Harnessing Energy At Thermal Sources Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1568, I call up the bill (H.R. 7409) to amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to waive the requirement for a Federal drilling permit for certain activities, to exempt certain activities from the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WESTERMAN. 7409.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 7409, the Harnessing Energy At Thermal Sources Act, or the HEATS Act.

First, I thank the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim), my friend, for being a leader on this issue and working with my staff and me to bring this bipartisan bill to the floor.

H.R. 7409, the HEATS Act, is a commonsense bill that would expedite the development of geothermal energy on non-Federal lands containing Federal minerals.

Currently, geothermal operators on non-Federal land producing any amount of Federal resources must abide by all Federal laws and permitting processes, even if the share of Federal minerals is minuscule.

Under this bill, such projects would still undergo a rigorous State permitting process but would not be bogged down by duplicative and burdensome Federal permitting processes.

H.R. 7409 stipulates that geothermal wells on non-Federal lands are not subject to NEPA, ESA, or NHPA if the United States holds an ownership interest of less than 50 percent of the geothermal estate and the operator receives a drilling permit from the respective State.

Notably, the bill would not impact the royalty paid to the Federal Government. Therefore, it would not reduce the Federal revenues generated by geothermal production. In fact, it would actually increase Federal revenues by reducing the administrative responsibilities of Federal agencies and expediting the permitting process for geothermal development.

Enhanced geothermal systems, or EGS, are created by injecting fluid deep underground in carefully controlled conditions to create new fractures and causing preexisting fractures to open, increasing permeability below the surface. The process employs established technology already commonly utilized in the energy sector, and the DOE estimates that EGS could generate 60 gigawatts of electricity by 2050, which represents 8.5 percent of the U.S. generation capacity.

The best geothermal reservoirs suitable for EGS are located in States with Federal minerals, including Colorado, California, Utah, Nevada, Idaho, New Mexico, and Oregon.

Mr. Speaker, Federal streamlining efforts like this bill will be necessary to realize EGS' full potential. Federal minerals, however, come with red tape.

This bill provides a rational approach to streamlining the development of a proven renewable energy source. This commonsense bill will help spur geothermal energy development and promote American energy independence as part of an all-of-the-above energy strategy. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Mr. Speaker, if we lived in a place called Utopia, a lot of this might be possible. I come from an engineering background. Some of the things I remember from those classes long ago, laws like energy can't be created or destroyed, it just changes form.

It would be nice if we could get electricity in the wire without a geothermal plant or to mine coal or to mine gas or to build the solar farm. We haven't figured out how to do that yet.

If we want energy, we are going to have to use the sources that we have got where they are. If we want minerals, we are going to have to get them out of the ground. That can be a good thing because that can create jobs, that can create economic growth. We can do it in a responsible way.

Mr. Speaker, this bill does not remove all permitting. It requires landowners to still get permits from States. It has protections built in for the environment. It gives States and local communities a bigger seat at the table than to rely on some permit coming out of Washington, D.C., to develop a project that has a slight interest in Federal minerals.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I guess things depend on the perspective from which you look at them. They took the geothermal plant picture down that was up on the other side of the aisle, but I will point out that if that plant were to be built on Federal lands, it would go fully under Federal permitting process.

We are talking about facilities that are built on State or private lands that are close to Federal lands. What we are really talking about is not what is on the surface; it is what is below the surface.

If the geothermal energy that is going to this facility, if 50 percent or less of that is coming off of the Federal estate, then the developer would not have to go through the Federal permitting process but would go through the State permitting process.

They would still pay the Federal Government the royalty for the geothermal energy that is coming off of the Federal estate, but they just wouldn't have to go through the Federal permitting process.

You can look at that and say, oh, they are being exempted from the Federal permitting process, but if you look at it from the other perspective, why should a State or private landowner be subject to the Federal permitting process on their private or State land just because less than half of the energy that is going into this facility is coming off of the Federal Government?

Should the Federal Government be dictating to States and private businesses and private landowners what gets developed on their land?

Again, I guess it is just the perspective of how you look at it, but the one thing we know is, you can't harvest and harness this renewable geothermal energy that could make up 8\1/2\ percent of our electricity generation without getting it out of the ground and having a facility to utilize that.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WESTERMAN. I appreciate the gentlewoman pointing out the language on page 3 of the bill. I will point that out too because it says, ``The Secretary shall not require an operator to obtain a Federal drilling permit for geothermal exploration and production activities conducted on a non-Federal surface estate. . . .''

I think most people would agree that we don't want the Federal Government telling States and private landowners that they have to obtain a Federal permit to extract energy off of their land. That is exactly why we are proposing this bill, and it is not coming from the standpoint that the government knows best, that somebody sitting here in D.C. in a nondescript cubicle should be telling somebody thousands of miles away how to develop their land. No.

We shouldn't require Federal permitting on State and private land, which is what we are talking about. That is what this bill would do. It is only in the case where when you get below the surface, if more than 50 percent of the geothermal energy is coming off of Federal land, then you still have to go through the Federal permitting.

If it is less than 50 percent, then the State permitting would rule. It is a commonsense bill. It would promote economic development. It would promote renewable energy development. It is a bill that needs to be passed.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

In closing, I would like to urge my colleagues to vote in support of H.R. 7409. The HEATS Act would expedite geothermal energy production by removing the requirement that geothermal operators receive a Federal drilling permit for wells on State and private lands where the subsurface geothermal estate is less than 50 percent Federal.

Operators would still be required to receive State permits and approval but would be exempt from Federal permitting regulations like NEPA, the ESA, and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. That is a mouthful of words, but let's look at in practicality.

We are talking about a geothermal production facility that is going to have a footprint on the surface of the land. It is going to be on the surface of State or private land. Then we are going drill a hole thousands of feet into the ground, an 8- to 12-inch in diameter hole that is going to go a mile or so deeper, maybe 2 miles deep into the ground. Then it is going to turn horizontal, and it is going to start picking up geothermal energy from a large area.

What my friends across the aisle seem to want to do is to invoke a NEPA permit on a hole in the ground 2 miles deep. They want to be able to implement the ESA because of a hole in the ground 2 miles deep. They want to do a National Historic Preservation assessment because of a hole in the ground 2 miles deep.

What they really want to do is be able to link this private facility on State or private land back to the Federal Government so they can use these laws that are well-intentioned, well-meaning laws to stop that facility from being built on State or private land.

There is no environmental benefit of doing an ESA analysis on a hole in the ground 2 miles deep. There is no historical preservation that is going to be improved by permitting a hole 2 miles deep, not when this has already been through a robust State permitting process and these States have requirements and regulations for developing energy resources within their borders. What this does is it eliminates duplicative bureaucracy at the Federal level that has no intent or purpose other than to impede geothermal energy development.

This bill will lower emissions and energy costs for American families and strengthen U.S. energy independence. Accelerating renewable geothermal production and deployment is a win for our economy, our national security, and the environment.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source