Testimony of David K. Garman
Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
U. S. Department of Energy
before the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
Committee on Energy and Commerce
U. S. House of Representatives
June 22, 2001
Chairman Barton and members of the Subcommittee, it is a pleasure for me to be here today to discuss the Administration's National Energy Policy and its relationship to the Department of Energy's Energy Efficiency programs. Mr. Chairman, the National Energy Policy, which was issued on May 16, 2001, by the National Energy Policy Development Group, is a balanced, comprehensive long-term approach highlighting the promise of technology in meeting our energy, environmental and economic challenges. The National Energy Policy promotes energy efficiency and improved energy conservation as a national priority. Of the 105 recommendations in the Policy, more than 20 directly or indirectly address energy efficiency in residences, commercial establishments, industrial sites, electrical power plants, and transportation. By implementing these actions, this nation will continue our trend of decreasing energy use per dollar of GDP, while improving our standard of living and protecting the environment.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to report the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy will continue to build on our successful technology research, development, demonstration and deployment (RDD&D) activities to meet the recommendations of the National Energy Policy. EERE is poised to play a major role in this nation's energy future. The Office funds research, development, demonstration and deployment of affordable, advanced energy technologies and practices. This effort is organized around five energy sectors — (1) buildings, (2) industry, (3) transportation, (4) power generation and delivery, and (5) federal government facilities — which are incorporated into 31 programs. Let me cite only a few examples of what we've accomplished so far to illustrate why I am so enthusiastic about EERE's capacity to fulfill many of the recommendations of the National Energy Policy.
In the transportation sector, the investment in our government/industry Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) is paying off: Hybrid-electric drive options will be offered by each of the three automakers in the 2003-2004 timeframe: Dodge Durango in 2003, Ford Escape in 2003, Chevrolet Silverado in 2004, and Ford Explorer in late 2004. In general, these configurations will deliver equal or better performance while also improving fuel economy by between 15 to 35 percent. To the individual consumer, this could mean roughly a twenty percent reduction in fuel use, which allow a fifth fewer trips to the gas station and reduced fuel costs.
In our industrial programs, through cost-shared R&D on pre-competitive technologies, the Department has helped develop over 140 technologies which are currently in the marketplace. These technologies provide environmental and general productivity improvements, as well as reducing farm and factory energy bills. For example, a new oxygen-fueled combustion process in the glass industry averages energy savings of 15% on larger furnaces and can achieve savings of up to 45% in smaller furnaces while reducing NOx and particulate emissions.
In the buildings arena, the introduction of new technology to increase energy efficiency can have significant economic and environmental benefits. Two examples of reduced energy use are: Low emissivity windows which reduce heat loss from windows by one-third and now comprise 40% of the windows market; and energy use in refrigerators has gone from over 1800 kilowatt hours per year for a typical unit sold in 1974 to a new standard of 476 kilowatt hours for a typical unit sold after July 1, 2001, reducing refrigerator energy use by roughly three-quarters.
And, finally, we have also had successes in our Federal Energy Management program. In FY 1999, the Government reached its Energy Policy Act of 1992 FY2000 goal of 20% decreased energy consumption per gross square foot since FY1985 - a year early. In FY 1999 constant dollars, the Federal government's utility bill in FY 1985 for facilities was $5.6 billion dollars. In FY 1999, the bill was $3.41 billion dollars — $2.2 billion less in constant dollars.
I want to stress that nearly our entire portfolio of energy efficiency programs is based on public/private partnerships. We believe that working with the private sector stimulates private investments and leverages scarce federal dollars. These partnerships also help ensure that we develop technologies that private industry will carry forward to the marketplace.
Mr. Chairman, the Department has already begun to implement some of the recommendations from the National Energy Policy report. The Policy calls for a review of current funding and historic performance of the Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy programs. I am pleased that Secretary Abraham asked me to begin the review process. My office has undertaken the reviews by using a two-pronged approach: (1) A period of public comments; and (2) an internal programmatic review. We scheduled seven meetings across the country throughout the month of June to receive public comments on the NEP as it relates to EERE programs. Six of the meetings have been completed. We've asked the public to provide their views on (1) the objectives of the current energy efficiency and renewable energy research, development, demonstration and deployment programs, (2) suggested potential objectives for future programs, (3) implementation of current and future programs, (4) whether these federal programs are achieving intended objectives, and (5) and ideas for public/private partnerships.
When public input concludes on June 29, we will begin reviewing all EERE programs to determine their performance and potential in terms of delivering benefits to the public. We have committed to reevaluating those programs that have not made progress toward national energy goals. Likewise, we will redouble our efforts in those programs that have shown, and continue to show, good performance and potential in contributing to national energy goals. We have set the ambitious goal of completing the formal program review by September 1 at which point we will provide recommendations to the Secretary. I fully expect, that when the review is complete, we will have a diverse portfolio of activities — from basic research to deployment projects — that is performance-based. This is consistent with the national need to develop a balanced energy technology R&D portfolio that delivers short-term, intermediate, and long-term energy benefits. Further, this review will complement the National Academy of Sciences study of our programs which is expected to be released in mid-July.
Mr. Chairman, we are leading by example. President Bush, on May 3, 2001, issued a directive to Federal agencies, echoing the NEP recommendation that Federal managers take appropriate actions to conserve energy at their facilities to the maximum extent possible. These Federal actions, which were to begin immediately, are expected to reduce peak load and serve as examples of energy conservation for the rest of the country. They may even help reduce the extent of electricity shortages this summer in susceptible areas including California, the Northeast and the Northwest. Secretary Abraham has asked EERE's Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) to work with federal agencies to implement the President's directive. This week we transmitted to the Vice President for his review, the consolidated report of Federal Agencies outlining the Federal Government's efforts to save electricity and reduce peak load in response to the President's directive.
The National Energy Policy report recommended that the President increase funding the Weatherization Assistance Program by $1.2 billion over 10 years. In concert with this recommendation, the President requested an additional $120 million in the FY 2002 budget submission for this purpose. This funding increase will enable States to weatherize 123,000 low-income homes. This represents an increase of 48,000 additional low-income homes as compared to FY 2001, thereby providing assistance to low-income citizens whose energy costs represent a disproportionate share of their income.
Mr. Chairman, I know that the Subcommittee is considering statutory changes that might further promote energy efficiency. We find, at first blush, that we have significant existing authority to carry out our programs under the provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the National Energy Conservation Act, the Energy Security Act, the National Appliance Energy Conservation Policy Act, the Federal Energy Management Improvement Act, and the Department of Energy Organization Act, among others. Moreover, Executive Orders provide us with additional authority and guidance. Prior to completion of our strategic reviews, we cannot identify other legislative initiatives beyond those included in the National Energy Policy that the Administration is prepared to recommend.
Mr. Chairman, we believe that the National Energy Policy recognizes the critical role that energy efficiency plays in a balanced energy policy. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today and I will be happy to respond to any questions you may have.