indicated that they've dropped precipitously 40%, as i recall. do you expect that this lowering of the estimates may possibly discourage further exploration? is this going to have any impact one way or another? >> i would say not. again, whether the u.s. has 100 years of total recoverable resource at current rates or 90 years of total recoverable resources estimated at current rates. i just don't think it has much of an effect. i think the thing that would affect development would be the view of companies on the ground as to how much it costs them to drill a well and what they can recover by drilling the well.

and the price so they care about the quantity they can recover by drilling a well. what it costs them to drill a well and what they think the price is going to be. that's really what they're focused on. you know, whether we have 90 years of total recoverable resource or 100 years. >> i would agree with that. 40% reduction is noticeable. but as you put it in those context -- let me ask, then, how much of the eia reserve estimate, then, is actually driven by the production data that's out there? >> again, i would say that usgs is the primary agency in the united states government that does resource estimates. we do the work on reserves primarily. resources is a larger concept. the usgs had not done a marcellus estimate in a long time. they had a very what we consider to be a very low estimate, one

that we couldn't use. so we made up or developed our own. made up is a bad word. >> bad word. >> strike that from the record. and then after we did that, usgs came out with an updated marcellus estimate which was the 84 trillion cubic feet compared to their prior estimate. the 84 trillion cubic feet was significantly lower than the number that we had developed internally. you know, we're obviously sad that when they came out, we would update our work based on the usgs work. we did try to do that. >> so do you think that you will revise the estimate again? >> i think this is a really tough area. i think there's too much emphasis put on that number, no matter whose number it is. i think that as we gain more and more experience with actual

drilling, the numbers will always tend to evolve on total recoverable resource. and again, i don't think it's that material for the 25-year horizon that i think we have been looking at in our projections long term that the iea looks at. in fact, we have more production and lower natural gas prices in this outlook than we had in the previous one. and that really reflects the drilling costs and the productivity. >> i think this is an important part of what it is that we're talking about and understanding what's going on. again, the president's state of the union that he gave last week, he, again, repeats the fact that -- i shouldn't say it's a fact. the statement that this country only has 2% of the world oes oil. well, when we're talking about reserves versus resources and

recoverable, we all -- you all know at this table that the number can be all over the board here. and it's how we define it. and i think sometimes it's a pretty loose definition that would lead people in this country to believe that we really don't have much of a recoverable resource. so it's important that we use the right terminology and try to be as accurate as we can, recognizing that we're dealing with a very fluid assessment again as our technologies and our capabilities expand. did you want to finish up? >> no. >> okay. no, i appreciate that. mr. chairman, that's all that i have. thank you. >> thank you. let me ask one other line of questions. dr. gruenspecht, your testimony, in discussing the world or the international energy outlook, you say renewable energy is

projected to be the fastest grow ing source of primary energy over the next 25 years. the renewable share of total energy use increases, in your projection, from 10% in 2008 to 15% in 2035. do you also have in your report an analysis of what those trends would be with regard to renewable energy? >> yes, particularly in our annual energy outlook, there's a lot of information on renewable energy. again, it's very fast growing for two reasons. one, in the transportation sector, you have the mandates for the biofuels, which even though we don't believe that the target at 2022 would actually be met. that certainly is driving renewables in that sector. and we have a lot of renewables

in the electricity sector. the share from renewables i think grows from, like, 10% of generation to 16% of generation. so that's a pretty big increase. generation is going up. although not too fast. we have renewables being pretty fast growing in the united states. on the electricity side, it's mostly driven by the state renewable portfolio standards. there's also some interaction between the transportation side because the plants that produce cellulosic biofuels, those plants will throw off some. it's a very interesting story. >> does the analysis that your agency has made, is it

consistent with this as far as renewable energy being the fastest growing source of primary energy over the next 25 years? >> well, it's certainly growing very rapidly, yes. i was just checking my testimony. according to the world energy outlook, the share of nonhydrorenewables, primarily wind and solar in power generation rises from 3% in 2009 to 15% in 2035. and hydro, which is a major source of generation, maintains its share at 15%. so overall, we're saying all would be about 30% of world power generation by 2035. >> okay. all right. i think this has all been very useful testimony. we appreciate you all being here. and we will try to stay in touch with you as these trends change. thank you very much. >> thank you.

congressional budget office director douglas elmendorf testifies wednesday about the economy and the federal budget. a cbo report released on tuesday

predicts a $1.1 trillion budget deficit this fiscal year. we'll have live coverage of mr. elmendorf's testimony beginning at 10:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span3. this is c-span3 with politics and public affairs programming throughout the week and every weekend, american history tv. 48 hours of people and events, telling the american story. get our schedules and see past programs at our websites. and join in the conversation on these social media sites. the pentagon's number three official gave her last major speech sunday at the reserve officers association symposium in washington, d.c. she'll step down from the post on friday. this is just under an hour.

>> welcome back, everyone. we'll continue with our program, continuing with the excitement. today's presentation titled "d.o.d. policy: a look back and a look ahead" will be in just a minute. before we begin the key speech, we would like to present the r.o.a. chaplain, lieutenant father vincent robert capidano, chaplain of the year award. the father was the only chaplain to receive the medal of honor. he was killed in action in vietnam in 1967. and we named the award for him about 10 or 15 years ago. presenting this award is majorc cap lynn christina moller, united states army reserve

command, command chaplain, and the reverend ron brevold, endorser of chaplain of the year with the international ministerial fellowship. this award is given annually for extraordinary contribution to the welfare, morale and effectiveness of the military reserve services. chaplain karen hallet served the 411th engineer brigade as the brigade chaplain. originally enlisted in 1983, enlisted in the army, went on to graduate from the united states military academy in 1988. chaplain hallet is an ordained and licensed nondenominational minister of the gospel with credentials and endorsements from international ministerial

fellowship. minneapolis, minnesota. she has more than 20 years in ministerial and missionary experience which, in addition to military service as a chaplain, includes organizing and directing missionary efforts in the united states and ghana, west africa. the recipient of this year's award goes to chaplain captain karen a. hallet, united states army reserve. chaplain. >> hold this.

picture. move over here. >> you may be seated. >> no, don't be shy. come up here and join me. members of the association, it's with great honor that i'm about to announce to you that our outreach, our congressional

outreach, this year has borne much fruit as it relates to our strategic partnership with the united states house of representatives. for the first year, all of our schedules have aligned to where when our members are on the hill visiting with their legislators, chap tin hallet who has been chosen to be the guest chaplain for the house of representatives by her congressmen, the honorable scott garrett from new jersey. and with that note, i would like to encourage all members and anyone who will be in the vicinity of the house of representatives on wednesday to please ask your members or their aides if they could escort you to the gallery to show support for chaplain hallet as she becomes part of history, inducted into the congressional

record with her beautiful prayer and a one-minute speech by her congressman, praising r.o.a. and a contribution that my esteemed peer and colleague has made on behalf of the republic. chaplain hallet, we congratulate you and thank you for representing us in such an esteemed accomplishment by our legislators. thank you. >> chaplain hallet, do you have a few words, please. >> people have asked me what this award means. first of all, all glory and honor goes to the lord who called me to this position and has allowed me to serve our soldiers and, of course, in our joint coalition forces, our airmen and our sailors and our marines as well. and secondly, this is an absolute credit to my command, to the 411th engineer brigade, the commander, general weeks,

and to the commanders and the staff that allow me to do whatever it is that i need to do in order to serve our soldiers. so credit to those two folks. i've really just done my job. >> i now turn the time over to major general davis who will introduce our keynote speaker. >> well, first i want to make it absolutely clear that we have five eagle rings, army, navy, air force, marines and coast guard. i had a question about it in the hall. and if you look at the numbers, if you're in the marines or the coast guard, you have a much better chance of winning a ring. so update your profile.

about a month ago, "the washington post," the newspaper of record for washington, d.c., and the political trade journal for the united states of amer a america, had a full-page story on the most powerful woman in the defense establishment. and she is our next speaker and guest today. i'd like to introduce the honorable michelle flornay, undersecretary of defense for policy. she has a bachelor's from harvard and a master's in international relations from oxford. great schools, but our last two speakers are phds from princeson. what's next? her previous positions included center for new american security, one of the most

important of the nonpartisan think tanks in washington. principal deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and threat reduction and deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy. we were just chatting. and secretary flornoy's tenure of service in this undersecretary position will end on friday. we hope that that doesn't diminish her ability to speak forthrightly, boldly and with some controversy and invite all the questions that we can off the floor. again, if you have questions, start writing them as soon as it pops into your mind, pass it to the center, and we will continue the q&a after the secretary's prepared remarks. secretary flornay.

>> good morning. thank you for the kind introduction. the most important qualification, though, for me to speak to this crowd that was forgotten, and that is i am the wife of a navy reservist. but it's really an honor to be here with all of you today. and what makes this particularly meaningful for me, as was noted, this is my last public speech in office, as the undersecretary of defense for policy. and i really can't think of an audience that i would rather sign off with than this one. the r.o.a. is a really remarkable organization. not only a professional organization of some 60,000 members from all of the uniformed services, and an advocate for the 1.5 million americans who are now serving in

the reserve components. but also an educational body that seeks public understanding of national security issues. as many of you have no doubt know, the roa's corporate charter was signed into law in 1950 by president harry truman. there's something very fitting about the fact that an organization dedicated to promoting public awareness of national security issues would be so recognized at that particular moment in time by that particular president. afterall, it was a moment of profound transition in the world. and in our own defense establishment. the world war ii had ended only five years before, and a new cold war with the soviet union was just beginning in earnest. moscow had just carried out its first successful atom bomb test in august of 1949. another wartime ally, china, had

just seen the end of a long civil war and mao's forces were now leading the world's most populist nation. on the neighboring korean peninsula, the year 1950 would see an invasion of the south by the north and quickly drew in the forces of the united states and our allies and partners around the world. in response to these and other changes in the security landscape, president truman and truly extraordinary group of senior advisers responded by embarking on a series of programs and reviews and initiatives that brought abouts national security and foreign policy systems, and think about it, the marshall plan and the establishment of the department of defense and an independent air force, and the formation of the cia, and the development of multinational bodies like nato, the united nations, and the development of nsc 68 and the containment policies toward the soviet union.

this multidimensional response drawing upon a range of american diplomatic and economic and cultural and military resources proved to be quite successful in containing the soviet union and setting the stage for ultimate victory in the cold war. with that victory some observers hopefully declared that history had come to an end, and that we could look forward to an era of a lasting era of relative glowle ba -- global policy and that obviously did not come to pass as i vents on 9/11 and other events made all too clear. in the years we have passed one sign post after another, and marking the arrival of an even more complex strategic era. the swift growth of china's economy and the broad based though quite opaque modernization of the armed forces, the emergence of asymmetric and hybrid forms of

warfare which pose new challenges for states and militaries. the arrival of cyber space as a domain of potential conflict and one that forces us to revisit long-standing ideas of deterrence and culpability, and the very definition of warfare, itself. the potential proliferation of the most dangerous technologies in the world, and particularly to irresponsible regimes. north korea has tested nuclear weapons and iran continues to seek the nuclear weapons capability in violation of the treaty obligations and established international norms, and the emergence of broad international norms and the security consequences are potentially enormous but still somewhat unclear from the arab awakening to the global climate change and as if all of this weren't enough in 2008 we suffered the most acute

financial crisis stiince the grt depression, and shaking the foundation of america's security, our economic strength. this is requiring some painful adjustments and as you know the budget control act passed by congress would have $478 billion be found in savings in the department's budget over the next decade. several observers at home and abroad have looked at the factors and concluded that we are embarking on an long-term u.s. decline. a steady erosion of american leadership in the world. i'm here to tell you that i strongly, strongly disagree with this thesis. while the challensunniable, the frankly than those that previous generations of americans have fac faced, including harry truman and his advisers early on in the cold war. that generation of statesmen and

officers met the challenge cans of their time by thinking strategically and seriously and practically about how to sustain u.s. leadership, and in a time of great change. that is exactly what prompted this president, president obama, and secretaries gates and panetta to undertake a comprehensive review of the defense strategy and the forestructure at this time. the department, the title of the guidance of the department recently released sustaining u.s. global leadership, and principles for the 21st century, and it was chosen very deliberately, and with with the emphasis throughout the review from president obama to secretary panetta on down has been at the size, structure and capabilities of the military must be driven by strategy, and not the other way around. to protect our country and maintain u.s. leaderership, we need to set smart sensible priorities for the future.

at the outset of the review, secretary panetta laid out four main principles to guide us which in turn also guided our budget plan which was just rolled out last week. first he said we must maintain the world's finest military and one that supports and sustains the global leadership role of the united states. second, we must avoid hallowing out the force and a smaller and ready and well equipped military is preferable to a larger force without adequate investment or modernization, and third, savings must be achieved in a balanced manner and everything must be on the table, and no sacred cows including potentially sensitive areas to likely provoke opposition and congress, industry, and some advocacy groups. fourth, we have to preserve the

quality of the all volunteer force and not break faith with the men and the women who serve and with their families. i think that the strategic guidance remains true to all four of the principles. the force of the future that it outline outlines will remain capable across the spectrum of missions, while it will be smaller of necessity, it will also be flexible, agile and above all ready. this force is going to be called upon to meet a very broad range of challenges and objectives, and the new guidance laid out a series of strategic elements including the following, increasing our emphasis on the asia pacific and sustaining the forces in the middle east while keeping america's article five commitments in europe. the protection of investments in vital areas such as special operations forces, isr, precision strike, counter-wmd

and cyber space and ensuring that the u.s. can still conduct combat operations and still effectively deal with aggression in more than one theater at a time. it is not a question of whether we are able to confront more than one adversary at a time, but it is a question of how and how the operational concepts are evolving and changing to meet the future. our ground forces to meet sustained and operational forces and somewhat smaller and ground force operations to respond ta to a wider range of surges, and to immobilize and counter any threat around the world and that is a degree to what we call reversibility to ensure that the forces are not caught off guard by unforseen or swiftly

developing threats. this is critical about a humility of the ability to predict the future. in the weeks since the president and the secretary of defense and the chairman of the joints chief of staff and the chiefs stood altogether at the pentagon to introduce the new strategic guidance, this document has generated a fair amount of speculation, and this is washington, afterall. are we adhering to the two war foresighting construct or abandoning to it? as we commit to the asia pacific will other parts of the world be neglected? by shifting away from the foresighting the ground forces for large scale operations, are we turning our back on the hard-fought lessons of the last decade? and most important of all by slowing the historic post 911 military spending