    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2006, Book I)]
    [May 24, 2006]
    [Pages 1000-1008]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania
    May 24, 2006

        Thank you all. Please be seated. Thanks for the warm welcome. If I
    talk too long, it's going to be even warmer. [Laughter] I really
    appreciate the chance to come to the Limerick Generating Station. I'm
    glad to see it in action. More importantly, I was glad to see the people
    working here, glad to meet them, glad to get to know them.

    [[Page 1001]]

    I appreciate their strong dedication to safety. I appreciate their
    dedication to the consumers you serve.
        This plant serves 2 million homes in the area, and it does so in a
    way that does not require us to pollute the air. It's a perfect example
    of how we can grow our economy and protect our environment at the same
    time. And so thanks for receiving me. I'm honored to be here.
        I thank John Rowe for introducing me, and
    thanks for coming over from Chicago. Appreciate you being here. I want
    to thank Chris Crane. I want to thank
    Ron DeGregorio. Thank you for having me, Ron.
    I want to thank the mayor, Sharon Valentine-Thomas, of the Borough of Pottstown. Thanks for coming, Madam
    Mayor. I appreciate you being here. I want to thank all the folks from
    the local government--sorry about clogging the neighborhoods coming
    through, but thanks. [Laughter] Appreciate you letting me come by.
        I want to talk about how the United States of America can continue
    to be the economic leader of the world. First of all, I think it's
    important that we're the economic leader of the world, because when
    you're the leader, it helps the folks who live in your country. See, it
    matters if we're on the cutting edge of change. It matters to people
    working every day in America if we're creating strong economic growth.
        Today, we are creating strong economic growth. I mean, this economy
    of ours is moving forward with a full head of steam--fifth year in a row
    of uninterrupted growth. Our economy grew faster than any other major
    industrialized nation in the world. We added 5.2 million new jobs since
    August of 2003. The national unemployment rate is 4.7 percent.
    Productivity is high, and that's important. A productive society will
    yield a higher standard of living for our people. Hourly compensation
    grew at an annual rate of 5.7 percent in the first quarter of this year.
    Our workers are taking bigger--home bigger paychecks. The standard of
    living is on the rise. After-tax income is up. Things are good.
        And the fundamental question is, can you keep them that way, see?
    And there's a lot of competition in the world that creates some
    uncertainty and anxiety amongst our people. And the temptation for some
    is to say, ``Well, we can't compete anymore so let's protect ourselves
    and let's withdraw; let's become isolationists.'' I think that would be
    a wrong approach by our country. See, we ought not to fear the future;
    we ought to shape the future. We ought to be confident in our ability to
    be able to compete and to remain the most innovative country in the
    world.
        And so here are some ideas. First, if we want to be the economic
    leader in the world so our people can prosper, we need to keep taxes
    low. We need to be able to be a society that says, you get to earn more
    of that which you earn.
        As you might recall, we went through a pretty tough time in this
    country over the past 5 years. We had a recession, corporate scandals, a
    stock market correction, a attack on our country. We went to war to
    defend ourselves; we've had high energy prices; and we had natural
    disasters. And yet this economy of ours is strong. And I believe the
    reason why is, is because of the tax cuts we passed in Washington, DC.
        We believe that if you have more money in your pocket to save,
    spend, or invest, the economy grows. And so one way to make sure that
    we're the economic leader in the world is to make sure the tax cuts we
    passed are permanent. Now, people say, ``Well, if you make the tax cuts
    permanent, you can't balance the budget.'' Well, let me talk a little
    bit about how Washington works. I've been there long enough to be able
    to give you an accurate report. [Laughter]
        Don't believe it when they say they're going to raise your taxes to
    balance the budget. They're going to raise your taxes and figure out new
    ways to spend the money. The best way to balance the budget

    [[Page 1002]]

    is to keep progrowth economic policies in place. And, by the way, last
    year, because our economy was growing, we generated $100 billion more
    for the Treasury than we thought. And this year, because of the economy
    growing strong, we're generating better rates than we did last year.
        And so the best way to balance the budget is to keep growing the
    economy so we collect more tax revenues and be wise about spending your
    money. See, in Washington, everything sounds good there; every program
    sounds fantastic. But Government, in order to be wise about spending
    your money, has got to learn to set priorities. And my priority is this:
    So long as we have a soldier in harm's way, he or she will have what it
    takes to achieve victory and secure America.
        We're on our way to cutting the deficit in half by 2009. Congress is
    now debating a supplemental bill. It's money to help fund our troops in
    Iraq, as well as helping the victims in Katrina. And I've made it very
    clear that I intend to participate with them in keeping the spending
    down. And if they exceed the $92.2 billion request, plus monies for
    avian flu, I'm going to veto the bill. See, that's one way you keep
    fiscal discipline in Washington, DC.
        We'll be competitive if we keep taxes low and be wise about how we
    spend your money. We'll be competitive, by the way, if we're smart about
    improving education for our people. See, this is a global economy,
    whether people like it or not. And the jobs of the 21st century will be
    either here in America or wherever the workforce is trained to fill
    those jobs. And therefore, it's important for us to make sure we educate
    our children early and emphasize math and science so our kids have got
    the skills necessary to fill those jobs.
        We changed how we view public education in Washington. We passed the
    No Child Left Behind Act, see. It basically said, we're going to make
    sure we fulfill our commitment to Title I students, but we're starting
    to ask some questions--questions that I'm sure are asked at this plant:
    Are you meeting objectives, for example? If you set a goal, are you
    meeting those goals? And so we set some goals: How about every child
    learning to read at grade level by the third grade? That didn't seem
    like an unrealistic goal to me. As a matter of fact, it was a necessary
    goal.
        And then we said to the States, you measure. We're going to get you
    some money, but you measure to show us whether or not we're meeting the
    goal. And if you're not meeting the goal, figure out why. See, you can't
    solve a problem unless you diagnose the problem. And so the No Child
    Left Behind Act basically says, we're going to diagnose problems early
    and solve them, before it's too late. This business about shuffling kids
    through the school--through our schools, based upon age, didn't work. It
    wasn't fair. It wasn't right. And so the No Child Left Behind Act says,
    we're going to measure early, and we're going to help children who have
    fallen behind in reading early, and then we're going to extend that to
    math.
        See, one of the interesting things is because we measure, we know
    that we're doing fine in math in the eighth grade. But children get to
    high school--relative to other countries, we're not doing fine in math.
    And we better do something about it now if we want to be the economic
    leader of the world.
        So we've got a plan to, one, make sure the same standards applied to
    reading for early grades are applied to math. If we measure in the
    eighth grade or ninth grade and you're falling behind, you're going to
    get extra help.
        Secondly, advanced placement programs work. I bet I'm looking at
    some folks out here who took AP when they were in high school. AP means
    high standards. But we don't have enough teachers around the country to
    teach AP, so we've got a plan to train 70,000 Advanced Placement
    teachers to keep raising those standards.

    [[Page 1003]]

        We want to have 30,000 adjunct professors in our classrooms in high
    school and junior--sometimes it's not cool to be involved with science--
    and yet it is cool. And we need people who are on the frontlines of
    science explaining that. I went to a school in Maryland the other day,
    and there was a NASA scientist there, explaining
    to junior high kids why the sciences matter and why it's fun to be in
    science.
        We're going to make sure our Pell grants--which, by the way, have
    expanded by a million kids since I've been the President--continue to
    have incentives in there for children to take rigorous academics coming
    out of high school and the first 2 years of college, and then if they
    maintain a 3.0 average or are taking math, science, or critical
    language, there's an additional $4,000 on top of their Pell grant. In
    other words, this is an effort to make sure that we have a workforce
    that can compete in a global economy so we remain the economic leader of
    the world.
        I want to talk about energy, see. If we don't get it right in
    energy, we can have the most educated workforce in the world, but we're
    not going to be able to compete. We can have the lowest taxes in the
    world, the least regulations, the fewest lawsuits, but if we haven't
    done something about our energy situation, we're not going to be able to
    compete in the world.
        And so that's why I've come to this important powerplant, to talk
    about how the United States can have a diversified energy policy that
    makes us less dependent on foreign sources of oil and more dependent on
    renewable sources of energy.
        Now, one of the things I want to start off by telling the--telling
    you all, and I hope others are listening, is that over the past 30
    years, our economy has grown three times faster than our energy
    consumption. Isn't that interesting statistics? In other words, we're
    becoming more technologically advanced. And during that same period of
    time, we created more than 55 million jobs while cutting air pollution
    by 50 percent.
        So what I believe the American people should understand is that we
    can put policies in place that encourage economic growth so you've got a
    better standard of living and, at the same time, become less dependent
    on energy from overseas and protect the environment.
        So what do we need to do? Well, the first thing we got to do is
    understand that we've got to change our driving habits over time. You've
    seen the price of gasoline going up. One of the reasons why your price
    of gasoline is going up is because demand for oil is increasing in
    places like India and China, and the supply for oil is not meeting that
    demand. And the key ingredient for gasoline is crude oil. So when the
    Chinese economy is growing or the Indian economy is growing, and that
    demand is going up, so is your price at the pump.
        One way to make sure the price at the pump doesn't go up as global
    demand increases for hydrocarbons is to figure out how to drive our cars
    with different kinds of fuels, such as ethanol. One of the really
    interesting developments that's taking place now in America is the use
    of corn-based ethanol--pretty cool deal, isn't it, for the President to
    be able to say, you know, we're growing a lot of corn--[laughter]--and
    we're less dependent on foreign sources of oil. It's coming--
    particularly in the Midwest right now, there's a lot of ethanol pumps
    and plants being developed there to manufacture ethanol from corn.
        We've got to do more, though, if we're going to become less
    dependent on foreign sources of oil, when it comes to ethanol. And so
    we're spending a lot of your money to develop technologies that will
    enable us to be able to manufacture ethanol from wood chips or
    switchgrass. Somebody said, ``What is switchgrass?'' I said, ``Well,
    it's grass that looks like a switch that grows in dry country.'' In
    other words, there's all

    [[Page 1004]]

    kinds of opportunities to manufacture ethanol, and we're exploring ways
    to do so. America has always been on the leading edge of technology and
    research and development, and here's an area where we've got to stay on
    the leading edge of change.
        Another way to help reduce our use of gasoline is through hybrid
    vehicles. They're coming; they're coming on the market. As a matter of
    fact, the energy bill I signed actually will pay you--give you a tax
    credit if you buy a hybrid. We're trying to stimulate demand through the
    Tax Code. It makes sense. But there's going to be an additional
    breakthrough--or additional breakthroughs--when it comes to hybrid
    vehicles, starting with the development of a battery that will enable
    you to drive your first 40 miles on electricity. And the Federal
    Government is very much involved in this research. We're spending your
    money, again, on research to help fund breakthroughs for battery
    technologies that will enable you to drive a plug-in hybrid battery.
        And, oh, by the way, on ethanol, just one thing I forgot to tell you
    is that there are 5 million flex-fuel vehicles on the road today. Flex-
    fuel means you can either have gasoline or ethanol or a combination of
    the two. You've probably got one and you don't even know it. The
    technology--the barrier to change is not the automobile; it is the
    ability to make the fuel in quantities--economic quantities so we can
    get them to you at the pump.
        And same with hybrid batteries; they're coming. Hybrid, plug-in
    hybrid vehicles with new batteries, they're coming your way. And one of
    the reasons why is because the Government has entered into research
    partnerships with the private sector to accelerate these technologies,
    all aimed at making us less dependent on oil.
        A third way to help this country remain an economic leader when it
    comes to the cars you drive is hydrogen. We spend about a--over a
    billion dollars of research to bring hydrogen to the marketplace. One
    fellow reminded me, wisely, it costs--it takes quite a bit of power to
    make hydrogen. An interesting way to make hydrogen on an economic basis
    would be through nuclear power, see. But we're spending money and time
    and effort, all aimed at making sure that the automobiles of the future
    will require less crude oil. And we're close to some significant
    breakthroughs.
        It's going to take time to move away from the hydrocarbon economy to
    the hydrogen economy, and in the meantime, it seems like it makes sense
    to me to do something about the refinery capacity of the United States.
    Like, if you're worried about the price of gasoline--you don't like it
    when your price got over $3--and I don't blame you--you might want to
    ask the question, how come the Government isn't working hard to expand
    refinery capacity so that there's more gasoline? If you have more
    gasoline on the market relative to demand, guess what--it takes the
    pressure off price.
        We haven't built a new refinery in the United States since the
    1970s. The regulatory burden is a lot. You're kind of used to that here
    in this industry. And so we got to cut through all that business. If
    we're serious about helping our consumers and getting more gasoline to
    the market, we got to have regulatory relief. I suggested to Congress
    that we put new refineries on abandoned military facilities. It seemed
    to make sense to me. And so we need to be wise about these policies so
    that we can say to the American people, we're on our way out of the
    hydrocarbon era. But in the meantime, let's be thoughtful of the
    consumers here in the United States.
        We're also going to need a lot of electricity in the future.
    Electricity demand is projected to increase by nearly 50 percent over
    the next 25 years. That's a lot. And we better be wise about how we
    implement a strategy to meet that demand; otherwise, we're not going to
    be the economic leader; otherwise, our people aren't going to be having
    the good jobs that we want them

    [[Page 1005]]

    to have; otherwise, your children and my children, our grandchildren are
    not going to have the bright, hopeful America that we want for them.
        Now, one of the things that people have got to understand is that we
    get our--we generate our electricity from four sources: coal--it's about
    50 percent; nuclear power--about 20 percent; natural gas--18 percent;
    and then other renewable sources like hydroelectric, solar, and wind
    power. And that's the mix; that's the energy mix.
        Coal is by far the most abundant and affordable energy resource. We
    got about 240 years at current rates of consumption. It's a valuable
    asset for the United States. The problem is, coal isn't--when you burn
    it, it isn't clean. It doesn't meet our standards. It's not--it doesn't
    enable us to say, you can grow your economy and, at the same time,
    protect the environment like we want.
        And so we're developing clean coal technology. We're spending over
    $2 billion in a 10-year period to be able to say to the American people
    that we're using the money wisely to determine whether or not we can
    have zero-emissions coal-fired powerplants. It's in our interests that
    we do that. It makes sense. About 2012, under the FutureGen Initiative,
    we think we will build the first powerplant to run on coal and remove
    virtually all pollutants.
        Natural gas is an important commodity. By the way, we can explore
    for natural gas in environmentally friendly ways. And we ought to be
    exploring for natural gas in the ANWR, as well as off the gulf coast of
    the United States.
        Here's another interesting way to help make sure there's enough
    natural gas for this economy to grow--by the way, natural gas, as you
    know, is not just used for power. It's used for fertilizers, a variety
    of uses. You can liquefy natural gas; you can put it in a ship, and you
    can send it long distances and still have an economic product. And there
    are places in this world where there's a lot of natural gas--a lot. And
    they're building liquefied production facilities. And they put them on
    these ships--but we don't have any places to offload it in the United
    States. We got some, but not enough.
        If we're really interested in diversifying our energy sources and
    making sure the American people have got enough energy to watch this
    economy grow, we have got to have LNG sites to offload the gas from
    abroad. And so what we've done is, I signed a new bill, energy bill,
    that clarifies Federal authority to license new sites, that reduces the
    bureaucratic obstacles to opening up the terminals and streamlines the
    development. It's in your interest that we enable liquefied natural gas
    to come into our country so that we can help take the burden off some of
    the pricing pressures that we're inevitably going to feel with demand
    going up and not enough electricity supply.
        Thirdly, about 6 percent of the continental U.S. is highly suitable
    for the construction of wind turbines. And this is a really interesting
    opportunity for the country--they ought to put one big one in
    Washington, DC. [Laughter] They say--the experts tell me that this area
    alone has the potential to supply up to 20 percent of our Nation's
    electricity. I think that's an interesting opportunity. I don't know if
    it's true or not, but it's certainly worth trying to find out, in order
    to make sure this country has got a bright future. And so we got $44
    million for wind energy research. And the goal is to expand the use and
    lower the cost of wind turbine technology.
        In other words, we're constantly researching and looking. I don't
    know if you know this or not, but the Federal Government does spend
    money on research in a variety of fronts, and it should. And I intend to
    double the basic--the budget for basic research over the next 10 years.
    The iPod--like, I like to ride my mountain bike and plug in the iPod.
    The technology for

    [[Page 1006]]

    the iPod came as a result of Federal research. The Internet came about
    because of defense money research.
        So we're spending money on research. The reason I keep repeating
    that is not only is it going to help us diversify our energy sources and
    make us competitive in the world, but it also helps make sure America is
    always on the leading edge of technological change.
        Solar energy--the dream in solar energy is to develop technology so
    that someday your house is like a little generating plant, and if you
    don't use the power, you feed it back into the grid. It's possible, but
    it's not going to be possible if we don't spend money on research and
    development. So we're spending $150 million to combine Government money
    with private research money in solar technologies to see if we can't
    help foster technologies that will be able to capture the sun, feed it
    into your house, generate enough electricity, and if you've got a little
    excess, feed it back into the grid. I think that's a pretty interesting
    idea, and it's certainly one worth exploring.
        Finally, I want to talk about nuclear power--a subject you all are
    very familiar with. It is a really important way to meet our goals,
    which is to have abundant, affordable, clean, and safe sources of
    energy. The important thing for the American people to understand is
    this concept: One, nuclear power is abundant and affordable. In other
    words, you have nuclear powerplants, you can say, we've got an abundant
    amount of electricity. And once you get the plant up and running, the
    operating costs of these plants are significantly lower than other forms
    of electricity plants, which means the energy is affordable.
        As I mentioned, nuclear power--it's the second leading source of
    electricity here. We have 100 nuclear powerplants that operate in 31
    States. Now, we haven't built one in a long period of time.
        People in our country are rightly concerned about greenhouse gases
    and the environment, and I can understand why; I am too. As a matter of
    fact, I try to tell people, let's quit the debate about whether
    greenhouse gases are caused by mankind or by natural causes; let's just
    focus on technologies that deal with the issue. Nuclear power will help
    us deal with the issue of greenhouse gases. Without nuclear energy,
    carbon dioxide emissions would have been 28 percent greater in the
    electricity industry in 2004. Without nuclear power, we would have had
    an additional 700 million tons a year of carbon dioxide, and that's
    nearly equal to the annual emissions from 136 million passenger cars.
    Nuclear power helps us protect the environment.
        And nuclear power is safe. It is safe because of advances in science
    and engineering and plant design. It is safe because the workers and
    managers of our nuclear powerplants are incredibly skilled people who
    know what they're doing.
        For the sake of economic security and national security, the United
    States of America must aggressively move forward with the construction
    of nuclear powerplants. Other nations are. Interestingly enough, France
    has built 58 plants since the 1970s and now gets 78 percent of its
    electricity from nuclear power. I think that's an interesting statistic,
    isn't it? The United States hasn't ordered a plant since the 1970s, and
    yet France has not only ordered them, they built 58 plants. And 78
    percent of their electricity comes from nuclear power. They don't have
    to worry about natural gas coming from somewhere else. They worry about
    it, but they don't have to worry about it to the extent that we do.
        China has 9 nuclear plants in operation, and they got--plan to build
    40 more over the next two decades. They understand that in order to be
    an aggressive nation, an economic nation that is flourishing so their
    people can benefit, they better do something about their sources of
    electricity. They see it. India--I just came from India--they're going
    to build some nuclear powerplants.

    [[Page 1007]]

        To maintain our economic leadership, we got to do it again. And so
    here's the strategy. First, in the energy bill I signed in 2005, there
    are loan guarantees, production tax credits, Federal risk insurance for
    the builders of new plants. In other words, we said, this is an industry
    that hadn't got much going since the seventies. It's an overregulated
    industry. It's highly risky because of the regulations to try to build a
    plant. People don't know this, but you get yourself a design for a
    nuclear powerplant; you start spending money for plans and engineering
    plans and everything; you get building; and all of the sudden, somebody
    can shut you down. And that makes it awfully difficult to take risk, if
    a lawsuit can cause you to spend enormous sums of money and have no
    productive use of the money spent.
        And so we got together with the Congress and said, ``Well, how--what
    can we do to create incentives to show the industry that we're serious
    about moving forward?'' Well, one is loan guarantees, and that gives
    investors confidence that this Government is committed to the
    construction of nuclear powerplants. Secondly is production tax credits,
    and those credits will reward investments in the latest advanced nuclear
    power generation.
        In other words, there's incentives--loan guarantee is an incentive,
    tax credits are incentives, Federal risk insurance. What the Federal
    risk insurance says--is offered for the first six new powerplant--
    nuclear powerplants. And the insurance helps protect builders of the
    plants against lawsuits or bureaucratic obstacles and other delays
    beyond their control. We have got what's called the Nuclear Power 2010
    Initiative, which is a $1.1 billion partnership between the Federal
    Government and the industry to facilitate new plant orders. In other
    words, I have said, we need more nuclear powerplants, and here's a
    strategy to get them going, see. Here's a way to say to the industry,
    we're serious about this.
        This time last year, only two companies were seeking to build
    nuclear powerplants. Now 16 companies have expressed an interest in new
    construction, and they're considering as many as 25 new plants, trying
    to get these plants--construction started by the end of this decade. I
    want it to be said that this generation of folks had the foresight
    necessary to diversify our--or to continue to diversify electricity
    supply and recognize that nuclear power is safe, and we did something
    about it. We just didn't mark our time. We actually did something about
    it so a generation of Americans coming up will be able to have a better
    America.
        I understand the issue of waste, and we've got to do something about
    it. We've got to be wise about nuclear waste. I'm a believer that Yucca
    Mountain is a scientifically sound place to send the waste, and I would
    hope that the United States Congress would recognize that as well.
        I also recognize that we can do something on a reprocessing front.
    And so I got our administration to commit to the Global Nuclear Energy
    Partnership. I think you'll find this interesting; at least I did. Under
    the partnership, America is going to work with nations that have already
    got an advanced civilian nuclear energy program, such as France and
    Japan and Russia, and we're going to use new technologies that
    effectively and safely recycle spent nuclear fuel. In other words, we're
    coming together to say, how can we do a better job of reprocessing and
    recycling fuel?
        And the reason that's important, at least for our fellow citizens to
    understand, is it will reduce the amount of the toxicity of the fuel and
    reduce the amount we have to store. To me, it's a smart way to combine
    with others to reduce storage requirements for nuclear waste by up to 90
    percent. It's a good way to work with other nations that are spending
    money on research and development as well. It's a way to, kind of,
    leverage up an investment. We're going to--I've asked Congress to

    [[Page 1008]]

    spend $250 million on this partnership. I hope they follow through with
    it. It is a necessary expenditure of money to make sure that the nuclear
    power industry can move forward with confidence, and the American people
    move forward with confidence as well.
        And so here are some ideas--not only ideas; this is what we're
    doing; this has gone from idea to action. What I'm telling you is, is
    that I understand the need to get off oil. I understand the need to work
    on renewable sources of energy. And I'm pleased to report we're working
    with Congress to do it. We're spending your money on research and
    development to find interesting technologies. You know, I hope that when
    my grandchildren and some of your children start taking their driver's
    test, they'll be cranking up a hydrogen-powered automobile, with
    hydrogen produced from electricity generated from plants such as these.
        We have a duty to think about the problems this country is going to
    face. Listen, this economy is good, and I want to keep it that way; but
    I also want to make sure it's good 10 years from now. And I want to make
    sure that this global economy, this world that is becoming more
    connected, is one that doesn't cause us to fear and to neglect our
    duties, but that we put policies in place that enable us to remain
    confident, that we're an entrepreneurial society, that we're well-
    educated people, that we're willing to work hard to raise our families
    and put bread on the table. And we've got to make sure we have a good
    energy policy to do that.
        I want to thank you for giving me the chance to come and share with
    you today what the country is doing right now. I want to thank you very
    much for showing what is possible. I appreciate your hard work here.
        May God bless you all.

    Note: The President spoke at 3:29 p.m. at the Limerick Generating
    Station. In his remarks, he referred to John W. Rowe, chairman,
    president, and chief executive officer, Christopher M. Crane, senior
    vice president, and Ronald J. DeGregorio, site vice president of
    Limerick Generating Station, Exelon Corporation.