[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                   U.S. EFFORTS TO SUPPORT EUROPEAN ENERGY 
                                  SECURITY

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                    SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, ENERGY, THE 
                            ENVIRONMENT AND CYBER

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                             JUNE 16, 2022

                               __________

                           Serial No. 117-122

                               __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
        
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]        


       Available:  http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://
                            docs.house.gov, 
                       or http://www.govinfo.gov
                       
                               __________

                                
                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
48-367                       WASHINGTON : 2023                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------     
                      
                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
                      
                  GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York, Chairman
                  
BRAD SHERMAN, California              MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas, Ranking 
ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey                  Member
GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia	      CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida	      STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
KAREN BASS, California		      SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts	      DARRELL ISSA, California
DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island	      ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
AMI BERA, California		      LEE ZELDIN, New York
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas	              ANN WAGNER, Missouri
DINA TITUS, Nevada		      BRIAN MAST, Florida
TED LIEU, California		      BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania	      KEN BUCK, Colorado
DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota	      TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota		      MARK GREEN, Tennessee
COLIN ALLRED, Texas		      ANDY BARR, Kentucky
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan		      GREG STEUBE, Florida
ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia	      DAN MEUSER, Pennsylvania
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania	      AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas
TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey	      PETER MEIJER, Michigan
ANDY KIM, New Jersey	              NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York
SARA JACOBS, California		      RONNY JACKSON, Texas
KATHY MANNING, North Carolina	      YOUNG KIM, California
JIM COSTA, California		      MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida
JUAN VARGAS, California		      JOE WILSON, South Carolina
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas		      
BRAD SCHNEIDER, Illinois              

                    Sophia Lafargue, Staff Director
               Brendan Shields, Republican Staff Director
                                
                                ------                                

        Subcommittee on Europe, Energy,the Environment and Cyber

              WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts, Chairman

SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania             BRIAN FITZPATRICK, 
ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia             Pennsylvania,Ranking Member
ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey		     ANN WAGNER, Missouri
THEODORE DEUTCH, Florida	     ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois,
DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island	     BRIAN MAST, Florida
DINA TITUS, Nevada		     DAN MEUSER, Pennsylvania
DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota	     AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas
JIM COSTA, California		     NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas	             PETER MEIJER, Michigan
BRAD SCHNEIDER, Illinois

                      Leah Nodvin, Staff Director
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                               WITNESSES

Light, The Honorable Dr. Andrew, Assistant Secretary of Energy 
  for International Affairs, U.S. Department of Energy...........     7
Kamian, Harry, Senior Bureau Official and Principal Deputy 
  Assistant Secretary, Bureauof Energy Resources, U.S. Department 
  of State.......................................................    15
Levine, Jake, Chief Climate Officer, U.S. International 
  Development Finance Corporation................................    21

                                APPENDIX

Hearing Notice...................................................    54
Hearing Minutes..................................................    55
Hearing Attendance...............................................    56

 
            U.S. EFFORTS TO SUPPORT EUROPEAN ENERGY SECURITY

                        Thursday, June 16, 2022

                          House of Representatives,
                Subcommittee on Europe, Energy, the
                             Environment and Cyber,
                      Committee on Foreign Affairs,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:04 a.m., via 
Webex, Hon. William Keating (chairman of the subcommittee) 
presiding.
    Mr. Keating. The hearing will now come to order.
    The House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee will come to order.
    Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a 
recess of the committee at any point and all members will have 
5 days to submit statements, extraneous materials, and 
questions for the record, subject to the length limitation of 
the rules.
    To insert something into the record, please have your staff 
email the previously mentioned address or contact full 
committee staff, and please keep your video function on at all 
times even when you're not recognized by the chair.
    Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves. 
Please remember to mute yourself after you're finished 
speaking.
    Consistent with the House rules, staff will only mute 
members and witnesses as appropriate when they're not under 
recognition to eliminate background noise.
    I see that we have a quorum present virtually and myself in 
person, and I'll now recognize myself for opening remarks.
    We are here at a very important time on a very important 
issue. It's one of that could be viewed as a three-legged 
stool. We are dealing with our security issues as well as 
global security issues, economic prosperity issues, as well as 
important climate change issues.
    Energy is the lifeblood of our globalized and 
interconnected world. Our homes, cars, and our critical 
infrastructure, the most basic of our everyday necessities, all 
require some form of energy.
    Since the Industrial Revolution, we have seen the obvious 
and clear benefits of harnessing this energy to buildup our 
infrastructure, invest in our communities, and ensure a high 
standard of living for the American people.
    On the foundation of our energy resources, the U.S. and 
Europe have built a booming transatlantic economy, bringing 
immense prosperity and opportunity to all our shared citizens.
    Unfortunately, just as the benefits of an energized world 
have fostered innovation, it's become abundantly clear that 
fossil fuels providing much of our energy resources are warming 
our climate and destroying the world we live in.
    Our military leaders, civilian leaders, and business 
leaders are clear. Fossil fuels and climate change pose an 
existential crisis that threatens the United States' national 
security.
    Across the globe as well we have seen some energy-producing 
companies wield their resources to establish malign influence 
over transit countries in energy-importing nations.
    Thankfully, we have what Russia and China cannot do here in 
the U.S. We have a transatlantic coalition aligned by values 
and actions in both the security and energy spheres to stand up 
to these malign influences and stand for the protection of 
democracy and the rule of law.
    Even before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 
February 24th, 2022, the U.S. provided substantial support to 
our European allies and partners in diversifying their energy 
portfolios and securing their energy in all sectors and with an 
understanding that energy security and the transatlantic 
alliance is central for our national security and the security 
of our transatlantic partners.
    For example, during the 115th Congress, we provided the 
Development Finance Corporation with the authority to support 
energy diversification projects in Europe that would reduce 
Europe's dependency on Russian gas.
    Further, both the Biden and Trump Administrations have 
shown resounding support for the Three Seas Initiative. 
Finally, both before and after Russia's full-scale invasion of 
Ukraine, President Biden's Senior Advisor for Energy Security, 
Amos Hochstein, has traveled across the globe to partner with 
countries in the energy sector and work in conjunction with our 
climate commitments to set up American and European energy for 
the future.
    Now, in light of the full-scale invasion and the subsequent 
energy crisis, European nations, the EU, and the U.S. have to 
think critically not only about the long-term energy security 
but also about short-term supply and, thankfully, in lockstep 
with the United States, the transatlantic alliance has acted 
resolutely and with creativity and precision to support Ukraine 
in its fight for freedom, imposed punitive measures on Russia 
for its illegal invasion, and create short-and long-term energy 
solutions to shore up European energy sectors.
    At the national level, Germany made the significant 
decision to halt Nord Stream 2 pipeline freezing, a major 
avenue for Russian malign influence in the energy sector. Other 
countries, like Bulgaria and Poland, have refused to pay for 
Russian gas in rubles to further limit Russia's ability to 
export fossil fuels to the rest of the European continent.
    And at the EU level, an unprecedented six rounds of 
sanction patches have been announced and the EU has moved to 
ban imports of Russian coal and oil.
    While I understand the difficulties of a gas ban, I hope 
the EU can continue to eliminate its dependence on Russian gas 
as soon as possible.
    EU initiatives like REPowerEU and EU Energy Purchase 
Platform have also created proactive steps to ensure EU member 
countries are adequately supplied with energy before the cold 
winter months.
    These necessary steps to save energy, diversify energy 
supplies, and create a crucial framework for a renewable energy 
future continue.
    While action from the EU and its member States is 
necessary, continued support from the U.S. is essential if we 
aim to construct a world in which energy is secure and 
democratic values remain.
    To that end, the U.S. has aided Europe through our Task 
Force on Energy Security, the Biden Administration joint 
initiative with the European Commission to diversify LNG 
supplies in alignment with climate objectives, ultimately 
reducing reliance on Russia and demand for natural gas 
altogether.
    U.S. companies have pioneered technologies such as small 
modular nuclear reactors, including in Romania, which have the 
potential to provide immense amounts of energy with low 
emission levels.
    These initiatives, among others, will be discussed here 
today at this hearing. Both recognize both the diversity across 
the continent regarding energy portfolios but also the need to 
act together across the Atlantic to invest in long-term energy 
solutions that do not compromise our climate commitments.
    Given different jurisdictions, authorities, and financial 
tools to outline U.S. efforts to support European energy 
security from across the Administration, we have invited three 
witnesses from the executive branch to testify today who have 
been tasked to meet this challenge.
    I want to thank all of you for your participation in this 
hearing.
    In closing, let me be clear. Decreasing reliance on Russia 
in the short term and preparing for the new realities of 
climate and geopolitical changes in the long term will not be 
easy.
    But by standing strong with our transatlantic allies, we 
can face the future with an innovative lens to build long-
lasting resilience, shaping a world prepared for climate and 
geopolitical challenges, and that is our ultimate goal.
    It's an ultimate necessity, and today's hearing, I hope, 
will shed light on pathways forward in dealing with this.
    I'll now turn and recognize the ranking member for his 
opening remarks.
    Mr. Fitzpatrick. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Keating, 
for holding this hearing and to our witnesses for being here 
today.
    For quite some time now, Europe has struggled with their 
energy security and has predominantly relied on Russia as a 
primary energy source.
    Natural gas represents about one-fourth of the EU's energy 
mix and the EU is Russia's main gas export market. 
Specifically, in 2021, nearly 75 percent of Russia's pipeline 
exports went directly to the EU. Prior to the war in Ukraine, 
Russia was the top gas supplier for most countries in central, 
northeastern and southeastern Europe.
    Since the war on Ukraine began, EU countries have spent 
tens of billions of dollars on Russian fossil fuels. As a 
result of the war it has exacerbated an already widespread 
energy crisis in Europe at a time when soaring fuel prices and 
inflation have also been jeopardizing Europe's economic 
recovery post COVID-19.
    As the unjustified full-scale genocide that's occurring in 
Ukraine continues, Europe's energy dependence on Russia 100 
percent needs to change, and while the EU has banned Russia 
coal imports and Russian crude oil and petroleum products, 
there remains an exemption for Russian crude oil delivered via 
pipeline.
    This needs to change. An article released yesterday on 
Bloomberg Stated, quote, ``Russia is using gas as a weapon 
again, sending gas prices to new highs with the objective to 
limit Europe's capacity to fill its storage levels,'' end 
quote.
    There must be more that is done to ensure that Europe does 
not have to succumb to Russia's bait when it comes to finding 
an energy source. For decades, the U.S. has worked with our 
European partners to encourage diversification of supplies, 
diversification of import routes, and diversification of fuel 
mixes, as well as exerted pressure against projects that 
contradict these goals, such as Nord Stream 2 and TurkStream.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on how the 
U.S. plans to once again work with our EU allies and ensuring 
that they do not have to rely on Russian energy sources, 
especially amidst this violent attack on Ukraine. Every dime 
that is sent to Russia is a dime that's complicit in killing 
Ukrainians and continuing this genocide that must end now.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Keating. I thank you, Ranking Member.
    I'll now introduce our witnesses. Thank you again for being 
here, and without objection, your written statements, all of 
you--all three of your written statements will be a part of the 
record.
    And our first witness is Assistant Secretary Andrew Light, 
who is an assistant secretary of energy for international 
affairs at the U.S. Department of Energy.
    Assistant Secretary Light, you're now recognized for 5 
minutes.

    STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DR. ANDREW LIGHT, ASSISTANT 
SECRETARY OF ENERGY FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT 
                           OF ENERGY

    Mr. Light. Chairman Keating, Ranking Member Fitzpatrick, 
and members of the committee, it's, indeed, an honor to appear 
before you today to discuss energy security in Europe and the 
role of the U.S. Department of Energy and the larger U.S. 
Government in supporting development of infrastructure systems 
and policies in eastern and central Europe especially that will 
support a secure, sustainable, diversified European energy 
sector, which will make them more secure.
    I'm appearing before you all, as you well know, at a very 
troubling and disturbing time. In addition to the tremendous 
humanitarian consequences of Russia's war against Ukraine, 
Russia is also instigating an energy war, affecting countries 
throughout Europe.
    As a result, the U.S. Department of Energy, along with 
colleagues throughout the government, are redoubling our 
efforts to bolster European energy security and accelerate 
regional and global net-zero energy transitions.
    The energy war has also, clearly, hit home. Vladimir 
Putin's actions have sent oil markets reeling, raising the 
price of gas at the pump, underscoring the need for the U.S. 
Government to work with our European allies to find affordable 
and diversified global energy solutions that will secure a 
clean energy future.
    Stated bluntly, this conflict starkly reinforces the 
national security importance of our energy investments, for 
energy transitions, and those of our allies.
    We're working to support Europe's energy security in three 
ways.
    First, accelerating the transition to energy sources that 
are not susceptible to foreign manipulation. This includes 
supporting Ukraine's desynchronization with the Russian energy 
grid and integration into the European electricity grid, where 
it could eventually export clean nuclear and renewable energy 
to all of Europe.
    Second, replacing Europe's natural gas volumes without 
creating global market instability, and third, facilitating 
multinational and public-private collaboration in energy 
innovation to multiply the options available for 
diversification and decarbonization of energy supply.
    Any discussion on European energy security today must 
include Ukraine. Ukraine's nuclear power generation capacity 
alone could reduce Europe's dependence on Russian coal and gas 
once Ukraine is able to export electricity to Europe.
    To help facilitate this, the Department of Energy is using 
emergency appropriations to support Ukraine's full integration 
into Europe's electricity grid with a focus on cybersecurity 
support for Ukraine's electric grid sector.
    Part of the focus on cyber and physical security will help 
ensure Ukraine's connections to the grid remains reliable and 
stable.
    We're in the process of transferring $10 million now to our 
national labs with deep expertise on cyber and physical energy 
infrastructure security, and despite the ongoing war we expect 
their work will soon commence in earnest.
    Looking beyond just Ukraine, we need to provide near-term 
support to our European allies, as the chairman and the ranking 
member said at the top, to ensure that they're able to 
withstand more potential shutdowns from Russia and have the 
resources to make it through the upcoming winter.
    U.S. LNG is a key part of the near-term solution and we are 
also working bilaterally and with the European Commission to 
help Europe secure more natural gas from other sources.
    In the longer term but starting immediately we need to 
support efforts to diversify and decarbonize Europe's energy 
sector in a way that will permanently reduce its dependence on 
Russia and set it on a path to a clean, secure, and affordable 
energy future.
    To this end, we have bilateral and multilateral 
partnerships with several European countries that include 
research collaborations on hydrogen, offshore wind, and other 
innovative energy solutions.
    In my remaining time, I want to highlight just one such 
tool we have for achieving these longer-term goals, the 
Partnership for Transatlantic Energy and Climate Cooperation, 
or P-TECC. It is, indeed, the very embodiment of the 
transatlantic coalition that the chairman mentioned at the top 
in his remarks.
    The previous Administration created this platform as a tool 
for the Department of Energy to provide technical, policy, and 
commercial support to 24 countries in eastern and central 
Europe, both in and outside of the European Union, to integrate 
and modernize their energy sectors.
    In September 2021 in Warsaw, Secretary Granholm relaunched 
P-TECC with climate action and energy security as 
interdependent mutually reinforcing goals with unanimous 
support of all of our 24 partner countries.
    Today, we're using this initiative to help our European 
allies with both their diversification and decarbonization 
objectives with work streams focusing on regional cybersecurity 
of electricity and grids, deployment of commercial nuclear 
energy to provide clean baseload power, investment in renewable 
energy and efficiency measures, and to catalyze regional net-
zero work.
    As you know, next week leaders of the 12 central and 
eastern European EU member States will gather in Riga, Latvia, 
to attend the Three Seas Initiative Summit.
    This summit was the impetus behind the creation of the 
Partnership for Transatlantic Energy and Climate Cooperation, 
and my department is fully supportive of its broad goals.
    In short, we are pursuing--pushing to achieve short and 
long term solutions for European energy security that will 
ensure a diverse, clean, affordable energy future for ourselves 
and our allies.
    I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Light:]

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Keating. Thank you very much.
    Our second witness, Harry Kamian--is that correct?
    Are we connected?
    Mr. Kamian. We are.
    Mr. Keating. Thank you. I just want to be sure.
    Is the Senior Bureau Official and Principal Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Energy Resources at the 
U.S. Department of State.
    You're now recognized for 5 minutes for your opening 
statement. Thank you for your participation.

STATEMENT OF HARRY KAMIAN, SENIOR BUREAU OFFICIAL AND PRINCIPAL 
 DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF ENERGY RESOURCES, U.S. 
                      DEPARTMENT OF STATE

    Mr. Kamian. Chairman Keating, Ranking Member Fitzpatrick, 
and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 
to discuss the Administration's efforts to support Europe's 
energy security.
    I'm joining you today from Paris at the conclusion of an 
International Energy Agency governing board meeting where under 
joint State Department and Department of Energy leadership the 
IEA voted unanimously for Ukraine to join the IEA family, 
another signal of the Administration's unwavering commitment to 
supporting Ukraine in the face of Putin's brutal war.
    Putin's unprovoked war on Ukraine has caused a major shift 
in Europe's approach to its energy security and has upended the 
world's energy map. It has made clear the dangers of over 
reliance on a single supplier, particularly one who uses energy 
as a tool of coercion.
    It underscores that the clean energy transition strengthens 
our energy and our climate security. The United States and 
Europe are now united in our determination to stand up to 
Russia to ensure Europe's energy security and to accelerate the 
clean energy transition.
    The United States is leveraging multilateral diplomacy to 
address global oil shortfalls and to assist European countries 
in finding alternative supplies. This will take time.
    In 2021, Russia provide approximately 45 percent of the 
EU's total natural gas imports and 27 percent of oil imports. 
Putin's war and subsequent natural gas cutoffs to Poland, 
Bulgaria, Finland, the Netherlands, and others have destroyed 
the illusion that Russia is a reliable supplier of energy.
    The EU's announcement in March that its REPowerEU claims to 
cut dependence on Russian natural gas by more than half by the 
end of 2022, and to achieve independence from Russian fossil 
fuels by 2027, was an important signal.
    As early as last fall, we warned that Russia was 
deliberately preparing to leave Europe with extremely low 
levels of natural gas and storage for the winter.
    The United States engaged major natural gas producers 
worldwide to understand their capacity and their willingness to 
surge output and allocate these volumes to European buyers.
    This produced tangible successes, including allies like 
Japan and Korea agreeing to redirect LNG cargoes to Europe. 
President Biden's March 25th announcement with European 
Commission President von der Leyen establishing a Joint Task 
Force on European Energy Security further illustrates close 
transatlantic cooperation.
    Through the Task Force, we committed to help Europe attract 
15 billion cubic meters of additional natural gas supplies by 
the end of this year. We committed to working with EU member 
States toward ensuring demand for approximately 50 bcm a year 
of additional LNG supplies until at least 2030, and Europe 
agreed to fast track regulatory approvals for LNG 
infrastructure and to identify demand sources to spur 
investments.
    But as the chairman said, increasing LNG to Europe cannot 
fully resolve European dependence on Russian energy. We are 
collaborating with Europe with clean and renewable energy 
technology providers to help reduce overall demand, including 
U.S. companies.
    We can reduce demand by accelerating deployment of 
technologies such as heat pumps, smart thermostats, efficient 
grid technologies, energy efficiency and productivity 
improvements, battery storage, offshore wind, nuclear energy, 
and clean hydrogen.
    We were cooperating on these goals well before the onset of 
Putin's war. We are all seeing and feeling the impacts of high 
energy prices due to Putin's war of choice against Ukraine.
    In March and April, the United States and the IEA announced 
collective releases from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and IE 
member reserves. Together with United States commitment, these 
releases add 240 million barrels to global supply. It is both 
the largest release from the United States and the largest 
release from other IEA countries in history and will support 
American consumers and the global economy.
    These actions result from the Administration's unwavering 
focus on doing everything in our power to help American 
families who are paying more out of pocket for gasoline as a 
result of Putin's war.
    Strengthening Europe's energy security is a high priority 
for the Biden Administration. Together, with our partners and 
allies, we will accelerate Europe's independence from Russian 
fossil fuels and bolster energy security in line with our 
shared climate and energy access goals.
    Thank you very much. I look forward to addressing your 
questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Kamian:]

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Kamian.
    Our next witness, Mr. Jake Levine, is the chief climate 
officer at the U.S. International Development Finance 
Corporation.
    You are now recognized for 5 minutes for your opening 
statement. Thank you for your participation.

     STATEMENT OF JAKE LEVINE, CHIEF CLIMATE OFFICER, U.S. 
         INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION

    Mr. Levine. Chairman Keating, Ranking Member Fitzpatrick, 
and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for 
inviting me to testify today on the Development Finance 
Corporation's role to support European energy security.
    DFC has a mandate under the BUILD Act to invest in 
transactions that advance development and the strategic 
interests of the United States.
    The subject of today's hearing is additionally central to 
our special responsibilities under the European Energy Security 
and Diversification Act.
    In line with those authorities, we are working to expand a 
portfolio of projects that can accelerate Europe's pathway 
toward energy security.
    Several of us have recently returned from the region, and 
next week DFC will lead the U.S. delegation to the Three Seas 
Summit in Riga to reinforce DFC's readiness to provide 
investment.
    In Ukraine itself DFC has a current investment portfolio of 
approximately $800 million across more than a dozen projects, 
including in renewables and nuclear fuel.
    We are evaluating new opportunities there and have offered 
flexibilities to existing projects to make sure they can 
weather this war.
    When it comes time to rebuild, DFC will be there again. 
Russia's unjustified war in Ukraine has permanently changed the 
energy landscape, particularly with respect to the near term 
delivery of oil and gas for heating this winter.
    At the same time, it has opened a critical window of 
opportunity to accelerate Europe's pathway to energy 
independence. Russia's weaponization of its energy resources 
has united the U.S. and Europe in a common effort to diversify 
European sources of energy and it is a wake up call.
    There can be no louder signal to underscore the need and 
the opportunity this moment offers to reduce dependence on the 
oil and gas resources that have allowed Russia to coerce its 
neighbors and to finance its war machine.
    President Biden has outlined a two-pronged approach to help 
secure Europe's energy: diversifying energy resources away from 
Russia and providers and supporting Europe's commitment to move 
away from fossil fuel dependence altogether.
    The U.S. is working to unleash an arsenal of energy 
resources in service of both, and DFC has a key role to support 
that in at least three ways.
    First, we are working to help Europe to pivot away from 
Russian sources of energy. DFC is actively advancing 
discussions to provide insurance for gas replacement contracts 
that can help small countries completely phaseout of Russian 
gas.
    We are in discussions to finance a gas pricing strategy 
that would facilitate purchases of U.S. LNG to replace Russian 
gas.
    Second, we are accelerating our work to help Europe deploy 
the massive amounts of clean energy, energy efficiency, and 
electrification required to fully move away from fossil fuels.
    The untapped savings available through smart thermostats, 
heat pumps, solar, wind, and storage projects in the near term 
represent, roughly, a third of all Russia's exports of natural 
gas to the EU.
    As part of this support, we are also exploring ways we can 
engage in civil nuclear cooperation, such as the recent LOI we 
signed with NuScale for its Romania SMR project.
    Third, we believe Ukraine and Eastern Europe are not just 
places in need of strategic investment from the West but can 
become hubs of energy security for the West.
    To that end, we are identifying opportunities for East-West 
cohesion that can connect the energy grids from Ukraine, 
Bulgaria, and Romania to serve Poland, the Western Balkans, and 
places to the west.
    Europe will invest more than $200 billion between now and 
2027 to phaseout Russian fossil fuel imports, but the total 
financing costs to achieve energy independence are 
significantly greater and, therefore, private investment must 
also be a core component of our strategy.
    That is where DFC can come in with critical financing and 
derisking mechanisms to help crowd in private finance and help 
Europe secure the investment it needs.
    Some of our tools were designed for this precise purpose. 
DFC's political risk insurance dates to the Marshall Plan, when 
the United States brought public financing tools to bear in a 
post-war market hesitant to support Europe.
    There is no more urgent challenge in energy security than 
this one. But in this remarkable time of unity and partnership 
among our European allies, our determination to defend 
principles of sovereignty and democracy is stronger than at any 
time in recent memory and DFC is resolute in its work to help 
set a trajectory for energy independence and for peace.
    Thank you again, and I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Levine:]

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Levine.
    I think our witnesses really laid out what we can do in the 
short and the medium and the long term. These issues were in 
place before. They were worked on and recognized before. But 
the action on going forward was more deliberate than, I think, 
even our European allies would recognize.
    So this is the prompting--the 5 minutes I recognize myself 
for some questions.
    I'd like to, first, just get back.
    Mr. Kamian, you mentioned the fact that the shortages from 
Russia were premeditated--my word--ahead of time. This was--
this shows the premeditation of Putin before February 24th. It 
was part of a plan to weaponizing and the leveraging of oil.
    I wonder if any of our witnesses could comment on the fact 
that, indeed, Putin's actions before were a precursor to what 
his plans were in invading Ukraine and continuing to use as 
weapons the energy supply that's coming out of Russia.
    Mr. Light?
    Mr. Light. Sure. I couldn't agree more, Chairman, in that 
statement. I think that if this were a chess game, then this 
was at least a seven-move play by Vladimir Putin.
    I mean, he was setting things up with respect to the 
reliance of the Europeans on single source, the--a very sort of 
meticulous--I do not know, charade, of convincing some 
countries that he was--in fact, he would never turn off supply 
under any circumstances, and was able to do things like, well, 
if there was a shortage he would offset it with payments of 
money or something like that.
    But, interestingly enough, the Ukrainians really saw 
through this because they've been through it, and I was very 
honored to this day to have been at the--President Zelenskyy 
called--what we called the Crimea Forum last August. I went 
there with Secretary Granholm as President Biden's designee for 
the Presidential delegation.
    Europeans were quite clear to the other Europeans who came 
to the Crimea Forum, which was also the thirtieth anniversary 
of Ukrainian independence, that they went after us, they're 
going to go after you next, and if they go after us militarily, 
you can be sure that anything you want to try to do to try to 
push back on the Russians you will get retaliated against and 
that's exactly what we're seeing happen.
    So the very high prices that we saw through the fall there 
was, clearly, manipulation going on there, which created a 
crisis well before February, and so what we're now trying to 
do, I think, is to catch up with respect to what we can do to 
increasingly diversify.
    The only good news here is that the Europeans have 
completely woken up as a community. They are synced up. They're 
working, clearly, with us to try to respond to diversification 
and get them out of Russian fossil energy.
    Mr. Keating. Yes, I agree.
    I mean, I've visited five European countries just in the 
last several weeks and energy issues are central to what's 
going on, and if you're looking at the many miscalculations of 
Putin, I think his miscalculation on the energy front will 
prove one of the greatest miscalculations he had.
    You know, his actions really lit the fuse of response that 
wasn't there and I think we're in an era of a Marshall energy 
plan right now with the U.S. and our allies working together--
an historic economic and energy transformation, and we're 
seeing it and we're seeing it at a pace I never thought might 
occur.
    But as we drill down a little bit more to Ukraine 
individually and the pressure they're under, one of the 
countries I visited also in, you know, Putin's target sphere is 
Moldova, and their energy dependence, as is the case in so many 
other countries, is extreme with Russia.
    One of the things they mentioned was as we give economic 
aid to Ukraine, a win-win situation might be to allow them to 
tap into the Ukraine grid, which they have the ability to do.
    But also because the price differential between cheaper 
Russian or energy going through Transnistria and the other 
price, the U.S. could help maybe bridge that cap, and then have 
them gain a greater independence from Russia and help Ukraine's 
economy at the same time.
    Do you want to comment on that proposal at all--that idea? 
Anyone?
    Mr. Light. I'm happy to say something about it and also 
would love to hear any thoughts from my colleague, Harry 
Kamian, at the State Department.
    I've been talking to our Ambassador there in Moldova. I've 
been talking to my colleagues at the State Department on this. 
I think you're absolutely right, and my office has been working 
earnestly to sort of see what we can do to encourage the sale 
of power from Ukraine to Moldova.
    And the trick here is going to be to do it at the same rate 
that Moldova is getting from Transnistria right now. And so 
while we wait for really opening up the ability for Ukraine to 
sell their power to the rest of Europe, which they not yet are 
able to do--there's an emergency connection with the European 
grid but it's not yet a full connection.
    That's something my office has been working on to stabilize 
and make sure that that full connection happens so Ukraine can 
sell to Poland, to, you know, Czech Republic, to other 
countries in the region.
    Moldova is right there. It's in need. It really would help 
a lot, would help them to get off of--out of a tricky political 
situation, which is a subset of the larger political situation 
the entire region is under right now.
    Mr. Keating. Thank you.
    I now recognize Representative Ann Wagner, a former 
European ambassador, for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mrs. Wagner. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This is a very critical and timely hearing, and I want to 
thank our witnesses for their service.
    As the chairman mentioned a few weeks ago, I, too, traveled 
with a bipartisan group of Foreign Affairs Committee members 
including our chairman, Chairman Keating, of the subcommittee 
to Moldova, to Switzerland, to the Czech Republic, and to 
Austria and at every single opportunity we urged our European 
allies and partners to end their dangerous dependence on 
Russian energy.
    I was so gratified to learn that shortly after our return 
the EU reached an agreement to cut 90 percent of Russian oil 
imports by the end of this year.
    This represents important progress, but we, obviously, need 
to do more. Russia's natural gas market dominance is a critical 
vulnerability for Europe, and just yesterday Russia further 
slashed natural gas shipments to Europe, increasing gas prices 
by more than 25 percent.
    In order to deny Russia a key source of revenue and 
insulate our transatlantic allies once and for all from Russian 
energy coercion, the Biden Administration must stop 
discouraging new domestic production here in America and 
accelerate our efforts to connect Europe with new energy 
sources.
    To delay or hamstring these objectives in the interest of 
preserving radical climate policies would be misguided and, I 
believe, extremely risky.
    As we discussed during our time in Kishinev, Moldova 
remains, as we said, overwhelmingly dependent on Russian 
energy. It receives nearly all its gas supplies from Russian-
owned Gazprom and buys 80 percent of its electricity from the 
Russian-owned MGRES power plant in that breakaway region of 
Transnistria.
    USAID recently awarded $17 million to reduce core 
vulnerabilities of Moldova's energy sector.
    Deputy Secretary--pardon me, Deputy Assistant Secretary 
Kamian, can you provide details on what this program aims to 
achieve and on what time line, please?
    Mr. Kamian. Congresswoman, thank you very much for the 
question. At this moment, I do not have details regarding the 
specific USAID plan but I know the initiative that our 
colleagues--and I'd be happy to get back to you with more 
details on that--but I know the initiative that they have 
launched as part of the Administration's broader effort as part 
of a $100 million package to help Moldova strengthen its 
economy, but also diversify over the long run.
    As you and the chairman noted, nearly 100 percent of their 
energy resources come from Russia. It puts them in a fairly 
precarious situation.
    In light of the recent Russian invasion of Ukraine we know 
our Moldovan colleagues are genuinely concerned, and as my 
colleague, Assistant Secretary Light, noted, we are working 
very closely with the Department of Energy and other colleagues 
within the Administration to identify ways in which we can help 
Moldova strengthen its resiliency, protect itself in the short 
run, but also help it take the steps to connect with the 
broader European grid that will, hopefully, help----
    Mrs. Wagner. Thank you.
    I have limited time here and I really do want to also 
emphasize what the chairman mentioned, which is helping Moldova 
with price negotiations, I think, would be very key, too.
    Some in Europe have conveyed that the use of chemical--a 
chemical weapon by Russia would push their governments to 
support a ban--full on ban on the import of Russian gas.
    Deputy Assistant Secretary Kamian, have you had similar 
conversations, I'm wondering, and why does it make sense to 
wait for another atrocity to take this step?
    Mr. Kamian. One of the challenges facing our European 
allies and partners, as you've noted, based on your recent trip 
to the region, is that for so long so many of them have been so 
dependent on Russian energy, and while they've reached a point 
now where there's broad consensus across the region that they 
need to reduce the dependence and diversify away from Russia, 
it's complicated.
    It's difficult, and many of their economies still rely on 
Russian energy to fuel the recovery from the pandemic, to 
provide their basic heating and necessities and to come out of 
a difficult era.
    And so I think what we're seeing from our European allies 
is awakening across the region, a steadfast commitment to never 
returning to the point of being reliant upon Russia.
    But it's going to take some time, and this is where the 
Administration is really committed to doing everything we can, 
whether it be the short-term surge in supplies of LNG to help 
them shore up supply, whether it be helping them fill up these 
gas storage levels that are going to be so critical to get them 
ready for the winter to ensure that our European allies and 
friends remain heated during this moment.
    But this is why we're really doubling down on the short-
term surge at the same time as accelerating the efforts for the 
clean energy transition.
    Mrs. Wagner. Well, I thank you. My time has expired. I 
appreciate the indulgence of the chair.
    I have some other questions for Secretary--Assistant 
Secretary Light. I will submit them for the record, and I do 
hope we will not wait for another atrocity to really ensue upon 
a full ban of Russian oil, and we can unleash American energy 
independence that can be helpful, I believe, in the region long 
term.
    So I thank you very much. I yield back.
    Mr. Keating. The chair now recognizes Representative Brad 
Schneider for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Schneider. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 
our three witnesses today, not only for joining us today but 
for the incredible work you and your three agencies are doing.
    Mr. Levine, I'd like to talk about the DFC's role 
specifically in energy security, and I appreciated your mention 
of Bulgaria in your testimony. I look forward to coordinating 
on your work in the region.
    I recently met with the prime minister of Bulgaria on his 
visit here to Washington, and we discussed the vital importance 
of energy independence from Russia in Eastern Europe.
    He relayed to me and my team how critical the DSC can be in 
providing financing to support this mission, not just in 
Bulgaria but other countries as well, and just yesterday, I met 
with members of the German Bundestag where we discussed the 
challenging but necessary steps of cutting off Russian energy 
from the European economy.
    To that end, I appreciate what the DFC is doing to support 
the Three Seas fund and making full use of the authorities 
Congress provided to the DFC through the European Energy 
Security and Diversification Act.
    The situation in Ukraine has made the need for supporting 
the energy needs of the region so much more urgent.
    So with that in mind, can you give us a quick update on the 
steps DFC has taken and will take in the coming months to 
fulfill the mission of the European Energy Security and 
Diversification Act?
    Mr. Levine. Thank you, Congressman Schneider.
    Absolutely, and I appreciate the question. I've myself 
recently had the opportunity to visit also with the prime 
minister in Bulgaria, his energy secretary, and much of his 
team.
    I was in Sofia where we were able to help advance some of 
the projects that we're working on to really help Bulgaria to 
actually completely switch off of Russian gas.
    As you know, Bulgaria uses a relatively small amount of gas 
resources, 3 bcm of demand. But in a place like Bulgaria where 
the political coalition can be so fragile, being able to 
replace that gas when Gazprom has shut the door, and provide an 
alternative to Russian gas is totally essential to maintaining 
stability, not just there but in the region.
    It's a similar story in Moldova where we have had similarly 
productive conversations about how we can support that 
transition.
    And so not only does it provide an opportunity for us to 
fulfill our mandate under the Energy Security and 
Diversification Act, but I think that it provides a real 
opportunity to support key strategic allies, friends, and 
partners.
    One of the other things about the Bulgarian conversation 
that I found to be particularly encouraging was their focus on 
the transition to clean energy. They are working to implement 
as part of their allocation of the recovery and resilience fund 
that they received from the EU, a 6 billion euro energy storage 
project, which we are eager to support.
    We're working with some of our existing trusted American 
borrowers to accelerate efforts on wind and solar. There are 
district heating projects that are begging for energy 
efficiency upgrades that can provide the cheapest and most cost 
effective form of gas demand reduction, and it's a wealth of 
opportunities that we are excited to pursue.
    You mentioned the Three Seas Fund, and I just want to note 
that our CEO, Scott Nathan, who was before your full committee 
just a couple of days ago, will be traveling to head the U.S. 
delegation in Riga, where we are excited that he'll be able to 
announce the terms and the scale of our commitment to the Three 
Seas Fund.
    We see this as a critical platform to be able to invest 
across the region from all the way from the Baltic States down 
to southern and eastern southeastern Europe, and we really 
welcome the opportunity to work with you and your colleagues to 
identify projects that we can support through that fund or 
individually.
    Thank you so much.
    Mr. Schneider. Thank you, and I look forward to it, too.
    In that vein, are there other things Congress can do to 
support DFC's work, broadly, energy security in Eastern Europe 
but also in particular in the Balkans.
    Mr. Levine. Well, I really appreciate the question.
    As you know, we now have a Fiscal Year 1923 budget request 
before the Congress. We have made a request for administrative 
funding in the amount of $220 million.
    One of the biggest bottlenecks that DFC has in terms of 
getting this funding out the door is our ability to staff 
projects, not just on the finance side but in terms of legal 
and policy capacity inside the agency.
    We would like to get to get to 700 staffers at DFC to be 
able to accelerate this work and to expeditiously process it, 
and we would be very grateful for your support on that budget 
request.
    Mr. Schneider. Great. Thank you.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I'm out of time. We have so many more 
questions, working to achieve energy dependence from Russia, 
not just in the context of Ukraine but a long term strategy for 
Europe is critically important and I am grateful for you having 
this hearing.
    Mr. Keating. Thank you, Representative.
    The chair now recognizes Representative Mast for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Mast. Thank you, Chairman.
    I just want to start with something that you Stated 
already, Mr. Light, and that was that Russians were 
manipulating the market and increasing prices before the 
invasion, and why I think it's so important that you said that 
today is because let's all ask ourselves what was President 
Biden doing while this was going on and ahead of that going on?
    Well, he was cutting off U.S. pipelines and creating a 
difficult regulatory environment for made-in-America oil and 
gas. You guys are to blame. That is what you were doing and 
everybody should be pointing their fingers at you, which is 
exactly what I'm going to do.
    I do not have any questions for you. I do want to talk 
about Development Finance Corporation. I do have your budget 
request right here.
    What you're asking for from we the people, the American 
people, and I do have the EESDA in front of me right here. I 
want to go over a few parts of it, as I did with Mr. Nathan a 
couple of days ago, and want to know your opinion on these.
    Part of EESDA specifically says to facilitate international 
negotiations concerning cross-border infrastructure.
    Should I understand cross-border infrastructure as it 
relates to the energy in EESDA as pipelines?
    Mr. Light. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
    Mr. Mast. Is it pipelines?
    Mr. Light. As I think CEO Nathan mentioned in his 
testimony, cross-border infrastructure would include 
infrastructure for energy. That's our mandate under----
    Mr. Mast. Cross-border would be a pipeline. That's a 
pipeline that goes across the border, right?
    Mr. Light. Well, for example, in the energies--if you look 
at that project eligibility guidelines in the Act----
    Mr. Mast. Is it a pipeline, among other things?
    Mr. Light [continuing]. That is electricity transmissions--
--
    Mr. Mast. Is it a pipeline, among other things?
    Mr. Light. Well, I think it could be.
    Mr. Mast. Are you against pipelines?
    Mr. Light. Well----
    Mr. Mast. Are you for pipelines?
    Mr. Light. The----
    Mr. Mast. Are you for pipelines?
    Mr. Light. The Act discusses----
    Mr. Mast. Let's go with that one. Are you for pipelines?
    Mr. Light. Congressman, I appreciate the question.
    Mr. Mast. Yes or no? For pipelines? Yes? No?
    Mr. Light. In my personal capacity, I have been really 
honored to have this opportunity to serve.
    Mr. Mast. I'm not worried about how honored you are. Are 
you for pipelines?
    Mr. Light. With respect, Congressman, my personal opinion 
is----
    Mr. Mast. This is what people hate about Washington, DC. 
It's a simple question. You're asking for money from the U.S. 
taxpayer to do cross-State infrastructure overseas as related 
to energy. Are you for pipelines or not?
    Mr. Light. I think that the Development Finance Corporation 
is interested in advancing any project that can deliver energy 
security for our allies and partners----
    Mr. Mast. It does say diversity on here--energy diversity--
and it does say renewable and nonrenewable fuels. That's the 
EESDA. So are you for pipelines?
    Mr. Light. In the Act, the project eligibility allows----
    Mr. Mast. So you won't say for pipelines. It's yes or no.
    Mr. Light. Allows us to work on projects that can deliver 
electricity generating capacity using fossil or clean energy 
and we will advance----
    Mr. Mast. So you're for fossil fuel use? You are for the 
DFC----
    Mr. Light. The DFC will----
    Mr. Mast [continuing]. Creating a friendly regulatory 
environment----
    Mr. Keating. Please. If I could interject.
    Mr. Mast. No, you cannot. It's not your time.
    Mr. Keating. Yes, I can.
    Mr. Mast. No, you cannot. It's not your time.
    Mr. Keating. Yes, I can, sir.
    Mr. Mast. No, you cannot. You guys messed this all up. It's 
not your time. It's not your time.
    Mr. Keating. Sir, you'd like an argument, you can let me 
answer the questions. With all due respect----
    Mr. Mast. There is no respect taken.
    Mr. Keating. Evidently, there is no respect given.
    Mr. Mast. That's because you guys are marking up energy to 
our country----
    Mr. Keating. The chair recognizes the witness to answer the 
question that was posed to him.
    Mr. Mast. You guys are making oil and gas ridiculously 
expensive for Americans and you do not want to be questioned 
about it.
    Mr. Keating. Are you pleased you're getting the sound bite, 
sir? I'm not going to participate in it.
    Mr. Mast. The Biden Administration created the problem.
    Don't participate then. Close your mouth and let me ask my 
questions. Don't participate. Let me ask----
    Mr. Keating. Close my mouth, sir?
    Mr. Mast. Yes, you heard it directly. That's why you sound 
so offended because you heard what I said. So let's do that and 
let me finish asking my questions.
    Mr. Keating. Allow them to answer the question.
    Mr. Mast. If he wanted to answer the question he could. 
Let's get back to the questions that you do not want to answer. 
Do you support pipelines? We know that you do not.
    We talked about what Mr. Light said already, that the 
Russians were working to manipulate these markets ahead of the 
invasion into the Ukraine, and what was the Biden 
Administration doing? Absolutely nothing.
    They were cutting off pipelines here in the United States 
of America, creating a difficult regulatory environment for oil 
and gas exploration. You guys are to blame for this. You're 
interrupting me because you do not want Democrats to have to 
answer for what Democrats have been doing in the House of 
Representatives, what the Administration has been doing as it 
relates to energy, cutting off 25,000 jobs as it relates to the 
XL pipeline, 800,000 barrels a day of oil to the United States 
of America.
    You're willing to ask for money for the Development Finance 
Corporation, money from we the people in the United States of 
America to develop energy infrastructure overseas, reduce the 
regulatory environment for energy infrastructure to include 
fossil fuel usage overseas, but you'll cut it off here for made 
in America from sea to shining sea, and you guys are absolutely 
wrong because of it.
    Now you can have 2 seconds back.
    Mr. Levine. If I could, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Keating. You did say--did you say not that any 
alternative would be available in terms of the ANC and you do, 
given the fact you weren't allowed to answer the question the 
opportunity to answer the question.
    Mr. Mast. He was allowed. I offered him plenty of 
opportunities to answer. He did not want to answer. Very simple 
yes or no----
    Mr. Keating. Gentleman's time has expired.
    The witness shall give the opportunity to answer a 
question.
    Mr. Mast. I should get that time back that you took when 
you were interrupting me. Why do not we give that back?
    Mr. Keating. The gentleman will have the opportunity to 
answer the question.
    Mr. Mast. Not interested in that?
    All right. I guess that's too democratic.
    Mr. Levine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, sir, 
for your question.
    Mr. Keating. I'll ask all the panel members, please, give 
the decorum with the respect that this committee deserves and 
the respect that witnesses deserve, the respect that the public 
deserve.
    I will allow the gentleman to answer this question.
    Mr. Levine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I simply would like to just underscore that under the 
authority that DFC has from European Energy Security and 
Diversification Act, designed to help provide energy security 
to our allies, particularly of importance during this war time, 
we will pursue projects that can deliver energy security to 
Europe.
    In the project eligibility section of the Act--and I would 
encourage you to consult with that section, Mr. Mast--there is 
specific delineation of what types of projects may be eligible 
for DFC financing and there is discussion of electricity 
transmission infrastructure, there is discussion of energy 
storage, there is discussion of electricity generating 
capacity, yes, for both fossil fuels and clean energy.
    And I'm not aware of any specific eligibility for 
pipelines. Thank you.
    Mr. Keating. The chair recognizes Representative Meuser for 
5 minutes.
    Mr. Schneider. Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. Did you call on me?
    Mr. Keating. No, Representative Meuser.
    Mr. Schneider. Sorry.
    Mr. Keating. The chair recognizes Representative Tenney for 
5 minutes.
    [No response.]
    Mr. Keating. The chair recognizes, and I know he's here, 
Representative Pfluger for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Pfluger. Assistant Secretary Light, I just returned 
from Asia. Returned from Europe. Everybody's asking for LNG. 
And my question for you is why has the Department of Energy not 
approved the ECA Phase Two on the Vista Pacific LNG permits on 
the West Coast to ship more American made energy?
    Mr. Light. Thanks for the question.
    Mr. Pfluger. I've got about 75 more questions.
    Mr. Light. OK. I'll be very brief. Thanks very much for the 
question.
    The department is currently undergoing review of those 
through our department of fossil energy and carbon management. 
I cannot speak to that review right now.
    We have already approved the majority of the product that 
would flow through.
    Mr. Pfluger. These two specifically?
    Mr. Light. Those two specific ones. Yes, absolutely. I 
cannot comment on an ongoing process, but it's definitely 
something that we're working on.
    Mr. Pfluger. OK. Ambassador or Assistant Secretary, did you 
push for sanctions on the Ukraine on Nord Stream during the 
buildup to the Ukrainian conflict? Did you push for full 
sanctions on the Nord Stream project?
    Mr. Light. Personally or the department?
    Mr. Pfluger. Yes, you personally.
    Mr. Light. So the Department of Energy does not handle 
sanctions packages.
    Mr. Pfluger. Did you recommend to the president of the 
United States through your channels to push for further 
sanctions?
    Mr. Light. I am not involved in those discussions on 
sanctions.
    Mr. Pfluger. OK. As an expert on energy, do you believe 
that we should have fully sanctioned the Nord Stream project 
prior to the Ukrainian conflict?
    Mr. Light. I believe that's a question for the White House, 
sir. I'm really not an expert on sanctioning so I cannot--I do 
not know the dynamics of which sanctions work and which 
sanctions do not.
    I'm happy to discuss them.
    Mr. Pfluger. Does the Department of Energy agree that we 
need to increase domestic production here in order to meet the 
demands not only of our domestic requirements but also that of 
our partners and allies around the world?
    Mr. Light. Absolutely. Yes.
    Mr. Pfluger. OK. So will the department approve the massive 
amounts of permits that are waiting and have been waiting, like 
ECA Phase Two, to get the production moving in the right 
direction?
    Mr. Light. I'm not aware of any natural--LNG export permits 
awaiting approval except for the----
    Mr. Pfluger. There are many. We will make your office aware 
of them. It's disappointing to hear that you're not aware of 
them.
    Do you agree with Envoy Kerry when he said that renewable 
power does not have the capacity to provide baseload?
    Mr. Light. I do not know that Secretary Kerry said that.
    Mr. Pfluger. He said it in this hearing room.
    Mr. Light. He said that renewable power cannot provide 
baseload power. Nuclear power, certainly, can provide baseload 
power and we are----
    Mr. Pfluger. Do you agree that renewable power cannot 
provide baseload capacity?
    Mr. Light. Renewable power plus battery storage can provide 
baseload power, and that's really the solutions that we're 
looking for for Europe specifically.
    Mr. Pfluger. So renewable power can provide baseload 
capacity?
    Mr. Light. With battery storage. With utility scale battery 
storage, yes.
    Mr. Pfluger. Is it the policy of the Department of Energy 
to accept the fact that there could be rolling blackouts 
throughout the United States?
    Mr. Light. We would not accept as good rolling blackouts in 
the United States. The Department of Energy will do everything 
in our power to make sure that that does not happen.
    Mr. Pfluger. That's good to hear. One thing that I heard 
you say was with regards to the EU that we are going to help 
them with a diverse and clean and affordable plan.
    `
    You left out reliable. Do you believe in reliability?
    Mr. Light. Absolutely. That's one of the reasons that my 
office was one of the biggest champions of nuclear energy in 
the region.
    Mr. Pfluger. You know, the thing that strikes me right now 
is that we're talking about this war on energy, the 
manipulation by the Russian government.
    In fact, the war on energy is right here. It's domestic 
policy. The assault on domestic energy is real and it's coming 
from the Biden Administration. Your policies--and I think it 
was pointed that you left out reliability in your testimony 
here today.
    Mr. Levine, how much additional capacity does the United 
States have with regards to LNG to actually ship to Europe, 
Asia, partners and allies that are requesting it right now?
    We have committed to 15 bcm to Europe. How much do we 
actually have?
    Mr. Levine. I believe that's correct. You know, as you 
know, DFC is focused on overseas projects. So we're not--we do 
not focus on U.S. capacity.
    Mr. Pfluger. Right. But you've spoken with great authority 
on the ability to ship what we need to Europe. So how much 
additional capacity do we have here domestically?
    Mr. Levine. When DFC receives a commercially viable 
application for a project from an allied partner nation in 
eastern Europe to help provide U.S. LNG, we can support that 
project.
    Mr. Pfluger. Do you know how much LNG is included in the 
Three Seas Initiative that will be rolled out and led by your 
CEO?
    Mr. Levine. Well, I know that there are several LNG 
projects that are under consideration by the Three Seas 
management team.
    Mr. Pfluger. Do you know where they are?
    Mr. Levine. I know that some of them include projects in 
the Baltic Seas and I believe that there are some projects for 
LNG import terminals in southeastern Europe as well.
    Mr. Pfluger. It's good to know.
    When I asked the CEO the same question he had no idea how 
much LNG was part of the DFC. But you said he's going to lead 
the envoy to Europe and make a big announcement.
    So it's very disappointing that the CEO does not know the 
details. I appreciate the fact that you've just told me that it 
will be included in the Baltic and in southern Europe.
    The war and the assault on American energy is real and it 
is also a limiting factor to provide energy security for our 
country as well as our partners and allies, and this pie in the 
sky plan is not going to work.
    If we do not look at the actual reality of what not only 
our country needs for baseload capacity, like Envoy Kerry said 
right here in this hearing room about 1 year ago, that 
renewable power does not yet have the ability to provide 
baseload capacity.
    He was right. He was correct in saying that, and we need to 
look at the actual reality of what we need because every 
country will be facing rolling blackouts, and if it's not the 
policy of the Department of Energy or any other Administration, 
bureaucratic agency, then let's get to the reality of what we 
need and let's unleash American energy instead of having these 
handcuffs and not permitting what we need that I've just 
mentioned two of the dozens of permits that are out there 
awaiting either FERC or DOE approval right now.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Keating. The chair now recognizes Representative Meuser 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Meuser. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    I appreciate it. Thanks to our witnesses as well.
    I, too, accompanied the chairmen, both Meeks and Keating, 
to a European trip CODEL not too long ago, and the concerns 
that we heard regularly from our EU allies and partners, many 
of which was not necessarily in this order--certainly, energy 
costs going up and capacity and availability, food. Maybe not 
yet but real concerns.
    Of course, refugees. Every country we went to was taking 
hundreds of thousands of refugees. And they were concerned 
about actual invasion of their sovereign nation from Russia, of 
course.
    So we're talking energy here. So I'll ask the witnesses and 
Mr. Levine, Mr. Light, a question that's been asked, but I'd 
really like to hear what steps are being taken to increase U.S. 
production of LNG to assist Europe's transition from Russian 
gas.
    Mr. Levine?
    Mr. Levine. Thank you, Congressman, for the question.
    As I previously mentioned, DFC is focused exclusively on 
overseas transactions. So I do not know that I can speak to 
domestic production of LNG in the context of my role at DFC.
    Mr. Meuser. OK. DFC recently sent a letter to Scott Nathan 
that--from Senator Marco Rubio where Marco Rubio outlined what 
their purpose was to facilitate the participation of private 
sector capital and skills and the economic development of less 
developed countries in order to complement the development 
assistance objectives and advance the foreign policy interests 
of the United States.
    Yet, there's a long list of approvals of $40 million in 
equity investments to African private equity firms to improve 
their environment, those social and governance standards while 
promoting women's economic empowerment, approved $100 million 
partial credit guarantee to fund manager to make loans to local 
enterprises striving for climate, smart land management, 
emissions reductions. Another $80 million approved for climate 
resilient infrastructure in Africa and the Middle East.
    Meanwhile, Africa has as much natural gas probably as the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
    So can you understand the frustrations when we're--we have 
these hearings, we're asking these questions, we have $5 
gasoline. We have got the war that Putin created.
    We have got the EU on the brink of energy collapse, and 
you're not answering any of our questions, OK, with any 
substance It's more than just frustrating. It's wrong. OK.
    Are you hiding something? And I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, but 
it's very frustrating. Why cannot we get an answer? Is there 
anybody on this panel that can answer me what steps are being 
taken to assist Europe in its loss of LNG or natural gas that 
it's purchasing from Russia?
    What is the U.S. doing to supplement this transition? Is 
there anyone on this panel, highly distinguished individuals 
from the U.S. Department of Energy--Assistant Secretary of 
Energy, senior bureau officials, chief climate officer?
    Nobody can answer that?
    Mr. Light. Congressman, I'm more than happy to answer your 
question. It's just that you directed it to my colleague, Jake 
Levine.
    So right now the United States is exporting every molecule 
of LNG that we possibly can that's being produced. We are at 
record highs of production. It will increase through the year.
    We had a setback with the Freeport fire that just happened. 
That's something that's concerning and probably impacting 
prices in Europe right now, in addition to the recent 
announcement of potential new cutoffs of Gazprom from Germany 
and Italy as well.
    But 70 percent of U.S. LNG exports this year have gone to 
Europe. That is where the cargoes are going. My colleague at 
the State Department, Harry Kamian, said earlier in the hearing 
that this is why President Biden and President von der Leyen 
signed and created this new U.S. European Commission LNG Task 
Force, which commits the United States to putting 15 bcm of LNG 
into Europe this year, and for creating the longer term 
contracts so there's more stability on the purchaser side, 
right, and on the production side in the United States so that 
the Europeans will pull together and create contracts that 
could go up to 50 bcm per year and increase those in the 
future.
    This is a very complicated market. It's a complicated 
dynamic. But I do not think that there's any holding back right 
now of information----
    Mr. Pfluger. We're all aware of how complicated it is and I 
respect your answer. Understand the seriousness of this, and we 
cannot be fooling around.
    Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Keating. Thank you.
    The chair recognizes Representative Tenney for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Tenney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the 
witnesses and Ranking Member Fitzpatrick for today's meeting.
    I want to ask my first question to Mr. Kamian. Can you 
provide any additional information and details about the use of 
the secondary sanctions in a way to enforce a possible price 
cap on Russian oil to cut our Russian energy--to cut Russian 
energy revenues? Is there anything more that we should know 
about that?
    Mr. Kamian. Congresswoman, thank you very much for the 
question.
    Together with our colleagues in the EU and the G-7 the 
Administration is discussing a wide range of options to try to 
figure out, on the one hand, how we can continue to reduce the 
revenue going to Putin and at the same time try to mitigate the 
possible negative impacts that it could have on the global 
energy market as well as our partners and allies.
    You mentioned one of the items that is currently under 
discussion that Secretary of Treasury Yellen mentioned last 
week, and that is one of the items that we're discussing 
together with our G-7 and other European partners.
    Those discussions are underway and I'm not at liberty to go 
into much detail other than to say that that and other options 
are worth looking at quite seriously to try to figure out how 
we might be able to reduce the revenue that's going to Putin, 
on the one hand, but be sensitive to our allies and partners in 
the Americas to mitigate the impacts it could have on us.
    Ms. Tenney. Right. So you're looking at--you're alluding to 
a price gap?
    Mr. Kamian. We're looking at a variety of options that are 
on the table in consultation with our G-7 colleagues in the EU. 
The degree of unanimity and cohesion between the United States 
and the EU and the G-7 has been fantastic and strong, and we're 
looking at exploring every possible option that we could take 
to balance those two competing needs.
    Ms. Tenney. Thank you.
    And Mr. Levine, what role can the Development Finance 
Corporation play in supporting LNG projects in Europe, 
including Greece, that will help us and the continent overcome 
some of this dependence on Russian energy?
    Are we working on that--those initiatives to make sure that 
happens? We just recently had meetings with the Prime Minister 
of the Hellenic parliament. We just want to know what your view 
is and if we're working on those issues.
    Mr. Levine. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    We are working on those issues. We are excited about the 
role that Greece can play in the Eastern Med. In fact, I do not 
know if you saw yesterday news reporting on a recent 
transaction to provide Israeli gas in partnership with Egypt 
and European countries, and we believe that Greece can play a 
similar role in terms of facilitating energy transactions and 
transmission through Greece and through the region.
    We have been similarly looking at projects not only in the 
LNG and gas space but also in clean energy, working on 
electricity distribution, network projects, wind projects, 
solar projects, and also, importantly, exploring our ability 
under our authorities provided by the European Energy Security 
and Diversification Act to support port infrastructure 
projects, which can be critical to energy----
    Ms. Tenney. OK. Let me jump to that because I want to ask 
you another question about the DFC and moving forward the Trump 
Administration's $300 million initial pledge to the Three Seas 
Initiative Investment Fund, which we are grateful for.
    What steps are you taking currently--is the DFC currently 
to coordinate the review and implementation of this strategic 
investment with the fund, the State Department, the U.S. 
embassies and the Three Seas countries involved in this 
initiative?
    Mr. Levine. It's--the Three Seas Fund is a top priority, as 
I previously mentioned. It's something that we're proud to be 
supporting, obviously, with enormous bipartisan support and 
support from this Administration.
    Our CEO, Scott Nathan, will be in Latvia next week at the 
Three Seas Summit, where he will be able to announce the terms 
and the scale of our commitment to that fund.
    One of the things that we have been working through, 
because when----
    Ms. Tenney. OK. Can I just reclaim my time for 1 second? 
Because I got two critical issues.
    I just want to make sure that there are no restrictions 
placed on this fund and that we are focusing that initiative on 
being able to use to counter the Russian influence on this 
region, which is feeling the pressure, obviously, because of 
the war in Ukraine.
    Can you just quickly comment on the fact that there are no 
restrictions on the use of this fund? We can still use it for 
LNG and other fossil fuels. It's not going to be restricted.
    Is that correct?
    Mr. Levine. Well, I'm not--I'm not sure what you mean by 
restrictions. But I was just going to note that----
    Ms. Tenney. OK.
    Mr. Levine [continuing]. Our eligibility to work on 
projects that come through the fund are limited to energy 
sector transactions because of the limitations in the Energy 
Security and Diversification Act.
    So to the extent that there are----
    Ms. Tenney. Right. No restrictions on fossil fuel 
enhancement to protect these regions in the Three Seas 
Initiative, right?
    Mr. Levine. Our support of the fund will extend to any 
projects that can provide energy security to eastern Europe and 
the region in this time of war.
    Ms. Tenney. Great. Thank you. I appreciate it.
    Thank you. I yield back.
    Mr. Keating. The chair now recognizes the co-chair of the 
Transatlantic Legislators Dialogue, Representative Costa, for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Costa. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for this 
timely hearing.
    I think we can all agree that in the last three and a half 
months the world has changed in ways that we could never have 
anticipated prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, this pariah, 
Putin, and the impacts, and while and we both Democratic and 
Republican Administrations has for 20 years or more than I know 
of have been suggesting--not suggesting, telling our European 
allies that reliance on Russia is not a good idea, I think that 
it has become a hard reality that, in fact, that's the case.
    We just, Mr. Chairman, finished a productive CODEL on the 
eighty-fourth meeting of the Transatlantic Legislators Dialogue 
last month.
    A number of our colleagues, including Congressman Pfluger--
and I want to thank him for his participation--was at that 
meeting. I think we got a good conversation between our 
colleagues with the members of the European Parliament on what 
they're doing to free themselves of the dependence on Russia 
oil and gas.
    Let me ask Dr. Light a question with regards to that 
efforts. Increasing LNG imports can reduce EU's dependence on 
natural gas from Russia. What's the appropriate balance and the 
time lines between short-term and long-term efforts?
    I know there's been significant efforts going on in the 
last month or so with the REPowerEU plans, and could you 
comment?
    Mr. Light. Yes, sir. Thank you, Congressman. And thank you 
for your leadership on that dialog, which is incredibly 
valuable for the entire U.S. Government, I think, as we engage 
with this war, which is an energy war, to be sure, as much as 
it is any other kind of war.
    Just a base check on this. So Europe was importing 155 
billion cubic meters of natural gas from Russia last year. We 
were exporting 22 billion cubic meters of LNG. If Putin goes 
forward and starts shutting off more taps to Russia, there is 
not enough U.S. LNG in the world to fill that gap.
    So any kind of move that we make forward with respect to 
help it, you know, surging more cargos and what we're doing 
through the U.S. European Commission Task Force on gas is very 
good, but it has to be complemented fundamentally with work on 
increasing energy efficiency and getting the Europeans out of 
fossil energy as their primary source of energy for both 
consumers and for larger industry.
    Mr. Costa. Irrevocably it's----
    [Simultaneous speaking]
    Mr. Light. So the longer we--the long-term plan has got to 
be immediately implemented.
    Mr. Costa. Correct. I agree. I think--my sense in the 
conversations I've had not only when we were there at the TLD 
meetings but before and after that they clearly understand that 
they're behind the curve on this effort.
    But what do you estimate their ability and the plan that 
they are now trying to put in place to relieve themselves of 
that dependency and what do you think are the best ways?
    I mean, we're talking about fast track permitting of LNG 
facilities and so forth. But as you pointed out, there's not 
enough natural gas to--and I must say, it's one of the--I call 
it the energy du jour in California these days.
    How do we get our arms around this? Because it's critical 
that we do so as quickly as possible.
    Mr. Light. Right. So the Europeans want to get out of 
Russian gas by up to two-thirds by next year. If we permit--if 
there were a dozen permits before us now that we magically sort 
of, you know, approved overnight, you cannot build the 
facilities fast enough to get the product out the door to 
substitute for that.
    And so that's why you absolutely need to work on everything 
on the efficiency side, on helping to transition Europe away 
from using gas as their primary----
    Mr. Costa. We have got to use all the energy tools in the 
energy toolbox.
    Mr. Light [continuing]. To electrify their heating supply.
    Mr. Costa. Right. Don't you agree?
    To what extent do you think the hydrogen goals interact 
with the other energy goals in terms of renewables and how 
realistic are they?
    Mr. Light. I think the hydrogen goals are extremely 
important. That's one of the reasons why the Department of 
Energy has our Earthshot initiative to try to reduce the cost 
of green hydrogen to $1 per kilogram of green hydrogen by the 
end of the decade.
    When you get down to those kinds of costs then you really 
are talking about a viable solution, that you could use 
existing infrastructure that potentially could be funded by 
different parts of the U.S. Government to move that around 
Europe as a viable substitute for gas.
    Mr. Costa. Mr. Kamian, to what extent do you think Russia's 
ownership and stakes in European energy infrastructure pose a 
challenge for the EU plans to reduce their dependence?
    Mr. Light. Sorry.
    Mr. Costa. I was--is Mr. Kamian on----
    Mr. Light. Oh, Mr. Kamian. OK. Sorry.
    Mr. Costa. Yes.
    Mr. Kamian. Congressman, thank you very much for the 
question. I think in our recent conversation with our European 
allies and partners they've acknowledged that Russia partial 
ownership of some of the energy-related functions in Europe 
does pose a strategic challenge for them.
    We have seen steps, for example, by Germany and others to 
look at this to find out ways in which they can wrestle legal 
control back to them.
    But I think this is part of the broader awareness in Europe 
that they need to take every possible step that they can in 
both the short and medium term to not only reduce the reliance 
on Russia but, as Dr. Light mentioned, accelerate the clean 
energy transition.
    And part of this is going to be gaining greater control, 
greater independence, and greater freedom from Russia, 
including control over those energy facilities where Russia may 
have partial ownership.
    Mr. Costa. Well, thank you for your answer.
    Mr. Chairman, my time is expired. But let me thank you for 
holding this hearing today, and let me also urge my colleagues, 
having been around here for a while, that we are in a energy 
and war crisis, and the world has changed in the last three and 
a half months and, frankly, the way we solve these issues is by 
coming together.
    It's easy to point fingers and lay blame, but at the end of 
the day we all have a stake in ensuring that Europe is no 
longer dependent upon Russia, and that we as a democracy stand 
together to do the right thing.
    And we know there are challenges and we have differences, 
to be sure, and we can--we need to work through those 
differences. But at the end of the day, frankly, I think a 
dialog that has civil nature to its discussion toward solutions 
is the way we need to solve this effort.
    Mr. Keating. Thank you.
    The chair now recognizes Representative Meijer for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Meijer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Dr. Light, what could occur more quickly, the construction 
of additional LNG export facilities in the U.S. or the full 
electrification of European home heating?
    Mr. Light. The full electrification of all heating in 
Europe would definitely take a long time, but it's not a zero 
sum game. I think that we can move forward with both these 
things at the same time.
    We can move forward with helping the Europeans to get out 
of a form of energy that can, frankly, be weaponized against 
them in a multiple--a multitude of ways.
    Mr. Meijer. And I appreciate you recognizing that, Dr. 
Light, because I completely agree that it's not zero sum. It's 
not either/or. It's both/and, and, Mr. Chairman, I wish to 
yield the remainder of my time to my colleague from Texas, Mr. 
Pfluger.
    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you to my colleague, and I agree with 
Mr. Costa that this does take all of the effort that we have, 
but it's not a pie in the sky plan.
    And let me ask, once again, Assistant Secretary, the--to my 
knowledge, the applications for the two permits that I 
mentioned on the west coast were put in 12 days after President 
Biden was sworn in.
    Can you tell me why they have not been approved?
    Mr. Light. Sir, this is really--that's an ongoing process 
through our office of fossil energy and carbon management, and 
that is not a process of my office overseas. It's an ongoing 
process.
    As I said, of those two facilities the one that's 
operational we have approved the majority of the product--U.S. 
product that goes through that.
    Mr. Pfluger. And there's a lot of--there's a lot of----
    Mr. Light. It's already been approved. So the question is--
--
    Mr. Pfluger. Four on the Gulf Coast have been approved. We 
have two that for 500 days have not been approved, and if we're 
talking about energy security--that's right. In Mexico.
    If we're talking about energy security for our partners, 
and as the Assistant Secretary for Energy of International 
Affairs, this should be a priority.
    Let me ask you another question.
    Mr. Light. Yes, sir. But it involves an ongoing regulatory 
process that I do not have purview over.
    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you.
    Do you agree that refiners are to blame for $5 gas?
    Mr. Light. I think that the global market is at the mercy 
right now of Vladimir Putin.
    Mr. Pfluger. Is it the refineries----
    Mr. Light. I think we need to do everything we possibly 
can----
    Mr. Pfluger. Assistant Secretary, do you believe----
    Mr. Light [continuing]. To make sure that the manipulation 
of that market and the impact of this war----
    Mr. Pfluger. Do you agree that refineries----
    Mr. Light [continuing]. Isn't as sad as it is on the 
American people.
    Mr. Pfluger. Do you agree that refiners are to blame for $5 
gas? American families going to the pump and in California 
paying almost $7, and cases above $7--do you believe that 
refiners are to blame?
    Mr. Light. I think the fact that the profit margin now is 
220 percent or more or what it was last year is disturbing. 
That's what President Biden's letter tried to address and 
that's what the convening that's here tried to address.
    Mr. Pfluger. You mentioned----
    Mr. Light. But, of course, we would never say----
    Mr. Pfluger. You mentioned earlier today--and thank you for 
that--you mentioned earlier today that we are at record high 
production. In fact, in my area, in the Permian Basin, we're 
almost at 5.3 million barrels a day with one-third less active 
rigs.
    So you're right, we are at record production. Do you agree 
with President Biden when he said that we're not--that 
producers are not producing enough?
    Mr. Light. I think that by the end--by 2023, we will be at 
even the highest levels of production----
    Mr. Pfluger. Do you agree that--do you agree with President 
Biden when he accused producers in a similar fashion that he 
said to refiners that they're not producing enough?
    Mr. Light. Well, I think that what's going on right now is 
that we have had--as you said, there's been a slowdown in 
deployable rigs that happened because of COVID and that's one 
of the biggest hurdles right now for producers to produce more 
is getting workers on rigs and getting rigs deployed.
    Mr. Pfluger. So do you agree that----
    Mr. Light. That is definitely something that needs to----
    Mr. Pfluger. It comes down to--it comes down to the 
assault. We have talked about the manipulation. Putin is not to 
blame for American energy prices. We only import 10 percent, 
historically, from Russia. Putin is not the cause of that.
    Now, there is a energy crisis ongoing in Europe and we can 
be a part of the solution. What is the additional capacity in 
bcm of LNG that we have right now to ship off our shores?
    Mr. Light. Zero additional capacity to ship off our shores.
    But the energy crisis like the gas prices, that's subject 
to the global oil market. Even while we have high production 
levels in the United States, the global oil market is affected 
by things like the Ukraine war regardless of what is 
happening----
    Mr. Pfluger. Should we be competing with malign actors to 
take the place of them shipping their products, their oil and 
gas, people like Venezuela, Iran, North Korea? If they have any 
production? China?
    Should we be competing with them?
    Mr. Light. We're competing with other countries in terms of 
the global market?
    Mr. Pfluger. Uh-huh. To provide for----
    Mr. Light. We should absolutely compete with other 
countries in terms of the global market.
    Mr. Pfluger. OK. So it comes down to the permitting. It 
comes down to the infrastructure here in the United States, as 
you mentioned.
    Do you agree with Envoy Kerry's recent comments saying that 
natural gas or fossil fuels have a shelf life of about 10 
years, that we should be done in about six, eight, maximum 10 
years?
    Mr. Light. I'm just not aware of what the secretary said in 
that context.
    Mr. Pfluger. I mean, he's the special envoy for energy and 
you are an assistant secretary at the Department of Energy and 
you do not know what he said.
    [Simultaneous speaking.]
    Mr. Light. I do not know what he said about this or what 
his comments are.
    Mr. Pfluger. I would invite you to read his comments that 
are public.
    Mr. Light. I am very happy to look at what the comment--
what----
    Mr. Keating. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The chair recognizes Representative Wild for 5 minutes.
    [No response.]
    Mr. Keating. Could you communicate to Representative Wild 
that she is muted and the video is----
    Having gone through the first round and up against the roll 
call in just a matter of minutes, we will continue with some 
second round questioning as time permits where the roll call is 
called.
    Mr. Pfluger. Mr. Chairman?
    Mr. Keating. Representative Pfluger?
    Mr. Pfluger. Did Representative Malliotakis not get called?
    Mr. Keating. We do not have her as being on the list.
    OK. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Pfluger. She is still----
    Mr. Keating. Thank you, Representative Pfluger.
    Representative Malliotakis is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Malliotakis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 
my colleague, Representative Pfluger.
    I agree with the sentiments that my colleagues expressed 
today, that it is obviously a national security issue, not just 
for Europe but for our own nation, and I would really advise 
the Administration to stop looking at our adversaries for 
energy needs when we can be producing right here in the United 
States and we have the ability to approve permits and leases 
and ramp up domestic production today to increase supply.
    And with that said, I would like to yield my time to 
Representative Pfluger so he can continue his questioning on 
this issue.
    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you to my colleague from New York, who 
understands national security better than most.
    Assistant Secretary, what steps are being taken right here 
in the United States? Because you mentioned that--in my 
previous question that there is 0.0 additional capacity. What 
steps is the U.S. Department of Energy taking to increase 
domestic production of LNG so that we can assure our partners 
and allies of their national security?
    Mr. Light. So the--you know, as I said before, we've been 
processing all permits on that and I think that U.S. capacity 
is high. We have been working with the State Department and 
others with respect to the critical situation that we're right 
now in terms of the refilling situation that's going on in 
Europe. And so----
    Mr. Pfluger. What steps are we taking right here to 
increase domestic production? It's very simple. You're a senior 
member of the Department of Energy. Our national security 
depends on you.
    Mr. Light. Right.
    Mr. Pfluger. What steps are being taken?
    Mr. Light. Right. So, as I said before, the Biden 
Administration fully supports all of the LNG that's being put 
in capacity and is moving out. We have had some permitting and 
some new trains go online.
    Just recently, they've increased our capacity that will, 
again, give us the highest capacity that the U.S. has ever had.
    Mr. Pfluger. This is the quote, and I'd like to submit this 
for the record, Mr. Chairman, the article from Bloomberg.
    Though natural gas burns cleaner than coal when used to 
generate electricity, it should not be a long-term climate 
strategy without emission control technology. And he says, then 
you've got 6 years, 8 years, no more than 10 years or so which 
you've got to come up with something else.
    OK. That is----
    Mr. Keating. Does the representative--excuse me.
    Is the representative moving to unanimous consent that that 
be part of the record?
    Mr. Pfluger. I'd like to submit this for--yes.
    Mr. Keating. Without objection.
    [The information referred to:]

    [INFORMATION NOT AVAILABLE AT PRESS TIME]

    Mr. Light. The first part of what Secretary Kerry said 
there is absolutely right, is that--is that natural gas is not 
an indefinite bridge fuel with respect to the climate problem 
that we are facing right now because it is a hydrocarbon, and 
also because of the leaking that occurs throughout the process.
    One thing that the Department of Energy is doing right now 
very intensively is making sure that we can tamp down every 
leak from the drilling site all the way to the transmissionsite 
so that all the gas that we do produce and then put through the 
liquefaction process actually makes its way up to the market--
--
    Mr. Pfluger. This is why I ask----
    Mr. Light [continuing]. And also is the greenest natural 
gas available on the market, the cleanest natural gas available 
on the market.
    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you for recognizing that. It's the first 
time I've heard a very good factual point about what we do here 
in the United States.
    We have the largest secure, stable supply, right, not just 
LNG but of energy. And you know what? I have the credibility to 
talk about this because in my district we have renewables.
    In Texas, we have 23 to 24 percent of our grid that's 
serviced by renewables. I have more wind energy in my 
congressional district than the entire State of California. But 
I'm very concerned about the misprioritization that the 
Department of Energy seems to have declared war on the oil and 
gas industry.
    It is clear to most Americans--every American who goes to 
the pump today and pays over $5 a gallon for gasoline we'll 
think about President Biden.
    They will think about his policies, about him going to 
Saudi Arabia and asking the Saudis to produce more, about him 
asking for Venezuela to import oil when we can do it right 
here.
    They will think back to the summer of 2021 when people like 
me asked President Biden to fully sanction the Nord Stream 
pipeline in advance of the impending invasion.
    They will realize that when I sat across from President 
Zelenskyy just 20--18 to 20 days before the invasion, he told 
me that without Nord Stream there would be no invasion. That's 
what President Zelenskyy told me.
    Yet, now the Administration is trying to blame this on 
Putin.
    Mr. Secretary, what steps is the Department of Energy 
taking to produce more LNG right here in the United States?
    Mr. Light. So I think I've answered that question and I 
think that--again, we do not want to mix oil and gas.
    The oil prices and the gas prices that derive from them are 
being driven by the war because it is a global market. It's not 
a market controlled by the United States.
    On the gas side, I completely agree with you is that even 
before this entire war started Russia was not only providing 
most of the natural gas to Europe, they were also providing the 
dirtiest natural gas in the world.
    It was not a transition fuel away from coal, effectively, 
because of the life cycle emissions of that.
    And so with respect to what we have been doing is we have 
been tightening up--working to tighten up the reserves----
    Mr. Pfluger. And we--we thank you.
    Mr. Light [continuing]. And even the transportation in the 
United States to make sure that the molecules get out the 
door----
    Mr. Pfluger. My time has expired. If you'll allow me 10 
seconds.
    We have got to compete with malign actors around the world. 
We do it better than anybody else. We shouldn't be paying China 
for the pieces and parts and critical minerals that are being 
harvested and mined through slave labor.
    We should not be enriching the Chinese. So let's look at a 
strategy that is all of the above, that is realistic that 
provides for baseload capacity. If our national security 
depends on it, that of our partners and allies depends on it, 
we are in a very complex threat environment right now.
    We have to think about this. Please quit declaring war on 
U.S. domestic production.
    And I yield back.
    Mr. Keating. The chair recognizes Representative Wild for 5 
minutes, and she could be a little liberal, given the 
flexibility we have entertained so far.
    Ms. Wild. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Sorry I wasn't 
available earlier.
    I'd like to direct my question to Assistant Secretary 
Light.
    Secretary, in addition to its dominance as an energy 
supplier, Russia's influence also extends to European natural 
gas infrastructure, including major investments in storage 
facilities, pipelines, oil refineries, and the like.
    I'm wondering if you could comment on what challenges 
Russia's ownership stakes in European energy infrastructure 
poses for EU plans to reduce dependence on Russia.
    Mr. Light. That's an excellent question, and I think that 
there the--as I said earlier to Secretary--I'm sorry, 
Representative Keating, this is a seven move play by Vladimir 
Putin.
    It was basically to make sure that it was not only the 
product but also the infrastructure, the delivery, the contract 
system. Everything was set up to create this complete reliance 
on Russia on that.
    And so in that respect, I think that any long term plan, 
both to diversify supply in Europe as well as to help the 
Europeans to get off their reliance on fossil energy, for which 
I think there's just not enough product that can replace what 
they were getting from Russia, has got to involve major work on 
infrastructure, and that's something that my colleague from the 
Development Finance Corporation was speaking to earlier in 
terms of our authority to work on that.
    So what we're really trying to do now is identify projects. 
We need the help the Congress to identify the projects we can 
make the most impact with respect to creating an energy 
infrastructure that is truly resilient and in the face of the 
weaponization of energy that we're seeing with Putin. We do not 
want to put them in the same position with anyone else.
    Ms. Wild. Well, with that said, I'm curious how the 
Administration views the role of former high ranking 
politicians in western European democracies who, after leaving 
office, serve on the boards of Russian energy companies, 
including a former German chancellor and until the Ukraine 
invasion a former prime minister of France.
    Even how well known and influential these former 
politicians are in their own countries, how do you assess their 
effectiveness in advocating for energy interests in their home 
countries?
    Mr. Light. I think that the effectiveness of using 
particular individuals in Europe as the emissaries for that 
product speaks for itself and it, obviously, was a problem that 
was making it more difficult to have inroads.
    All that has changed now because of the war, and in this 
respect, one of the things the chairman said earlier that Putin 
may have overplayed his hand on this and we will eventually be 
able to get to a point where the Europeans are not as reliant 
on the Russians and so cannot be put--open up an energy flank, 
whatever else Putin wants to throw at them, is probably better 
than it's ever been before.
    Ms. Wild. Well, this may be, you know, a speculative 
question, but with the invasion in Ukraine and, you know, what 
we have seen in terms of energy independence in Europe and so 
forth, do you think it's a permanent breakaway of these former 
western European politicians from serving on Russian energy 
boards or do you think they'll go right back to it when and if 
this war ends?
    Mr. Light. Thank you, ma'am. I think the stakes are so high 
we must make this a permanent break. I just think that anything 
else short of that is just not acceptable and that's one of the 
reasons why we have got to double down on efficiency. We have 
got to double down on alternative forms of energy, that it not 
be used there.
    If the Europeans just switched wholesale from Russian gas 
to some other sources of gas around that does not make them, at 
the end of the day, more secure if they're not able to, for 
example, to rely on electricity that they can produce at home, 
including, hopefully, we hope someday in the near future from 
Ukraine, from clean reliable electricity for their heating as 
opposed to what they've been doing with respect to gas.
    It is a big problem. It's a complicated problem. But, you 
know, if we were, for example, to take all U.S. LNG and surge 
it all magically into Europe overnight, we would create 
overnight huge problems with other parts of the world--I mean, 
Asian markets as well.
    And so this is one of the reasons why the opportunity that 
we have in Europe despite the terrible reasons for it, we 
cannot afford not to lose with respect to helping them to 
become energy independent, renewable.
    They already have their own targets that set them in that 
direction. Now we just need to work with them in order to help 
them to achieve it.
    Ms. Wild. Well, thank you. You answered my next question 
with your answer already.
    So, Mr. Chairman, do I have time for one more question or 
no?
    Mr. Keating. You have plenty of time. Go ahead.
    Ms. Wild. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And this is for Mr. Jack Levine, chief climate officer of 
DFC.
    Mr. Levine, under the Biden Administration, DFC has 
established a target to reach net zero emissions through its 
investment portfolio by 2040 and to make one-third of its 
investments climate focused by the start of 2023.
    How do these targets intersect or conflict with DFC's 
efforts to diversify energy sources and support European energy 
security?
    Mr. Levine. Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question. 
It's really important, and I think that my colleague, Assistant 
Secretary Light's, last response did a lot of work to help 
highlight why those targets are so critical because even as we 
work to support the diversification of sources of energy on the 
oil and gas side in the immediate term to help avoid what will 
be a very challenging and a very painful winter, maybe two 
winters, in eastern Europe, we know that we need to immediately 
be rolling out projects in energy efficiency, in 
electrification, in the use of heat pumps, surging smart 
thermostats into homes across Europe so that homeowners can be 
a part of the solution.
    We know that just by reducing the temperature on the 
thermostat by one degree you could free up 10 bcm of gas, for 
example. There are solar, wind, battery storage, geothermal 
nuclear projects.
    All of these projects would serve to advance DFC's net-zero 
target. They would count toward our 33 percent Fiscal Year 1923 
renewable energy and clean energy and climate targets.
    And then I think from there it's important to acknowledge 
that as we invest and continue to support some of the energy 
security projects that will have emissions associated with 
them, we also need to be working on carbon sequestration, 
carbon removal, nature-based solutions projects around the 
world to bring down our emissions on the other side of the 
ledger, and I'm excited to be able to report that we have 
increasingly seen very exciting, very robust deal flow in those 
spaces, in Amazon supporting regenerative agriculture and 
reforestation--in the Amazon Basin, excuse me--in Southeast 
Asia, in Indonesia, in Africa projects where investors are now 
developing real opportunities to capitalize on the value of 
removing that carbon from the atmosphere and balancing the 
ledger.
    Mr. Keating. Thank you very----
    Ms. Wild. Well, I hope we can----
    Mr. Keating. The gentlelady's time has expired. Thank you 
very much.
    And I would like to just take advantage of having our 
witnesses here as much as time permits. We are up against a 
four roll call vote sequence that's coming up.
    So what we'll try and do is to the extent that we can do, 
like, 5 minutes and 5 minutes on each side. I do not anticipate 
we're going to get through a whole second round but we might be 
able to get in, at least I think--by the way, the roll call 
looks at least one back and forth 5 minute--as I think that's 
something that we'll try to do to try and deal with this.
    So I'll recognize myself for 5 minutes and then we'll see 
how far it goes.
    Mr. Light, you mentioned that the markets and the price 
that people pay at the gas pump it's set by the global market.
    So the fact that there's 10 percent production that we will 
rely on--we used to be reliant on 10 percent of Russian oil in 
the U.S.--that's really--the price is set globally. Is that 
correct?
    Mr. Light. Correct.
    Mr. Keating. So that does not really affect the price, the 
fact that we're only relying 10 percent on Russian oil and 
that's the fact.
    Along that line, you mentioned that there's been 220 
percent profit margin in the last year from the oil-producing 
companies. That includes, by the way, $30 billion from Exxon, 
$10 billion from Chevron, for instance, that were used on stock 
buy backs instead of further supply production.
    Could you tell us if there's availability and federally 
permits right now for production of energy that are unused at 
this moment?
    Mr. Light. There are lots of reasons that are unused and on 
the----
    Mr. Keating. Do you know how many? I have a figure that is 
there. But do you know--I had a figure of 9,000. Is that----
    Mr. Light. Nine thousand is the same figure----
    Mr. Keating. Does 9,000 currently--there's 9,000 Federal 
permits that aren't being used by the oil companies. At the 
same time, they're getting 220 percent profit and the same time 
they're doing these stock buy backs?
    Mr. Light. It's 225 percent increase in profits from Q1 
2021 to this quarter.
    Mr. Keating. At the same time.
    So, usually, historically, when there's an increase, as we 
have had this dramatic increase in demand after COVID, usually 
the companies increased supply. But we're seeing stock buy 
backs instead of that and we're seeing permits that aren't 
being used. I just wanted to be clear on that as well.
    And the other thing is, is Mr. Putin's action in the energy 
front and through the invasion--the illegal invasion of 
Ukraine--has that affected global prices?
    Mr. Light. Completely true it affected global prices, as 
has the expected response from the Europeans themselves with 
respect to their announcement of their ban on oil.
    I mean, that's something that's happening right now.
    Mr. Keating. I just want to be absolutely clear.
    Mr. Light. I mean, the----
    Mr. Keating. I mean, Putin's actions have resulted in an 
increase in global prices, which increases the price here. 
That's what sets the price. Am I correct?
    Mr. Light. Putin's actions, the war itself, the energy war 
component of it, is increasing the price of oil. It's driving 
that. We can see that.
    We have tried to mitigate that as much as we could with the 
two largest--as Harry Kamian said earlier in his testimony, the 
two largest ever collective releases of oil through the 
International Energy Agency--through the 31 countries of the 
International Energy Agency, 120 million barrels there added to 
the 260 million barrels that President Biden announced 
unilaterally, which puts a million barrels a day on the market.
    So we have done our best to do every tool we can to make 
sure that the American people do not feel this effect. But they 
are because the war continues and because it continues to have 
an impact.
    Mr. Keating. I just want to be clear on that, because 
there's so many--so much conflation of things that do not line 
up in reality and in fact, and I want to be clear of that.
    There are areas, certainly, that there's great agreement 
across the aisle here, and one is to do our best at energy 
independence in Europe in LNG.
    Have we been assisting our European allies in terms of LNG-
receiving facilities? Is that a limiting factor? There's--you 
know, it's one thing to be able to supply LNG. The other is do 
they have places for storage and capacity that we're working on 
and assisting with them on?
    Mr. Light. They have these floating storage and 
regasification units. The Europeans are already moving forward 
on those by themselves. Finland and Estonia, for example, 
leased one just recently after Finland got cutoff from Gazprom.
    You're seeing more of that happen around there. The 
infrastructure problems, I think, in Europe are actually not 
the biggest drawback right now. The question is really making 
sure that we decrease demand and that's something that's 
absolutely essential and that is why the longer term play of 
decarbonization has to begin immediately and has to do that so 
all the things that Jake mentioned earlier of heat pumps, of 
smart metering, of all this thing--every kind of--every single 
renewable project we can put out there is going to be important 
because it is an energy system. We're definitely in favor of 
stable energy systems and they're going to be complemented----
    Mr. Keating. And the government cannot do this alone. I 
think Mr. Levine mentioned the work we're doing with the 
private sector to encourage energy independence. Could you 
expand on that in the few seconds we have left?
    Mr. Levine. Yes, very quickly. I mean, the entire private 
sector is--first of all, as you note, even though the EU is 
going to spend $200 billion between now and the year 2027 they 
need to spend $200 billion every year in order to scale up the 
resources and the supplies and the demand reduction projects 
that we need.
    So without the private sector, it's not going to happen and 
that's why the derisking tools, the guarantees, the insurance, 
the technical assistance actually that we can provide to help 
create bankability in terms of these projects is absolutely 
critical.
    And there's been enormous private sector interest, which is 
encouraging and we're excited to be supporting that interest.
    Mr. Keating. Yes. That's why the work of this Congress 
years ago in establishing your agency and moving it forward is 
so critical because there was recognition then as there is now 
we cannot do it alone, and you're certainly the linchpin in 
terms of leveraging our ability to do that.
    So I will yield back now. Unless there's any objection I 
hear from other people in the queue that have spoken before, I 
see that Representative Pfluger is here.
    So if there's no objection from anyone else, I'll recognize 
Representative Pfluger for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Pfluger. No objection.
    Assistant Secretary, this is a fascinating conversation 
about 9,000 permits and, as you know, the assistant secretary 
for energy and international affairs, 9000 permits--I mean, 
come on.
    We need 90,000 permits. There are thousands of permits that 
are required to take a molecule out of the ground and get it 
all the way down to where it needs to go to be refined.
    And speaking about the SPR, as you know, that's crude. 
That's not a refined product. So when will you refill the SPR?
    Mr. Light. So the refilling process has started on----
    Mr. Pfluger. Really?
    Mr. Light. Yes, it has.
    Mr. Pfluger. OK. How many days will it take?
    Mr. Light. The total number of days I do not know off top 
of my head but I'm happy to get back to you on that----
    Mr. Pfluger. OK.
    Mr. Light [continuing]. And get you that information.
    Mr. Pfluger. Did that make a dent on the price here in the 
United States?
    Mr. Light. Well, refilling the SPR itself will not have an 
effect on the price.
    Mr. Pfluger. No, the release. The release.
    Mr. Light. In terms of increasing the prices?
    Mr. Pfluger. No, the release. The release of the SPR.
    Mr. Light. The question was how soon we'd want to release--
--
    Mr. Pfluger. A million barrels per day? Do I have that 
right?
    Mr. Light. But I think that given that we're in the mid--
we're about to start hurricane season, it's probably not 
prudent to immediately rerelease as soon as we have refilled, 
and also it takes some time to do this.
    Mr. Pfluger. Just very quickly. You're going to refill the 
SPR?
    Mr. Light. There's a refill plan that's been executed. 
Absolutely.
    Mr. Pfluger. OK.
    Mr. Light. I can--I'm happy to get you the schedule for 
that.
    Mr. Pfluger. Please do. Thank you for that.
    Mr. Light. Yes.
    Mr. Pfluger. I'll go back to DFC for just a second, Mr. 
Levine. Did the Biden Administration change the policy with 
regards to LNG? DFC policy? With regards to the investment 
policy, did it change from the last Administration to this 
Administration?
    Mr. Levine. I'm not aware of any change in policy relating 
to LNG.
    Mr. Pfluger. I think you've mentioned one already and that 
is with regards to the pipelines.
    Mr. Levine. No. What I was saying with regards to the 
pipelines was what are our authorities under the European 
Energy Security and Diversification Act.
    Mr. Pfluger. Will the DFC invest in pipelines in places 
like Alexandroupolis, in places like the Baltic countries?
    Mr. Levine. The DFC will invest in any energy 
infrastructure that can provide energy security and for which 
we have authority to invest.
    Mr. Pfluger. And that's the authority piece.
    Mr. Levine. Exactly.
    Mr. Pfluger. Did the Biden Administration change the policy 
from the previous Administration with regards to LNG?
    Mr. Levine. No. No. With respect, the authority comes from 
the statute. It's not a--that's your authority. You're granting 
the authority to us.
    Mr. Pfluger. We're well aware of that.
    Mr. Levine. Yes. So, in fact, you could ask--I could ask 
you does the does the Act provide that authority.
    Mr. Pfluger. Well, the next time I'm sitting down there and 
you're sitting up here you can ask me that question.
    Assistant Secretary, you've mentioned that you do think we 
need to compete globally. But we have two West Coast permits 
that increase U.S. jobs, that increase U.S. economic output. 
Are you committed to the security of our partners and allies in 
Asia?
    Mr. Light. Absolutely. We're committed to our partners----
    Mr. Pfluger. So why are those----
    Mr. Light [continuing]. Who we owe a tremendous debt to, 
given that they helped us to trade some cargos in the early 
part of this year so that Europe could get some emergency 
relief.
    Mr. Pfluger. You've also mentioned that we do not have any 
additional capacity right now to send to Europe. In fact, the 
Asian countries have been very generous in allowing the 
movement and the diversion of those molecules of LNG to move to 
Europe.
    So why are we not approving the permits on the West Coast 
if we're committed to the security of our partners and allies? 
It's an easy one.
    Mr. Light. Sorry for the double negative, but we're not not 
approving this permit.
    Mr. Pfluger. They've been sitting on----
    Mr. Light. We are, in fact----
    Mr. Pfluger. They've been sitting on the secretary's desk 
for 500 days.
    Mr. Light. On the secretary's desk. That process is ongoing 
now and then we should be able to communicate something on that 
very soon. If it's of interest, I do have one note on the SPRO 
if you wanted to----
    Mr. Pfluger. I'll use it for the record. I've got a minute 
and 13 left.
    So imagine us juggling all the priorities. My concern is 
the fact that when you look at these priorities, and in a 
previous comment you talked about every priority except for 
reliability, and when it comes to--and we can say that that was 
just left out.
    But I think it is the policy of the Biden Administration to 
disregard reliability right now because we all want a better 
earth. There is no question about that. We're going to increase 
the population on this earth in the next 15 to 20 years by 
almost 50 percent. I'm sorry. We're going to increase the 
population by another billion and increase demand for 
electricity by almost 50 percent.
    So when it comes to reliability it has to be a priority. 
You can have price. You can have security. You can also have 
the climate goals. But you have to have reliability. The 
Administration is completely ignoring that piece of it.
    When it comes to baseload capacity we are ignoring that, 
and this is the plea from the American people is that they need 
reliability.
    The price has to come down and it's incumbent upon the 
Department of Energy and agencies like FERC to make sure that 
we are actually doing the right things here domestically so 
that other countries like China and Russia do not take 
advantage of our lack of production, which is exactly what the 
Administration has done.
    Mr. Light. Congressman, with all due respect, this 
Administration is a thousand percent committed to the 
reliability of energy systems.
    It would be absolutely--it would completely undercut all of 
our goals in order to see an energy transition--to transition 
to an unreliable system, and that system will have a number of 
components including renewables, including nuclear, including 
decarbonized fossil, as Jake mentioned earlier.
    That creates a comprehensive energy system that definitely 
will be as reliable. We would never imagine to put the American 
people or the world at large at the risk of an unreliable 
energy transition to something they couldn't rely on.
    Mr. Pfluger. Well, with all due respect----
    Mr. Light. That would be an unsuccessful transition. No one 
would accept it.
    Mr. Pfluger. With all due respect, I also disagree that 
reliability is being ignored. We're not in a transition. We're 
in an expansion, and we need to get our minds around the fact 
that we are expanding our energy needs, not just in the United 
States but worldwide.
    Mr. Light. Completely agree. Transition, then an expansion.
    Mr. Pfluger. This is not a transition. This is an 
expansion.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Keating. On that moment of agreement, I'm informed that 
we're just minutes away from a set of four roll calls being 
called.
    I want to thank our witnesses on this important issue. 
There will be, I'm sure, followup briefings and other 
opportunities to deal with it, and as I said at the outset, I 
believe that we are in an historic time in terms of our energy 
transformation globally and the leaders in this will be the 
transatlantic alliances dealing with things that should have 
been dealt with, perhaps, many years ago, but now accelerated 
by the threat of the unprovoked and illegal actions by Putin in 
Ukraine and the followup using energy as a weapon through 
Europe, in particular, but also have an effect globally on 
worldwide prices.
    So I'll inform the committee members they'll have 5 days to 
submit statements, extraneous material, and questions for the 
record, subject to the limitations of the rules.
    I want to thank the members for their participation in a 
day when much was happening at the same time, but also at a 
time when this central issue, an issue so vital to our 
country's security, so vital to our economic prosperity, at a 
time when climate change presents an existential threat not 
only to our own country but to the world.
    So I want to thank you for your participation in this very 
important subject.
    And with that, I'll declare the hearing adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 10:54 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]

                                APPENDIX
                                
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                 [all]