation.
Secretary Bodman. We will. We are going to work very hard, if I may say so, sir, in terms of technology and what its impact can be, but I also, sir, hope that I am not sitting here explaining to you a year from now that we have a lot of promises that we have not kept. And so I will do my very best to be able to come in here and tell you that we have said we would do whatever it is we have said we would do and that we have done it.
Mr. Markey. Good luck, Mr. Secretary.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_house_hearings&docid=99900.wais