    [Senate Hearing 116-327]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 116-327

                              PENDING LEGISLATION

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                             SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY

                                     OF THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                       on

                            S. 143         S. 1685
                            S. 983         S. 1741
                            S. 1064        S. 1857
                            S. 1183        S. 2048
                            S. 1593        H.R. 1138
                            S. 1602

                                   __________

                                  JULY 9, 2019

                                   __________

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                           Printed for the use of the
                   Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                                 ______

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
     37-809                WASHINGTON : 2021

                   COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

                        LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman

    JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming               JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia
    JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                RON WYDEN, Oregon
    MIKE LEE, Utah                       MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
    STEVE DAINES, Montana                BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
    BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana              DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
    CORY GARDNER, Colorado               MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
    CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
    MARTHA McSALLY, Arizona              ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
    LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee           CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
    JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
                                     ------

                             Subcommittee on Energy

                             BILL CASSIDY, Chairman

    JAMES E. RISCH                       MARTIN HEINRICH
    MIKE LEE                             RON WYDEN
    STEVE DAINES                         MARIA CANTWELL
    CORY GARDNER                         BERNARD SANDERS
    CINDY HYDE-SMITH                     DEBBIE STABENOW
    MARTHA McSALLY                       MAZIE K. HIRONO
    LAMAR ALEXANDER                      ANGUS S. KING, JR.
    JOHN HOEVEN                          CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO

                          Brian Hughes, Staff Director
                         Kellie Donnelly, Chief Counsel
      Brianne Miller, Senior Professional Staff Member and Energy Policy
                                    Advisor
                    Sarah Venuto, Democratic Staff Director
                    Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
                    Renae Black, Democratic General Counsel

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page
    Cassidy, Hon. Bill, Subcommittee Chairman and a U.S. Senator from
      Louisiana......................................................     1
    Heinrich, Hon. Martin, Subcommittee Ranking Member and a U.S.
      Senator from New Mexico........................................     4

                                   WITNESSES

    Collins, Hon. Susan, a U.S. Senator from Maine...................     3
    Klobuchar, Hon. Amy, a U.S. Senator from Minnesota...............    14
    Walker, Hon. Bruce J., Assistant Secretary, Office of
      Electricity, U.S. Department of Energy.........................    15
    Bennett, Shawn, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oil and Gas,
      Office of Fossil Energy, U.S. Department of Energy.............    25

              ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

    Acuity Brands, et al.:
        Letter for the Record........................................     5
    American Public Power Association, et al.:
        Letter for the Record........................................     8
    Bennett, Shawn:
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    61
    Cassidy, Hon. Bill:
        Opening Statement............................................     1
    Collins, Hon. Susan:
        Opening Statement............................................     3
    Ernst, Hon. Joni:
        Statement for the Record.....................................    63
    Federal Performance Contracting Coalition:
        Letter for the Record........................................    65
    Ford, Richard W.:
        Letter for the Record........................................    67
    Heinrich, Hon. Martin:
        Opening Statement............................................     4
    Information Technology & Innovation Foundation:
        Letter for the Record........................................    68
    Klobuchar, Hon. Amy:
        Opening Statement............................................    14
    Matheson, Jim:
        Letter for the Record........................................     9
    National Association for State Community Services Programs:
        Letter for the Record........................................    11
    National Association of State Energy Officials:
        Letter for the Record........................................    12
    National Community Action Foundation:
        Letter for the Record........................................    13
    Walker, Hon. Bruce J.:
        Opening Statement............................................    15
        Written Testimony............................................    18
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    43

                                   __________
    The text for each of the bills which were addressed in this hearing can
    be found on the committee's website at: https://www.energy.senate.gov/
    hearings/2019/7/subcommittee-on-energy-legislative-hearing.

                              PENDING LEGISLATION

                                  ----------

                             TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2019

                                   U.S. Senate,
                                Subcommittee on Energy,
                     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
    Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bill Cassidy,
    presiding.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BILL CASSIDY,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA

        Senator Cassidy [presiding]. The hearing shall come to
    order.
        Good morning. Today the Committee comes together for a
    legislative hearing on several bills. I appreciate the
    opportunity to work with Senator Heinrich, the Subcommittee
    Ranking Member, to address key issues in our energy portfolio.
        This hearing will allow us to receive testimony and ask
    questions from the Assistant Secretary for the Office of
    Electricity, Mr. Bruce Walker, and the Deputy Assistant
    Secretary for Oil and Gas from the Office of Fossil Fuel, Mr.
    Shawn Bennett.
        The Department of Energy (DOE) will play a critical role in
    helping the U.S. and the world lower emissions which is, of
    course, a global problem. If we want to be leaders, we need to
    provide a model that others can follow and part of that model
    is showing the world that, through innovation, we can lower
    emissions and maintain a modern economy.
        Through technological breakthroughs, such as carbon capture
    and energy storage, we have the opportunity to show such a
    model. However, if we are to reach these breakthroughs, we must
    ensure that right policies are in place to set up success.
    There has been promising breakthroughs in each area, and I hope
    we can continue to build.
        One of the bills on the docket I have been working on with
    my colleague, Senator Cornyn, is S. 1685, the Launching Energy
    Advancement and Development through Innovations for Natural Gas
    Act, or the LEADING Act. This bill requires the U.S. Department
    of Energy to establish a research, development and
    demonstration program for carbon capture technologies for use
    by natural gas generating power facilities.
        I want to acknowledge the hard work that DOE is already
    doing to develop such technology for both coal and natural gas,
    but as we continue to increase natural gas consumption, new
    challenges arise and we must keep natural gas competitive.
        The U.S. is leading the world in lowering emissions by
    increasing its use of natural gas and other innovative
    resources. Natural gas is now the main source of energy in the
    U.S., generating 35.1 percent of our electricity in 2018, and
    the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects this number
    to continue to rise for the foreseeable future as more gas
    comes online.
        Natural gas emits 50 to 60 percent less carbon dioxide when
    combusted in natural gas power plants compared with other
    sources. It also supports the deployment of renewable energy.
    Gas power plants can quickly and safely ramp up and down to
    combat the volatility of renewables.
        According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, a
    one percent increase in the share of fast reacting power source
    is associated with almost a 0.9 percent long-term increase in
    renewable generation. Investment in gas is able and necessary
    to support increased use of renewables.
        Developing cost-effective carbon capture technology for
    natural gas plants will help the U.S. continue to lower
    emissions while creating jobs and supporting domestic energy
    production and security.
        Other bills on today's docket include several energy
    storage bills that would each authorize funding to encourage
    energy storage, research development and demonstration.
        S. 143, the Department of Energy's Veterans' Health
    Initiative Act, introduced by Senator Ernst, authorizes DOE to
    conduct collaborative research with the Department of Veterans
    Affairs to improve health care services for veterans in the
    U.S.
        S. 983, the Weatherization Enhancement and Local Energy
    Efficiency Investment and Accountability Act of 2019,
    introduced by Senator Coons, reauthorizes and modernizes the
    DOE's Weatherization Assistance Program.
        S. 1857, the Federal Energy and Water Management
    Performance Act of 2019, introduced by Chairman Murkowski,
    improves federal energy and water performance requirements and
    formally authorizes the Federal Energy Management Program.
        S. 1064, the Appalachian Energy for National Security Act,
    introduced by Ranking Member Manchin, requires DOE, in
    consultation with the Departments of Defense and Treasury, to
    conduct a study and issue a report on the national security
    benefits of the proposed ethane storage and distribution hub
    located in Appalachia.
        Lastly, H.R. 1138, introduced by Representative Reed, would
    reauthorize the West Valley Demonstration Project in West
    Valley, New York.
        Now I will turn to my colleague, Ranking Member Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Actually, Chairman, while we have our
    colleague from Maine, why don't we let her give her testimony
    and then I will come back and give my opening statement so that
    she can move on, if she would like?
        Senator Cassidy. I was halfway through my opening statement
    thinking what in the heck? Why didn't I allow Senator Collins
    to go first? So, I apologize.
        Please, Senator Collins, and thank you.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. SUSAN COLLINS,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM MAINE

        Senator Collins. Thank you very much. That's very gracious
    of both of you.
        Good morning, Chairman Cassidy and Ranking Member Heinrich.
    I want to begin by thanking you for holding this hearing to
    examine new energy proposals that have been referred to your
    Subcommittee.
        I appreciate the opportunity to testify on the Better
    Energy Storage Technology Act, or BEST Act, that I've sponsored
    with the distinguished Subcommittee Ranking Member, Senator
    Heinrich. I would also like to thank Senators Gardner, Smith,
    McSally, Coons and King, who have joined us as original co-
    sponsors.
        Energy storage systems provide a wide range of benefits,
    including improving the reliability of our grid, decreasing
    energy costs and allowing the increased use of our renewable
    resources. Developing these new technologies is critical.
        Our bipartisan legislation will support the next generation
    of energy storage technologies at the Department of Energy.
    Energy storage technology holds such great promise in the fight
    against climate change. Advancing next generation energy
    storage technology will allow us to integrate more renewables
    such as wind and solar which, in turn, will help to reduce
    emissions. Solutions to the challenges posed by energy storage
    are, in fact, key to expanding our reliance on renewable
    sources of energy.
        Specifically, our bill would support energy storage
    research on highly flexible, longer duration and seasonal
    storage systems. Those are the three areas that the bill
    specifically concentrates on. Second, it would authorize up to
    five demonstration projects. Third, it would direct the
    Department of Energy to establish a strategic plan and allow
    the Department to develop cost targets. We've seen what the
    Department can do working with the private sector. For example,
    the great success the Department had in working with the
    private sector in lowering the cost of solar technology.
    Another provision of the bill would support coordination of
    research across government--so the left hand knows what the
    right is doing. And finally, the bill would authorize $60
    million annually for five years. The BEST Act would help
    advance energy storage technologies to improve the efficiency
    of the nation's electricity grid while helping to promote wider
    use of clean, renewable energy.
        I want to thank you again for holding this hearing. Let me
    just end by saying that I think the energy storage bills are so
    important and exciting. They really represent the new frontier.
        I hope that this Subcommittee will favorably report the
    BEST Act.
        Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, my
    colleagues.
        Senator Cassidy. Thank you, Senator Collins.
        Senator Collins. Thank you.
        Senator Cassidy. Senator Heinrich.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

        Senator Heinrich. First, I want to thank Chairman Cassidy
    for calling this hearing today, our first hearing together as
    Chairman and Ranking Member of the Energy Subcommittee. And I
    certainly want to thank our witnesses today.
        The Energy and Natural Resources Committee really hit the
    ground running this Congress with an excellent package of
    public lands legislation. I was very pleased to see that
    legislation get to the President's desk in March, but it left a
    number of really good energy bills behind. And today we begin
    consideration of important energy legislation with 11 bills,
    almost all of which are bipartisan. The list of bills on
    today's agenda could have been, literally, twice as long, so I
    hope the Subcommittee will continue to process legislation with
    additional hearings and a markup in the full Committee.
        We should be able to assemble, fairly quickly, one or even
    more packages of energy legislation that can be marked up in
    the Committee with bipartisan support. I certainly look forward
    to working with the Chairman, Ranking Member Manchin and our
    colleagues on the full Committee to pass important energy
    legislation.
        Today's hearing will address several important energy
    issues including energy efficiency, energy storage, artificial
    intelligence, and carbon capture.
        Energy technologies are one of the critical tools we need
    to address climate change and what many of us believe has
    become a climate crisis. We need to get additional low-carbon
    energy technologies ready for commercialization, and then we
    need to get them deployed.
        Energy storage is clearly a major topic of interest for
    members judging by the five bills before us today. I am pleased
    to be a co-sponsor on several of these bills.
        Expanded use of energy storage, especially long-term
    storage, is the key to modernizing the grid and the near-term
    transition to a clean energy economy. There is widespread
    support in Congress for a robust R&D program on energy storage,
    including long-term storage, and I look forward to working with
    my colleagues to move legislation forward.
        Although the President's FY 2020 overall request for energy
    R&D is wholly inadequate, the Administration has acknowledged
    energy storage as an important area for investment. And I want
    to hear more about the Department of Energy's plans today.
        Again, I want to thank the Chairman for calling today's
    hearing and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses and
    working to pass a number of these bills.
        Before I give up the mic, I just want to ask unanimous
    consent to add a number of letters articulating support for a
    number of the bills on the docket today to be added to the
    record.
        Senator Cassidy. Without objection.
        [Letters of support follow:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Cassidy. Senator Klobuchar.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA

        Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much.
        Thank you, Chairman Cassidy and Ranking Member Heinrich and
    all the members of this Committee. It's an honor to be here.
    And thank you for holding this important hearing to examine
    legislation relating to energy storage, grid improvements and
    energy production.
        We all know the important moment we are at in history. And
    what I have seen in the rural areas of my State and across the
    country is that there is more and more interest in how we move
    forward to cleaner energy and to a clean energy grid. Some of
    this is, of course, obvious with the flooding we're seeing in
    the Heartland, and the wildfires. Some of it is simply
    homeowners insurance going up, but people are starting to say
    to themselves, let's see what we can do to be part of this.
        And I appreciate this opportunity to discuss a bill that
    I've introduced with Senator Moran, the Expanding Access to
    Sustainable Energy Act.
        What our bill would do is help rural communities and rural
    electric co-ops overcome barriers to renewable energy storage
    and grid improvements by providing access to needed resources
    and expertise.
        We all know from so many of you from states that have
    significant rural areas that it is not one-size-fits-all when
    it comes to electric companies. And I've spent a lot of time
    out at the electric co-ops in my State, including going up in a
    bucket and doing other various interesting things. One of the
    things that I've learned is they want to be a part of this and
    they want to figure out how they financially can be a part of
    it.
        One of my favorite examples was the Steele-Waseca Electric
    Co-op in Minnesota. Once some incentives were put in place for
    solar, they actually wanted to figure out how to get their
    customers to buy a solar panel, not for their own homes, but
    for an area right outside their co-op. So they came up with an
    idea that they would give a free large capacity water heater,
    which aren't that expensive, which have been found to actually
    be smart for large farmhouses.
        And it was a bill actually Senator Hoeven and I had worked
    on when they were going to be phased out. So they ended up
    doing that, and it was astounding the hundreds of people in
    their small co-op that bought these solar panels because they
    were able to price it out for them. And in exchange they got a
    free large capacity water heater for their basement. So when I
    saw that, I thought, well, we have to do more to incentivize
    these small co-ops.
        This bill is co-sponsored by our colleagues, Senator
    Gardner and Senator King, both members of this Committee, and
    it empowers rural communities and electric co-ops to develop
    their own energy storage and grid improvement projects. By
    providing technical assistance and grant support, the bill
    provides opportunities for these communities to invest in
    improvement. The bill builds upon the success of the Department
    of Energy's Sunday program, which led to a dramatic increase in
    adoption of solar energy by rural electric co-ops, such as the
    one I just mentioned, from 2013 to 2018.
        The recognized need to improve energy grid capacity and
    resiliency, as well as the unpredictability of a day with solar
    and wind power has fueled interest, of course, in energy
    storage as a way to meet electricity demand during peak times.
        While tax incentives have helped spur development of
    renewable energy projects, these incentives do not address the
    most significant barriers to exploration and establishment of
    new renewable energy projects, including storage projects in
    rural communities where help is needed in planning,
    implementing, and maintaining these projects. Our bill would
    address these barriers head-on.
        I believe that extending expertise and support to rural
    communities and rural electric co-ops will improve rural
    community energy resiliency and autonomy, spur economic
    activity, and improve environmental and public health.
        So thank you so much for allowing me to testify in support
    of this bill. It is my hope that you will all support our
    bipartisan effort.
        Thank you very much.
        Senator Cassidy. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar.
        And now, could we have Mr. Walker and Mr. Bennett move to
    the witness table?
        [Witnesses come up and take their seats.]
        Senator Cassidy. Mr. Walker, whenever you are ready.

    STATEMENT OF HON. BRUCE J. WALKER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, OFFICE
               OF ELECTRICITY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

        Mr. Walker. Thank you, Chairman.
        Chairman Cassidy, Ranking Member Heinrich and members of
    the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify
    regarding these important pieces of legislation.
        First, I would like to thank the members of the Senate
    Energy and Natural Resources Committee for your advocacy
    resulting in the confirmation of Mr. Genatowski, our Director
    of ARPA-E.
        Today's hearing addresses many areas including advancing
    utilizing artificial intelligence (AI) and relational
    computational capabilities for complex problems including our
    veterans' health, optimizing the way we utilize fossil fuels,
    especially natural gas given its importance in electric
    generation, providing federal leadership in energy and water
    conservation and ensuring energy efficiency, health and safety
    investments for low income citizens, and finally grid-scale
    electric energy storage. Each of these are, indeed, crucial
    factors in advancing energy resilience and our economic and
    national security.
        The Department is grateful for the Committee's attention to
    these critical issues in the energy sector. We believe that our
    research and development capabilities consistently demonstrated
    by our national labs is unrivaled and provide unique
    opportunities to address key challenges working with industry
    and academia.
        Specifically, the bills associated with electric energy
    storage technology are timely impression. Grid-scale electric
    energy storage is disruptive and has the opportunity to
    revolutionize the energy industry. Having spent my career in
    the electric industry managing grid operations, I know this
    firsthand.
        By comparison, the significant changes that have been
    realized in the energy industry over the last two years will
    pale in comparison to the remarkable changes and improvements
    that will be realized through ubiquitous grid-scale electric
    energy storage and the related smaller storage technologies
    that will evolve as a result.
        Similar to the computer industry where we witnessed the
    transition from centralized mainframes to highly capable
    networked personal computers, here too, with grid-scale
    electric energy storage, we shall witness the transition from a
    consolidated grid to a disaggregated, more secure, more robust
    and more flexible energy grid.
        The Department, specifically, the Office of Electricity, is
    focused on advancing grid-scale electric energy storage to
    address resilience on the bulk power system, including our
    defense critical electric infrastructure.
        Keenly aware of the threats posed by physical and
    cyberattacks, as well as natural disaster, the Office of
    Electricity is working with other DOE Departments developing
    new tools and technologies to accelerate electric energy
    storage developments through the Grid Modernization Initiative,
    the Advanced Energy Storage Initiative and the Grid Storage
    Launchpad.
        The Office of Electricity proposed Grid Storage Launchpad
    at Pacific Northwest National Lab will focus on expanding or
    extending U.S. R&D grid-scale electric energy storage
    leadership by validating new technologies and earlier readiness
    levels and by accelerating new technologies in partnership with
    industry and academia. The $5 million requested in FY20 will
    fund that design and lead to the construction in subsequent
    years.
        Finally, it is important to highlight that without this
    Committee's insistence, advancing critical technologies such as
    AI, advanced data analytics, grid-scale electric energy
    storage, and carbon capture, utilization and sequestration,
    would simply not be possible.
        And before I close, the Secretary specifically asked me to
    convey his thoughts regarding Senate bill 143, DOE's Veterans'
    Health Initiative Act. ``The health of our nation's veterans is
    one of utmost importance to the Trump Administration,
    especially the U.S. Department of Energy. Using the power of
    the world's fastest supercomputers housed at our national
    laboratories, DOE is uniquely positioned to improve the
    diagnosis of and treatment for the most perplexing diseases our
    war fighters disproportionately suffer from. DOE fueled
    advancements in artificial intelligence and machine learning
    are helping researchers identify and neurologists treat
    traumatic brain injuries and other mental health conditions
    paving the way for better outcomes and a better future for our
    nation's war fighters.
        ``Specifically, the DOE's Veterans' Health Initiative Act
    authorizes DOE, in partnership and coordination with the
    Department of Veterans Affairs, to analyze the world's richest
    medical dataset with the world's most powerful computers to
    transform data into knowledge. This bill is strongly aligned
    with the Administration's stated research and development
    budget priorities that include the American leadership in
    artificial intelligence, maximizing interagency coordination
    and a workforce for the 21st century economy.
        ``All Americans have an obligation to do everything in our
    power to ensure that those who have worn the uniform get the
    best care our country has to offer. It is my highest priority
    to apply DOE's world leading computational capabilities to
    research and the development of new ways to improve and
    positively impact their lives.'' Secretary Rick Perry.
        Thank you and I look forward to the discussion today.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Walker follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Cassidy. Mr. Bennett, it is my understanding that
    you do not have an opening statement, correct?
        Mr. Bennett. That is correct.
        Senator Cassidy. Okay. Well then, let's start with
    questions.
        I will defer to Senator Gardner.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Bennett, I appreciate your statement, thank you.
        [Laughter.]
        Just kidding. Efficiency of the Committee under the new
    leadership, thank you, Chairman Cassidy.
        I want to thank you for holding this very important hearing
    and to both of the witnesses today, Mr. Walker and Mr. Bennett,
    for being here.
        I want to, first of all, start by thanking you, Mr. Walker,
    for your support of the bill that you concluded with, the
    Veterans' Health Initiative. I think this is an incredible
    opportunity for us to capture a couple things that the U.S. is
    leading on, of course, artificial intelligence, our computer
    capabilities, our supercomputers within the Department of
    Energy and the lab system, particularly Oak Ridge and others
    that we can harness the information we have through the
    Veterans Administration. Working with our veterans to improve
    health care through advanced cutting-edge technologies and
    applications really is something that could be seen as one of
    the great accomplishments of this Congress.
        We all agree that the Department of Energy's brain trust to
    their ability to harness computational capabilities is
    incredible and have solved many difficult problems in the past
    and can also, now, be applied to help our veterans.
        When it comes to the storage bills that we have talked
    about today, Senator Collins testified about, it appears the
    Department is supportive of the Better Energy Storage
    Technology Act and the Promoting Grid Storage Act, both of
    which I am proud to be a part of. Thank you for that.
        And as the Department completes its analysis of the
    Expanding Access to Sustainable Energy Act, I hope it will see
    the benefit of supporting rural electrical cooperatives to
    explore electrical energy storage opportunities in rural
    America as well.
        You and I have talked at length about the defense critical
    electric infrastructure in the past, and I am committed to
    giving the Department of Energy the authorities that it
    requires to fulfill its role as the sector specific agency for
    energy.
        We have a lot more work to do in this area, and I think the
    two bills today will be a step in the right direction.
        Do you think that the joint long-term storage acts focus on
    demonstrating long duration, electrical energy storage in
    collaboration with the Department of Defense will be a helpful
    tool in protecting defense critical electrical infrastructure?
        Mr. Walker. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
        Indeed, I do. The work we've been doing through the
    initiatives regarding the defense critical electric
    infrastructure which was, you know, astutely placed in the FAST
    Act, have allowed us to work very closely with the Department
    of Defense, our own National Nuclear Security Administration,
    NNSA, within DOE, as well as DHS to prioritize and work through
    identifying the most critical infrastructure throughout the
    United States.
        In fact, we are working and have been working for over a
    year with the Department of Defense with regards to
    opportunities to utilize storage technologies as well as other
    microgrid technologies, to better secure and improve the
    resilience capabilities for those sites, clearly on a
    prioritized basis. And I thank you for your support and the
    discussions we've had with regard to that, Senator.
        Senator Gardner. Yes, thank you, Mr. Walker.
        And the Federal Energy and Water Management Performance Act
    would increase FMP's focus on the Federal Government's energy
    resiliency. Do you think that is also something that could be
    useful in conversations, collaborations, with the Department of
    Defense (DoD)?
        Mr. Walker. Absolutely.
        One of the things that we've realized through our work with
    DoD, specific to the defense critical electric infrastructure,
    is that there are many capabilities of renewable technologies
    that are on or nearby those sites. And we believe that there
    are opportunities for us to leverage those renewable
    capabilities working with the base to maximize and look at
    energy utilization as well as water utilization. So, yes, sir.
        Senator Gardner. Thank you.
        One of the great things about Colorado, of course, is we
    are home to NREL and the opportunities we have there to utilize
    a vast number of experts in renewable energy and clean energy
    but also home to some of the largest defense installation
    communities in the country. Colorado Springs, you know, Denver,
    are all home to very significant and important national
    security operations and mission sets.
        I hope that we can be of assistance going forward as we
    look at both renewable energy defense resiliency and, you know,
    when you are flying our GPS Constellation out of Schriever Air
    Force Base, we need to make sure that for our national
    security, resiliency is there, but also for our economy that
    relies on the timing and synchronization that we have all of
    the resiliencies in place, resiliency efforts and policies in
    place to make sure that we protect both the security and
    economy of this country.
        So thank you, Mr. Walker.
        Thank you, Mr. Bennett.
        Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Cassidy. Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Mr. Walker, I am pleased to be a co-
    sponsor on a number of these bills, but I want to ask you about
    how a lot of the work that is being done in storage is being
    done across a number of different departments. There is R&D
    work that is being done, there is work to bring down costs--
    those are split up between the Office of Science, ARPA-E, and
    the DOE labs.
        What is the Department doing to make sure that all of this
    disparate work gets shared across those departments so that we
    are not balkanizing this and we are really taking advantage of
    moving those costs down quickly and moving performance up
    quickly in energy storage?
        Mr. Walker. Thank you for that question, Senator.
        That's a fantastic point, one that was recognized by the
    Secretary a couple years ago and has mobilized us to place into
    the FY20 budget an initiative called the Advanced Energy
    Storage Initiative (AESI) which cuts across all of the
    organizations within DOE that you referenced, ARPA-E,
    Department of Science, EERE and Office of Electricity as well
    as FE and the NE space. The intent of that is to coordinate all
    of the cross-cutting efforts under one umbrella that was
    proposed in the budget in an effort to really drive down,
    significantly, the price of storage and, I think, more
    importantly, it also focuses on the different applications.
        So similar to the bills that you noted, there's components
    that deal with transportation. There's components that deal
    with buildings, in front of the meter, behind the meter, as
    well as bulk storage things like electro-chemical things that
    we're working on within the Office of Electricity.
        So through that AESI we have been coordinating across all
    those departments to better understand what each one of the
    aspects each department has been working on and then leveraging
    those through the efforts collaboratively, pooling the money
    together to really make sure that we're addressing storage from
    a 360-degree view. So we're well on our way with regard to that
    initiative that's proposed in the FY20 budget, and we've
    outlined a number of those things.
        One of the key components that I would highlight is the
    metrics for driving down the price which has been mentioned, I
    think----
        Senator Heinrich. Sure.
        Mr. Walker. ----very appropriately in the bills.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes, that is one of the key things about
    storage at this point because lithium-ion has become so
    dominant, there is a tendency to think of that as storage. But
    as we move toward seasonal storage, you know, the kind of
    metrics that are important for transportation, like driving
    down weight, will not be an issue where you have long-term
    storage that never moves. So I want to make sure that we are
    tackling that from all sides.
        I want to ask you about something that is related to all of
    this, which is artificial intelligence, which came up today as
    well. I am curious where you see the near-term opportunities
    for using both AI and machine learning in terms of optimizing
    our grid operations and really optimizing the amount of clean
    electrons we can get on the grid at any given moment?
        Mr. Walker. Excellent. That's a key focus of mine,
    particularly as we move forward with the development of the
    North American Energy Resilience Model which is a model that
    integrates all the bulk power energy infrastructure throughout
    the United States. And that is important today because of the
    interdependencies across the different infrastructure, energy
    infrastructure and, most notably, one of the key areas is
    megawatt-scale renewable technology.
        So the utilization we've already been working with our AI
    Department within the Department of Energy to analyze the
    information that is included in that North American Energy
    Resilience Model to be able to optimize the utilization of all
    of the energy sector capabilities, integration of renewable
    technologies to support the resilience of the grid as well as
    being able to incorporate different capabilities and
    technologies like automated restructuring of relay protection
    to avoid outages, particularly for the most critical
    infrastructure in the United States.
        So AI is playing a key component in this. There are a
    number of projects underway particularly as it relates to that
    North American Energy Resilience Model which has a huge
    component developed focusing on grid storage.
        Senator Heinrich. I am glad to hear that.
        When my dad was a lineman, he had to check those relays
    manually. It is a big difference.
        Talk to me a little bit about direct air capture. I think
    it is something we have not adequately resourced from an R&D
    standpoint yet. What is the current thinking at DOE on direct
    air capture?
        Mr. Walker. I'm sorry, I'm having trouble hearing the first
    word.
        Senator Heinrich. Direct air capture.
        Mr. Walker. Direct air capture for----
        Senator Heinrich. For CO2.
        Mr. Walker. Do you want to go with that, Shawn?
        Senator Heinrich. Mr. Bennett?
        Mr. Bennett. Ranking Member Heinrich, yes, I'll be pleased
    to take that question.
        In 2018 the Office of Fossil Energy actually worked with
    the National Academies of Science on a report of negative
    emissions technologies and reliable sequestration which is
    direct air capture. Really the report concluded that direct air
    capture in its current form is too expensive and immature to
    have a wide range of, you know, wide range of scale deployment.
        Senator Heinrich. But you could say that about carbon
    capture and sequestration too.
        Mr. Bennett. Yes, well, you can say that for that, and we
    can get to that here in a bit.
        Now what we are doing in that space and we continue to work
    diligently in that space.
        On July 24th we are hosting a forum with 40 scientists and
    engineers for their input on key areas that we need to address
    to bring down the cost of direct air capture and learn more
    about that to be able to utilize this more on a commercially
    viable technology.
        So, you know, what we gleaned from the 2018 study was the
    fact that we needed to meet the scientists and engineers to
    bring down or get more input from the stakeholders to be able
    to implement a more robust R&D technology focus for the Office
    of Fossil Energy.
        Senator Cassidy. Senator Hirono.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        This is for Mr. Walker.
        In April I visited the Lawai Solar and Storage Facility on
    Kauai Island. It is the largest combined solar and battery
    storage facility in the world, and it generates 11 percent of
    Kauai's power and can serve as much as 40 percent of the
    evening peak power demand on the Island of Kauai for the Kauai
    Island Utility Co-op.
        Hawaiian Electric is also pursuing six new combined solar
    and storage projects on other islands, enough to serve 105,000
    homes.
        Hawaii is on the leading edge of energy storage and finding
    ways to cut pollution and use high amounts of renewable power.
    Kauai is already at 50 percent renewable power, and we are at
    27 percent statewide.
        I think we need a similar focus nationwide, which is why I
    am pleased to be a co-sponsor of one of the bills we are
    considering today, S. 1593, the Promoting Grid Storage Act of
    2019, introduced by Senator Smith. It will provide over $1
    billion over five years to accelerate the research, development
    and demonstration of energy storage technologies while helping
    organizations or communities design and develop energy storage
    systems to meet their needs.
        On page 3 of your testimony you say that the DOE agrees
    with and recognizes--and this is regarding S. 1593, which is
    the bill I am talking about--the need to provide analytical and
    technical assistance, especially for state, local, other
    relevant stakeholders. So you recognize the need. My question
    is, does the Office of Electricity have the expertise to carry
    out a nationwide program to accelerate energy storage research,
    development, and deployment along the lines of S. 1593 if
    Congress directs it to do so?
        Mr. Walker. Thank you for the opportunity to answer that
    question.
        In fact, we do. We do have that capability and as part of
    the FY20 budget we proposed a Grid Storage Launchpad. There's
    $5 million in FY20 proposed to build out the capabilities based
    on our analysis thus far at the Pacific Northwest National Lab
    (PNNL).
        We are in our alternative analysis component of that. We're
    working with PNNL. And what that does is it enables us to
    leverage the different areas, similar to my response to Senator
    Heinrich, with regard to the advanced energy storage
    initiative. So the Grid Storage Launchpad will bring together
    all the capabilities of our national labs in one place.
        Senator Hirono. This bill calls for $1 billion over five
    years, and you are telling me you have the capability with $5
    million. Is that what you are saying?
        Mr. Walker. No, the $5 million, Senator, is to do the
    design engineering analysis for the building of one facility
    that brings together all the capabilities that we have within
    our national labs at one of our national labs and that becomes
    the focal point to deal with industry and academia, where in
    fact, we would be bringing together the expertise at 23 labs.
        Senator Hirono. So you would use the $5 million to do the
    kinds of things that the bill, S. 1593, will----
        Mr. Walker. No, ma'am.
        The $5 million is simply to do the engineering to actually
    be able to construct the building over the next several years
    with appropriation.
        Senator Hirono. So can you say then that you do have the
    capability now to perform the requirements of S. 1593?
        Mr. Walker. We are, you know, working on what is suggested
    through many of the bills here today, not at the, obviously,
    with the amount of funding resources that are being offered.
        You know, the work that we do, predominately, at PNNL and
    Sandia, Argonne, is work that is being done to push all of the
    different components that are highlighted in these bills, but
    we don't have anywhere near a billion dollars over the period
    of time.
        Senator Hirono. Yes.
        Would you say that this Administration has a major
    commitment toward R&D for energy storage? Would you say that
    there's a major commitment?
        Mr. Walker. I would say there is and, in fact, in FY20 with
    the advent of the Advanced Energy Storage Initiative and the
    Grid Storage Launchpad, those are the initiating points from
    which to jump from in order for us to move forward in a much
    bigger way.
        Senator Hirono. I am very hopeful that that is actually
    what is going to happen.
        Let me say, as I run out of time, I was glad to join Chair
    Murkowski and Ranking Member Manchin and Senators Gardner,
    Shaheen and Portman in co-sponsoring the Federal Energy and
    Water Management Performance Act. This bill would codify the
    Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) and update federal
    energy and water performance requirements for federal
    buildings. So this is a bill that simply codifies an existing
    program, is it not?
        Mr. Walker. That's correct.
        Senator Hirono. And yet, in page 4 of your testimony you
    say that because of complexity you are reviewing this bill. Why
    do you have to review a bill if it is simply codifying an
    existing program?
        Mr. Walker. The--I'm not sure of the distinction you're
    making, Senator, with regard to codifying the FEMP. It was what
    has been utilized since 1976 with great success----
        Senator Hirono. So you would have no problem with this bill
    actually codifying what you are already doing?
        Mr. Walker. We do not.
        Senator Hirono. Okay.
        So then would you be able to detail--could I just ask one
    little follow-up question? Can you detail how much energy and
    taxpayer money the Federal Energy Management Program has saved
    to date from this existing program and explain the savings in
    energy, water, and money that would come from raising the water
    and energy efficiency standards for federal buildings as laid
    out in the bill? This may require a more thorough answer. So if
    you could submit your answer to this question for the record,
    that would be fine.
        Mr. Walker. Yes, very broadly, we've reduced energy costs
    by 50 percent since the inception of this, resulting in about
    $50 billion of savings.
        There are seven key metrics that there is detailed
    information that I'd be happy to provide on a QFR back with
    regard to those seven metrics that are at, have and continue to
    be measured.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you very much.
        Senator Cassidy. Thank you.
        Chairman Murkowski.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to your Ranking
    Member. Thank you for having this Subcommittee hearing this
    morning.
        Following on Senator Hirono's comments, I am pleased to be
    able to be working on this Federal Energy Water Management
    Performance Act measure, moving it forward. I appreciate the
    endorsement.
        I think when we look to different ways that we can lead by
    example when it comes to long-term energy efficiency, water
    usage reduction goals, this is pretty much a no brainer here,
    in my view, and certainly an area where we can work to reduce
    costs to taxpayers over time.
        So I appreciate that that is on the agenda, but I think the
    real main attractions this morning are the energy storage
    bills. I think we have done some good work here in the
    Committee in focusing on the role that energy storage will play
    in our clean energy future. I think not only do we have broad
    bipartisan support in this space, but we have colleagues over
    on the House side that are working on it as well.
        Back in June we had an oversight hearing on grid-scale
    energy storage, and it was pretty clear then that expanded
    deployment really does offer us an opportunity to make the grid
    just that much more resilient, that much more clean and
    certainly more affordable.
        I had an opportunity, and I have shared with my colleagues
    here, the opportunity to go to Cordova just a month ago to cut
    the ribbon on an energy storage facility there in Cordova. They
    continue to lead and innovate. And I know that you, Assistant
    Secretary Walker, have had an opportunity to see for yourself
    all the good things that come out of that little town.
        But we now have a new battery system that is paired with
    existing run-of-river hydropower. We are reducing the reliance
    on diesel fuel. We are managing demand fluctuations. We are
    lowering the energy costs for the city's residents. It is just
    all good.
        I think the next step for us as a Committee is to really
    work to develop these storage technologies more broadly. The
    five bills that we have before the Subcommittee this morning,
    again, indicate the level of interest and it is encouraging
    that it is not only bipartisan, it is in more remote and rural
    areas and urban and clearly very bicameral. These are exactly
    the types of initiatives that I think we can advance at a time
    when everyone says that the Congress cannot get anything done.
    So I encourage the work of the Subcommittee this morning.
        I am not going to be staying for the duration of the
    hearing here, but I am looking forward to the discussion and
    better understanding of what DOE is doing in the space of
    energy storage, what further support we can provide, the
    direction that you would like from this Committee and from
    those of us here in the Senate.
        So we have some good things going on, and I am hopeful that
    this will, again, be one of those initiatives that can really
    break what we are seeing with the legislative log jam because
    of good cooperation.
        My goal, recognizing that we have five different bills out
    there, is to really evaluate where we are with them, synthesize
    the various bills and the concepts, take in the best provisions
    that we have in each of them, combining them into, perhaps, a
    larger, more comprehensive energy storage package that we will
    be able to report out of the Committee.
        I hope that we would be able to do that, possibly as early
    as the end of this month or more likely in September. But
    again, I am optimistic about this space and what it is that we
    can do.
        I appreciate your leadership and that of many of the
    members on this Committee and outside the Committee that have
    weighed in on this very important matter.
        I am not going to ask questions of our witnesses this
    morning but just thank you for the work that you are doing to
    help us here at the Committee level.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Cassidy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Manchin.
        Senator Manchin. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to thank both of you for holding this Subcommittee
    hearing because it is extremely important to our energy
    package. Hopefully we will have an energy bill this year, and
    it would be a great part of that.
        But let me just say that West Virginia is an all-in energy
    supplier, if you will. We are heavily, as you know, coal
    industry. We have an ocean of natural gas under us with wet
    properties and propane, ethane, and butane. We have been
    blessed, but also, we have an awful lot of wind, which we are
    taking advantage of, and solar is coming on. So we are a little
    bit on all sides. We are for everything.
        We think innovation is the way to go. Elimination is not
    going to work because the rest of the world will not follow
    elimination. But if we can innovate, we can do much better.
        In 1920 in the Kanawha Valley in West Virginia, we built
    one of the first petrochemical crackers. And now, with all the
    wet properties we have with the gas boom, shale gas boom, in
    our neighboring states, Ohio and Pennsylvania, West Virginia is
    in the epicenter of this whole center of newfound energy.
        I have also talked to Secretary Perry and he said, ``Joe,
    I've seen the model of the Class 5 hurricane coming up the
    Houston Channel and what it does to cripple the energy of our
    country and the dependency that we have.'' So we are looking
    for a backup in West Virginia, in that area there, Ohio,
    Pennsylvania, West Virginia, with all the energy it has stored
    there--the protection of the mountains and everything else, is
    a natural hub.
        We are talking about a storage hub, petrochemical storage
    hub, for all of our wet properties that can be used for a
    renaissance, if you will, in the chemical industry as far as
    making products--manufacturing again--but also the backup
    energy needs of this country as far as the stabilization.
        Can you provide any type of an update regarding the
    President's Executive Order directive to examine the
    Appalachian region as a candidate for economic development in
    the nation's petrochemical sector?
        Mr. Bennett. Yes, Ranking Member Manchin, and I appreciate
    those comments. Not many people know where Kanawha, West
    Virginia, is and the Kanawha Valley and I'm from Ohio and, you
    know, back in April----
        Senator Manchin. You are not far from us then.
        Mr. Bennett. Oh, 45 minutes away from the Ohio River and,
    you know, within six months in 1859, 1860, we started----
        Senator Manchin. Well, when you think about it, nylon was
    invented in Charleston, all the things that we did for the war,
    all the things that our little state has done because of the
    energy. We have been blessed with energy. Now people want to
    curse us a little bit, but we are doing it better and we want
    to continue to improve.
        Mr. Bennett. That is correct.
        Senator Manchin. An all-in policy.
        Mr. Bennett. I've seen you at the Polymer Corridor coming
    right up through Parkersburg.
        Senator Manchin. Yes.
        Mr. Bennett. And you know, we understand the importance of
    the petrochemical industry within----
        Senator Manchin. How does it play within the President's--
    --
        Mr. Bennett. You know, and Secretary Perry has been very
    fond of talking about creating an Appalachian petrochemical
    complex storage hub in the region because he recognizes the
    importance from an economic security standpoint.
        You know, he has said many times, you know, that one of the
    things that kept him awake at night was a hurricane coming up
    the Houston ship channel and with that you need to have a
    diversity of your petrochemical manufacturing.
        So we are definitely looking at that and through that came
    the President's Executive Order and Section 9 of that, so we
    are hard at work on supplying that Executive Order. I believe
    it will be due here then, what, August? Yeah, in August, that
    we will have that report complete. But again, in that report we
    do recognize the importance of Appalachia and the diversity of
    your economic security for, you know, polymer and petrochemical
    manufacturing.
        Senator Manchin. Let me just say something that I don't
    know, and I am sure that Secretary Perry and I have talked
    about this, but there is no CFIUS review of propane, ethane,
    and butane which are the building blocks.
        China is trying to buy every drop of propane, butane, and
    ethane in that new shale industry. If they do, they will suck
    out every opportunity that we have for revitalization of
    manufacturing as far as energy protection we need for our
    country.
        I hope that you all are aware of this. I hope that you are
    aware of what they are trying to do, because we are trying to
    stop it. They came into the little State of West Virginia and
    offered an $83 billion deal with a ``B.'' Now you throw $83
    billion at any State, especially a little State like West
    Virginia, and it seems to be very attractive for people that
    don't know what their end game is. I want to go on record
    saying that we will do everything we can to stop them from
    taking this product without the review of how it is needed for
    the security of our nation, our country, and our states.
        I don't know if you all have been aware of that? I would
    like to put you on record to understand that we have a concern
    there, and I hope you look into it.
        Mr. Bennett. Yes, and thank you for that concern. And
    again, we definitely share in wanting to have the petrochemical
    manufacturing industry stay in Appalachia. Again, where you're
    seeing the growth in natural gas as well as natural gas liquids
    is coming, really, out of West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio.
        Senator Manchin. Right.
        Mr. Bennett. If you take that, if you took those three
    states and put them as a country, we'd be the third largest
    natural gas producer in the world.
        Senator Manchin. Alright.
        Mr. Bennett. And that's just fascinating to me.
        Senator Manchin. And then the petrochemical industry we
    have, it is a footprint of what it used to be. I mean, we are
    about 50 percent.
        So we can expand without any additional infrastructure
    because it is already there waiting to take off again.
        Mr. Bennett. Yes, and currently where you're seeing the
    ethane move to is the Gulf Coast and a lot of that is being
    used----
        Senator Manchin. It is moving by pipeline, yeah.
        Mr. Bennett. Within the petrochemical complexes on the Gulf
    Coast and then ultimately gets shipped back up to our region of
    the United States and up to Chicago and so----
        Senator Manchin. I am glad you all know about that. I hope
    you can help us with that, but I think it would be great for
    our country and great for the security of our nation.
        Thank you very much.
        Mr. Bennett. Yup.
        Senator Cassidy. Senator King.
        Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        I think there has been a little discussion of this but I
    want to inject another point into this discussion. Senator
    McSally and I are both members also, and Senator Heinrich, of
    the Armed Services Committee and energy, particularly the
    transportation of energy, is more and more important to our
    military, everything from radios on the backs of soldiers to
    fuel for tanks.
        During one of the Gulf Wars, Secretary Mattis said,
    ``Unleash me from the tether of fuel.'' It was a real problem.
    In fact, lack of fuel stopped George Patton in World War II
    when he was heading across Europe.
        So this is not only important for the grid and for the
    economy, generally, but it is a national security issue. And
    Senator McSally, Senator Heinrich and I have a bill, and I
    think Senator Gardner may have mentioned it, to work to develop
    a joint project between the Department of Defense, which is
    already doing research in this area, and ARPA-E or the
    Department of Energy. I hope that you will look with favor on
    that proposal. I think it makes a lot of sense, because this is
    an aspect of this issue that does not get all that much
    discussion.
        The Defense Department is the largest single energy user in
    the United States, and battery storage and storage for them is
    not only something nice to have, important to have, but it is
    vital to national security concerns.
        I would like your thoughts on that.
        Mr. Walker. Yes, Senator, thank you for the opportunity to
    speak on this.
        This is a critically important issue and one that I am
    keenly aware of as I lead the Defense Critical Electric
    Infrastructure Initiative for the Secretary in the Department
    of Energy. And specifically, with regard to that, the
    Department of Defense has been a close partner in working with
    the Department of Energy on the nexus of the concept of energy
    on base as well as for any of the ancillary capabilities that
    they actually require.
        So we are working very closely right now with the
    Department of Defense. We have a number of pilot projects
    underway, under our existing storage programs, some very
    specific sites. We're working through different R&D
    capabilities to, you know, enable utilization of different
    storage capabilities, utilizing and capitalizing on much of,
    many of the renewable components and capabilities that were
    previously put on these sites but tend to be grid-facing and
    not base-facing.
        So I applaud the bill that you're proposing with regard to
    the partnership with DoD because it significantly expands our
    capability to leverage the expertise within DOE within our
    national labs and our partnerships within industry and academia
    to meet the needs of our most important and critical
    infrastructure throughout the U.S.
        Senator King. I appreciate that and I look forward to
    working with you on working out the bill to an extent where the
    Administration can support it. We can move forward, make it
    part of this important package that we are talking about here.
        Mr. Walker. Absolutely.
        Senator King. I noted in my background research for this
    hearing, there are a lot of storage initiatives in the
    Department of Energy and in various places in the Department of
    Defense.
        Is there a coordination issue? How do you coordinate all
    these different programs to be sure that they are sharing
    information, that one knows what the other is doing, that we
    are not reinventing the wheel in one program that we have
    already covered in another?
        Mr. Walker. Thank you, Senator.
        And that goes back to the heart of Senator Heinrich's
    question. We have advanced forward development of an Advanced
    Energy Storage Initiative which is also included in the FY20
    budget. That initiative, led by the Secretary, cuts across all
    of the different departments, ARPA-E, the Department of the
    Office of Science, all the applied sciences, to aggregate all
    of the otherwise disparate efforts on storage capability, both
    from a bidirectional electric storage down to flexible resource
    storage. So basically running the full gamut, everything that
    incorporates and is covered in a number of the other bills,
    things like transportation, battery waste management,
    coordination with the states, the regulatory components and,
    most notably, really driving down the cost and safety of long-
    term storage.
        So the DAYS program that was put forward by the ARPA-E
    Department, in fact, was really meant to be and driven by, and
    we worked in close partnership with, the ARPA-E Department, to
    drive things like defense critical installations.
        So that $30 million funding opportunity that went out for
    10-hour to 100-hour, long-term storage is one of the initiating
    factors to bring us, throughout the Department of Energy,
    together to really focus on number one, driving the cost,
    eliminating any of the duplication, really being able to define
    things and success by the application of the different types of
    storage capabilities that there are.
        And so, we continue on that effort really challenging
    ourselves and building off of what the needs are of our most
    critical infrastructure, as well as those things that are going
    to further the integration of renewable, you know, capabilities
    and technologies with the utmost focus on the overall
    resilience of the bulk power system.
        And we're really, we really made some great strides in this
    arena, particularly as it relates to what the barrier is today
    which is in the case of the batteries that exist today, which
    were fundamentally developed for the integration of renewables,
    is the cost of vanadium and/or lithium and the fact that
    they're not necessarily owned or abundant in the United States.
        We have broken that nexus and now we're focused on other
    chemistry solutions that break us away completely from any of
    the supply chain risks and the costs associated that, today,
    eliminate us driving the cost of vanadium or lithium down.
        So through aqueous solution redox equation chemistry
    innovation, we are driving these costs down significantly while
    simultaneously breaking that supply chain and reliance on
    things like vanadium or lithium or things that are otherwise
    rare earth minerals controlled by other countries that we don't
    necessarily get along with.
        Senator King. Thank you. That is a wonderful analysis.
        Mr. Chairman, can I follow up with one additional question?
        Senator Cassidy. Yes.
        Senator King. Given that--and that was a very erudite
    response and I appreciate it--and this is not a hostile
    question.
        I am puzzled, given the significance and success of ARPA-E
    in the past, why it is slated for zeroing out in the
    Administration's budget? It seems to me it has been one of the
    most successful of Department of Energy programs, and I just
    worry that if it goes away there will be a loss of impetus
    behind the research imperative that we have in this area.
        Mr. Walker. Excellent question.
        And so, similar to the Advanced Energy Storage Initiative,
    one of the things that we are trying to do is cut across what
    we are doing and I'll give you another example where we've done
    that, cut across the different siloes that exist through
    different varying platforms that enable us to join the forces
    of the different departments.
        So similar to that Advanced Energy Storage Initiative that
    I mentioned earlier, in the Grid Modernization Initiative,
    which up until last year was simply a partnership between EERE
    as well as the Office of Electricity, my office, we've now
    further expanded that platform to include the five applied
    sciences and many of the function capabilities depending on
    what the determination/appropriation is for ARPA-E and some of
    the functions there.
        So ARPA-E has been working very closely with each of the
    applied sciences and the Office of Science, and we believe that
    there's an opportunity to consolidate the work that they're
    doing and more cohesively meet the needs of the applied
    sciences with an ARPA-E type function but using the grid
    modernization initiative to do that.
        Senator King. But I assume if the Congress appropriates
    funds for ARPA-E, you will administer it according to the law?
        Mr. Walker. Yes, sir.
        Senator King. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Cassidy. Thank you.
        Mr. Bennett, there is a megatrend toward using more natural
    gas for electricity generation. What percent of your carbon
    capture research is specific for natural gas as opposed to
    combined with efforts related to coal?
        Mr. Bennett. Chairman Cassidy, and again we truly
    appreciate your comments earlier about CCUS and as well as
    really growing this important topic and really the commitment
    of this Committee.
        And I do not have an exact number for the percent. I can
    say that we do have 97 active projects working.
        Senator Cassidy. Now if I can interrupt just because we
    have limited time.
        It is my understanding, not my foolproof knowledge, that
    most of the effort is going toward coal even though whatever we
    think of the generation of electricity by coal is declining
    with many more retirements and visage and the amount of
    generation by natural gas is growing significantly and will
    continue to grow. It is now, I think, 35 percent of the grid,
    as I mentioned.
        So why would DOE not have more of an effort that is
    specific, not just for natural gas, but also for the later
    technology which is the combined cycle natural gas plant?
        Mr. Bennett. Chairman Cassidy, that is a great question.
        So when you look at CCUS technology over the past ten
    years, we have spent approximately $4 billion in CCUS
    technology. While that has been mainly focused on coal, we
    currently have about five projects that are working both on
    flue gas and natural gas as well as coal. And currently----
        Senator Cassidy. Now, let me come back because as well as
    coal--so you have 95 projects, five of which include natural
    gas but none of which are specific for natural gas.
        Why would you not have one which is specific, not just for
    natural gas, but also for the combined cycle which is, of
    course, a different set of technologies which I am told allow
    gas to be captured at different points along the way, not just
    in the flue?
        Mr. Bennett. Chairman Cassidy, and we are currently,
    through the National Carbon Capture Center actually
    retrofitting a natural gas boiler to test additional
    technologies for, specifically for natural gas.
        Now regarding the technology that goes into carbon capture,
    the applications remain mainly the same between coal and
    natural gas.
        Senator Cassidy. Now I am going to disagree with you a
    little bit and I hesitate to do so because you are the expert,
    but I am told that if you retrofit a coal plant for gas it is
    not as efficient, number one. Number two, it won't be combined
    cycle. And number three, whereas in coal it is in the flue, in
    combined cycle there are numerous steps along the way.
        I go back to if we have an increasing amount of gas and a
    decrease in amount of coal, but the focus is basically, it
    sounds like, 99 percent upon coal, with kind of, you know, I
    don't want to be rude about this, but kind of the stepchild
    treatment of gas. That seems to be, kind of, ignoring a
    megatrend. Does that make sense?
        Mr. Bennett. No, Chairman Cassidy, I do understand that and
    the question.
        And again, as you are, as you did mention, natural gas is
    playing a more predominant role in electric generation. But
    again, when we look at the carbon capture, we are focusing more
    toward natural gas. You're starting to see that with the carbon
    capture. Actually, we had Exxon and Total just join the NCCC,
    the National Carbon Capture Center, since they are interested
    in natural gas capture. So that is a focus that the Department
    of Energy is taking on as well.
        Now historically, it has been focused on coal. You are
    correct there. But it has also had applications within natural
    gas as well.
        And really, you know, I can understand with the flue gas
    comment there are definitely differences. However, with the,
    when you look at carbon sequestration and the amount of carbon
    that comes out of coal-fired power plants versus carbon that
    comes out of natural gas-fired power plants, obviously it is
    significantly more.
        The success that we do have in coal-fired generation with
    CCUS is applicable to natural gas because if we are successful
    there, that can be applied to natural gas and be more
    commercially and economically viable.
        Senator Cassidy. I am going to interrupt just for the sake
    of time.
        I accept what you are saying as a theoretical, but as an
    applied we do not know because apparently we are applying it to
    one and not the other.
        Part of this Committee is coming up with initiatives that
    other countries can follow and other countries are obviously
    using more and more natural gas. So that would just be the
    strong encouragement from this member of this Committee.
        Mr. Walker, you gave, kind of, a paradoxical statement at
    the outset. You, on the one hand, said that our grid will be
    more decentralized and therefore more secure. Then you, in
    multiple other areas, spoke about wholesale integration using
    AI to, kind of, take all the bulk power around the country and
    to integrate. And seasonal transmission which I assume, again,
    if we are shipping something from the panhandle of Texas to the
    Northeast in the wintertime, then that is going to be
    integrated across different grids. So what is it? Are we
    decentralized or are we more integrated than we ever were? Do
    you follow what I am saying?
        Mr. Walker. I think so, Senator.
        So the statement I was making was that, you know, today and
    over the last 20 years we've been transitioning from a bulk
    power system with generation, transmission lines and load
    without much penetration of renewables. Obviously, over the
    last 20 years, that transition has significantly increased, as
    has the fuel sources as the discussion has been ensuing, with
    regard to the generation sources for each of the degeneration
    capacity components.
        The point I'm making is one, today, what we're pushing is
    bulk power storage as well as other types of storage. Not the
    only type of storage, but the long duration storage to be able
    to work through some of the challenges that we have on our
    transmission and generation systems today, particularly as we
    integrate megawatt-scale renewables.
        So, today----
        Senator Cassidy. I am still not sure I am getting--you say
    we are decentralized but if we are going to have bulk power,
    utility grade storage, then that is not decentralization, that
    is still resident within a power plant, presumably, and then
    going through the same transmission lines.
        Mr. Walker. Senator, it depends on how the system is
    designed.
        Today I would argue that our system is fundamentally
    centralized with a small portion of megawatt-scale renewable
    penetration of the system. As we add in bulk power storage, it
    will become less and less centralized because that storage will
    be able to be utilized in various levels of the system----
        Senator Cassidy. I got it. So it will be two poles.
        Mr. Walker. Right.
        Senator Cassidy. As of right now, it is the power plant, so
    it would be the power plant plus the bulk storage.
        Mr. Walker. Bulk storage, and bulk storage will also be
    able to be utilized on the distribution system as well.
        Senator Cassidy. We will have a question for the record.
        Mr. Walker. Sure.
        Senator Cassidy. And several things you have mentioned,
    they are very promising but we don't have a sense of the time
    horizon. So we will ask both the time horizon and the projected
    expense of full deployment as a QFR.
        I think my Ranking Member has a follow-up question.
        Senator Heinrich. I think one of the things that the
    Chairman raised that is very interesting is where the storage
    goes. One of the interesting things we have seen with regard to
    utility deployment is that that storage is now being decoupled
    from generation of any sort, in many cases, and used to replace
    either transmission or other infrastructure like transformers
    on the grid which will allow a very different way of optimizing
    a distributed grid.
        I also wanted to say just a bit about the idea of a
    megatrend with regard to natural gas. Certainly natural gas has
    been on a tear over the course of the last ten years in terms
    of electric generation. But it is interesting--I was just
    reading an article about FERC revising their three-year
    forecasts through 2022, and they are now predicting a
    retirement of 17 gigawatts of coal and a retirement of 7
    gigawatts of nuclear, which certainly does not help us
    decarbonize the grid. But an addition of 28 gigawatts of gas
    with 10 in retirements, so a net increase of 18. But additions
    in wind at 27 and additions in solar at 16, which adds up to
    almost 43 gig in renewable additions, is about twice what we
    are seeing in natural gas. So I think we have another trend
    that is emerging at the moment.
        Mr. Bennett, I want to ask you a question about the next
    phase of all of this which is, how do we decarbonize some of
    the high temperature, industrial processes that are going to be
    the hard stuff in the future? And this is the role of DOE to
    think about these things, to do the research and then other
    people come along and commercialize these things. So, steel,
    cement, those kinds of industrial processes, what are you doing
    to decarbonize those?
        Mr. Bennett. Ranking Member Heinrich, and again, great
    question.
        This goes back to your earlier question here this morning
    and that's the fact that the Department of Energy has a very
    strong record of tackling these very tough questions. That's
    what we're really posed with doing. And that's, again, with the
    industrial gases and similar from the coal and natural gas,
    they do act very similar in nature. So the successes that we
    have on one, hopefully, we can transfer more to the other.
        And in that vein, in just this year and I guess last year,
    but we are working currently. Secretary Perry requested the
    National Petroleum Council to do a study on carbon capture and
    underground sequestration, CCUS, that would look at the
    business quick case, not just for coal and natural gas, but
    also industrial gases as well. So really the recommendations
    that will come from that will help guide us as we look at
    utilizing industrial sources for carbon capture and
    sequestration.
        Senator Heinrich. Mr. Walker, I have one last question for
    you and that is, you know, we were talking about distributed
    resources and we are seeing utilities, more and more often, use
    a number of distributed and even non-wires alternatives.
        We are seeing advanced demand response where in the old
    days demand response was someone at the utility, like my dad,
    calling up a factory and saying can you dial it back for the
    next three hours because we have a peak here and we cannot meet
    the demand? Today you have a cell phone connection between
    someone's water heater that can automatically turn it on and
    off within certain parameters and that can be aggregated over
    the course of an entire city or an entire distribution area.
    That requires a lot of computation, which is something DOE is
    good at.
        What are we doing to get the right tools in the hands of
    co-ops, utilities, and community choice aggregators so that
    they can use those advanced and distributed tools to really
    save ratepayers money and increase the penetration of clean
    electricity as well?
        Mr. Walker. Thank you, Senator. That's an important point.
        With the advent of number one, long-term storage, short-
    term storage, flexible resources, you introduce a high level of
    complexity with regard to the dynamics associated with, you
    know, running a system where load really has to match
    generation as closely as possible all the time, otherwise we
    run into things like under frequency, you know, problems and
    things like that.
        So throughout the labs and throughout much of the work that
    is being done through the Office of Electricity, through the
    Energy Efficiency Office, we are looking at and developing tool
    sets for--and promulgating those out through things like NASEO,
    NGA, the NARUC organizations--for things like flexible building
    loads, grid services for vehicle charging. I can go on and on.
    I've got a list literally sitting in front of me of all the
    different types of things that we're doing, dealing with the
    dynamics of the load and being able to maximize and optimize
    the system.
        One of the things I think is important as we move forward
    in that space is recognizing the complexity associated with the
    addition of all of the different capabilities, and to that end,
    we are spending a great deal of time working through the labs
    to build the control algorithms necessary to optimize that,
    much like the advent and, I think, success of the microgrids.
    Early microgrid technology was fairly simple. It has continued
    to evolve with the complexities associated with integrating
    more and more components.
        We continue to spend a lot of time working on the
    electronics, the power electronics necessary to be able to
    optimize the utilization, particularly as it relates to things
    like storage, some of the wind, some of the renewable
    technologies in this process.
        And through this we work with, I know just within the
    Office of Electricity, we're working with about 25 different
    universities on this to develop different tool sets. We work
    with about 35 to 40 different private industry groups. Once
    that's done, DOE, we work through our department, OTT, to bring
    it out for tech transfer capability to get those things
    licensed, to get them out into industry so that they can be
    promulgated and utilized by the consumer and by the utility
    industry.
        So we've got a lot of efforts focused--about a third of,
    maybe actually a sixth, of my program just in the Office of
    Electricity is focused on working with state regulators in
    getting information out.
        In fact, we have built an entire computer system that
    enables, or computer program, that enables anybody to go on to
    it and look at what the regulatory processes are for any
    particular state, what the standards are, where there are
    penetrations of different things of storage.
        And we have developed over the last few years and continue
    to work with Sandia and NRECA and EPRI to develop a very, very
    comprehensive report that comes out of Sandia that's about 350
    pages that goes into a lot of the capabilities and tool sets
    that are available.
        Senator Heinrich. Fantastic, thank you.
        Senator Cassidy. Thank you.
        This concludes the hearing. The record will remain open for
    questions for the record and follow-up comments.
        With that, this hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:14 a.m. the hearing was adjourned.]

                          APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                                  ----------

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]