spent? in other words, what makes them feel confident that we're not going to be bailing out some of the president's contributors in the future? do we have any provisions like that in this budget? >> well, in terms of program integrity, there's significant investment in program integrity, because program integrity has a heck of a good return. for every $1 you spend on irs program integrity, you return $5. >> i'm talking about the way we're spending dollars, not irs collection dollars. >> same in social security in terms of program integrity. same in health care in terms of program integrity. the president put a -- >> okay, you're telling me these provisions are included in this budget. is that correct? >> absolutely, they are. >> okay. >> the next thing i have to do has to do with gdp growth assumptions. i noticed that in looking at the 2012 budget versus the 2013 budget, during the years 2015 through 2019, at the gdp growth assumptions have been amped up a fair amount. this doesn't compare well with the recent cbo update that we got that paints a much bleaker

future for economic growth. so how does omb come up with numbers that are pretty optimistic? >> well, the cbo assumptions, i think, that you're talking about assumes that none of the president's policies are adopted. in fact, the '01 and '03 tax cuts disappear both for the middle class and the upper -- the wealthiest. so i think the cbo is based on current law, and therefore, is a projection that isn't reflective of the kind of policies that we would agree on, even if we don't agree on all of them. >> probably not any of them. >> well, i don't think any of us are looking to increase taxes on the middle class, for example. so the cbo assumption would have that. so i think you really are comparing apples and oranges. >> thank you. i yield back. >> guess what, time has expired. hearing is adjourned. mr. zeinst, welcome to your first trip to the budget committee. meeting is adjourned. >> thank you.

as this budget hearing comes to a close, you can see it in its entirety on our website, if you go to c-span.org and look for the video library. homeland security secretary janet napolitano explains her department's 2013 budget request to a house committee this afternoon. we'll have live coverage starting at 2:30 eastern. president obama is proposing an overall spending can cut for the department of about a half a percent, but an increase for cybersecurity. again, live coverage starting at 2:30 eastern here on c-span3.

president obama left the white house this morning to visit a factory in milwaukee that moved jobs from china to the u.s. the president is visiting masterlock, it's an milwaukee maker of padlocks that was cited in his state of the union address for bringing back 100 jobs from china. in his speech at masterlock, president obama intends to call on companies to promote more investments and more jobs in the u.s. we'll have live coverage of his comments in milwaukee starting at 1:40 eastern. after the wisconsin trip, president obama turns to fund-raising. he's holding eight fund-raisers over the next couple of days for his re-election campaign in the los angeles area, san francisco, and seattle.

booktv is live saturday from the savannah book festival. coverage starts at 9:30 eastern with tom clavin followed by carl, and scotty smiley at noon. at 1:30 eastern, greg meyery and jennifer griffin on the changing israeli/palestinian conflict. irshad manji connects love. toure looks at who's afraid of post blackness at 4:00. and at 5:15, sc guinn on the rise and fall of the comanches on c-span2's book tv. only two of the four major republican presidential candidates are on the campaign trail today.

moirm moi mitt romney is in his home state of michigan rick santorum is campaigning in north dakota, starting with an energy roundtable and raleigh in fargo this evening. newt gingrich and ron paul have no public appearances today. arizona and michigan hold their primaries in less than two weeks, followed by washington state's caucuses in early march. super tuesday, where ten states hold primaries or caucuses is on march 6th, and 11 states and u.s. territories hold primaries or caucuses through the rest of march. you can follow coverage of political events as well as results on the c-span networks and online at c-span.org. now online at the c-span video library, speeches from last weekend's conservative political action conference. >> we must outsmart the liberals! we must outsmart the stupid people that are trying to ruin measuring!

>> it's about one country united under god. we aren't red americans, we're not blue americans, we're red, white, and blue and president obama, we are through with you! >> around the last table, they can get along and come at our throat as long as we're foolish enough to raise taxes and throw money in the center of the table, and then they can get along like the scene in the movie after the bank robbery, one for you, one for you, one for you, and they're all happy. >> search for "cpac," and you can click videos and share them at c-span.org/videolibrary. earlier this week, energy secretary steven chu outlined the president's 2013 budget request for the energy department. the president's request is just over $27 billion. and that's less than last year's spending. the budget eliminates $4 billion in fossil fuel subsidies and cancels the 35 projects that failed to meet research milestones. this briefing is about 40 minutes.

>> good afternoon, everyone. welcome members of the press and the media, i believe we have c spab online too. so hello to all of our viewers there. my name is irvine barwell. it's a pleasure to welcome you all to receive our presentation of our fiscal year 2013 budget request. i'm going to run through some ground rules here. we'll see from the secretary, hear from secretary, run through our presentation. i will be available also to run through a presentation of some of the budgetary numbers that we have. we'll then move into a question and answer period. i will emcee that, both the secretary, myself, and we also have the undersecretaries that have joined us, are available to answer questions.

and if we're unable to field any specific questions in the session here, we'll be sure to make sure we get an answer to you before your deadlines. so just to give a flavor of our budget here and the budget cuts we're under, we're actually down to one laptop in the department. the secretary is running i.t. training for us, so i knno now how to use this. but with that, without further ado, mr. secretary. >> okay, thank you. i'm owen barwell's i.t. specialist. so i want to talk about the budget, begin by quoting president obama, who spoke about an america within our reach. a country that leads the world and educates people, an america that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs. a future where we are in control of our own energy, our own -- our security, and prosperity.

an economy built to last. so this budget reflects that, it invests in clean energy and safely harnessing our energy resources. it supports science and innovation. it saves money for families and businesses by saving energy, and it cut costs for u.s. manufacturers through more efficient operations. finally, it reduces the nuclear dangers and environmental risks. a lot of this is modeled after two very thorough reviews, led by steve cuenan. one is a long-term strategic planning. followed by a much more intensive technology review. and that quadriennial technology review is reflected in some of the things in this budget. so the first budget request is $27.2 billion, and it roughly

reflects some tough choices. to cut back in certain areas and invest in strategic priorities. so war we cutting? well, the president's budget eliminates $4 billion in unnecessary fossil fuel subsidies. it scales back work on certain projects, for example, a sodium ion battery, for good sale energy storage. because, actually, it was successful, and is being commercially deployed. and it's on track for viability. it's also cutting back on the things that we have funded, which did not work, and with the consent of the grantees have discontinued funding for a combined total of nearly 35 projects that did not reach research milestones, or promised to achieve success. and we're investing where we think will have the greatest impact. as an example, given the

commercial success of onshore wind, we are not directly fundifund ing onshore wind research. that's getting to be an established technology, but we will focus on offshore wind. onshore wind is a very good news story. the levelized cost of onshore wind's estimated by a number of independent studies, independent department of energy to be about 7 cents a kilowatt hour. it's becoming very competitive with any form of new energy. natural gas is a little bit less, but if you compare it to other forms of new energy for the other capital cost of investments, costs of money, it's next least expensive. we're also committed to physical management and responsibility. as an example, if you look across the department of energy, we have sold programs in the offices of science, in rpe, and in energy, and we are

coordinating across those different funding streams and we want to maximize the technology r&d that we do across those areas. we're doing this in solar energy, we're doing this in batteries, we're doing this in biofuels. and it's a coordinating effort, so that we actually keep track of what we're doing and we also are approaching this as in a business sense, and that's what i mean, across the lines of business, so that we can, with the price of u.s. dollars, be the most effective in stimulating new innovation. that would not have occurred without us. wii undergoing a number of things to save the taxpayer money through more efficient operations. let me give you a view. we're avoiding $3 million in cost through 2011 through reduced travel. we found that the previous policy in the department was to use fully refundable airline

tickets, and in most cases, you could save a lot of money by purchasing nonrefundable tickets, and in most cases, that means you just purchase the tickets three or four weeks ahead, they're nonrefundable. there are very, very rare examples where you would not use those tickets. we think we can save a lot of money that way. we've achieved roughly 330 million procurement savings, and we've overhauled the energy.gov website and saved $10 million annually. we've reduced the fleet in washington at headquarters and germantown by roughly 35% and the labs have been asked to do the same. in some of the labs, they've already done that, and in others, they're in the process of completing that. so these are government-owned vehicles. we're reducing that. and finally, we're reducing the time to hire by more than 40%

and want to continually improve on that. we're better leveraging our innovation resources. and to deliver products to the market. so the connection between the research we fund and how that actually gets out into the private sector, we're looking at every nook and cranny to make sure that that process, the intelligent chul property that's developed in the research we fund makes it into the private sector. we've streamlined the cooperative research and development agreements, so that it can can be done much faster. in these agreements, we used to require that the companies provide three months of funding, forward funding, before projects could start, and they would remain three months ahead, and for small companies, that is a very big hurdle. we've reduced that to two months, and looking at whether we can reduce that to one month.

the taxpayers are still protected, because the contractors, let's say, a national laboratory, would then backstop what would happen should there be a shortfall. but that would enable us to work more with smaller companies. there's another, first we have a top energy innovator initiative. we just completed a contest where companies with great ideas run for selection. it's a vote. on our website, you can click on these little video moves, and they advertise, you know, their particular innovation. and there were over 500,000 likes or dislikes cast. and we've announced the the top three finalists that will -- which is a great thing. we've also made it so that if companies, especially this is pertinent to smaller start-up

companies, if they want to have a low-cost option agreement for licensing in our national labs. all they would have to do in order to get this option is a $1,000 option fee for up to three patents. . so, again, greatly reducing the cost of beginning the process. they can take that option and begin to shop it around to the investment community to see if there's any interest there. that doesn't mean it's $1,000 to license the patent. it means for $1,000, they can shop it around. but it, we think, is going to add a lot of flexibility. we're also allowing, we realize one size doesn't fit all, and so we're saying that in certain cases, especially again if you're a smaller company, you will not start a business unless you have an exclusive license, because if you don't have an exclusive license, you're always afraid of a bigger company comes in and licenses it and it rolls

right over you. so in many instances, exclusive licenses are the preferred approach. and again, it's a case-by-case basis, as to what you do. again, all with the intent of getting this out into the private sector, turning discovery and invention into innovation. and finally, we've implemented the act or agreement for commercialization technology. it's a pilot program i think of more than six or eight labs have already signed up for this. again, an alternate way, different from the so-called c credas, in order to show some flexibility. we're very focused on saving money by saving energy. and so our budget contains $310 million to improve commercial and residential building efficiency. it supports the president's better buildings initiative to catalyze the private sector, investments in commercial building efficiencies, and that's a photograph of president obama, president clinton, who has been also very instrumental

in helping get this started. we promote -- the budget promotes the passage of home start, to provide rebates to help families invest in home energy upgrades, again, to save money by saving energy. we want to strengthen u.s. manufacturing. the president in his state of the union spoke out very strongly for this. if you look at advanced technology products, to try to balance between what we import in advanced technologies and what we export, you find that about 2002, 2001, we went negative. we started importing more high-technology goods than exporting, and this is not good. not only is it not good for a lot of reasons, but it's mostly not good, because more than anywhere else, we believe that the united states can compete in advanced technology manufacturing, and so our budget

reflects that. it asks for $290 million for advanced manufacturing office to support r&d on materials and processes, to help manufacturers cut costs. so this is not some stuff 20 years out in the future. we are talking about things that actually can help manufacturers in their factories produce, for example, advanced steels, alloys, lightweight materials, all sorts of things that could help our competitive edge. manufacturing also supports through the does, there's additional manufacturing. this is specifically tied to advanced manufacturing. but if you look within our energy programs, within rpe, and in little bits and pieces in science, but it's mostly in science and rpe, we're also supporting advanced manufacturing through advanced and science supports it through advanced computing. advanced computing means you

design in silico, you reduce the number of prototypes and number of design cycles before you actually go into production. this has worked quite well and it is certainly something where we have a big advantage internationally. and again, we're forming coordinating efforts in manufacturing r&d across the office of science, ere and rpe. we want to lead in clean energy technologies. our motto is invented in america, made in america, and sold worldwide. our budget calls for $95 million in wind, mainly in developing offshore wind reliability. $330 million in our sunshine initiative, to develop next generation technologies that can remain competitive with the rest of the world, but also supports geothermal, biomass, and other renewables. it also supports cross-cutting work in advanced alternative fuels, batteries, and other vehicle technologies.

it doesn't support certain paint jobs. now, the first time since 2008, in 2011, the united states reclaimed the title from china in leading countries in terms of total clean energy investment. you have to look at the numbers. 55.9 and 47.4 don't, because the zero is down below. so it's a slight edge. but we are concerned as to whether we're going to keep this lead. that leadership in 2011 was in large part due to the government programs like the 1603 grant in lieu of tax credits and the production tax credits. and so the president's budget calls for the extension of the 1603 program and a production tax rate of $5 billion for 48c, for advanced manufacturing. again, to keep the momentum.

all right. continuing on this motto of inventing in america, made in america, sold worldwide, our budget calls for $143 million for smart grid and energy storage technologies. grid modernization, cybersecurity. it calls for investments in nuclear energy, especially important was the launching of the smr program, the end of -- well, now, this year, but continue that and to engage in this sports certification licensing of new reactors. and $155 million for carbon capture storage r&d. and also to support carbon capture and utilization and sequestration. many of the companies view this as a first step, if you're going to -- if the private sector is going to invest, literally, hundreds of millions to billions of dollars in carbon capture and storage, they also can have utilization as part of that. the lessons learned in

utilization, we're talking about capturing carbon and using it for eor, but where the department of energy assists in the monitoring and verification of the carbon storage, but we also assist in the carbon capture part. we think this is a good partnership. we want to safely harness american energy. if you look at this graph, this is a plot of what the natural gas supplies were coming in the united states, from 1990, up to 2010. and then predictions going beyond, and so in 2010, if you look at what are called unconventional gas, shale gas, tight gas, and methane gas, what you find is that in 2010, about 58% of our gas was from these unconventional sources. in 2011, it's going to be well over 60 to 65%. the data is not fully in for 2011.

i want to remind you of the role the department of energy played in all of these sources of natural gas. there are many quotes out there, not from the department of energy, but from others. this one from fred julander, a member of the american petroleum council, and he said the department of energy was there with research funding when nonetheless was interested and today we're reaping all the benefits. early r&d in tight gas, shales, and methane helped to catalyze the developments of technologies we're applying today. so actually beginning in the mid'70s, when we began to fund this, there was a coordinated program beginning in 1978, and here on those redd bars, you see the department of energy funding. we stopped in 1992. in 1991, schlumberger picked up hydraulic fracturing and

drilling. so it was being handed off to industry. and as industry began to realize that, hey, maybe there's something in this, you see the increase the tight gas, the increase in methane, and especially see the increase in shale gas. so it was that department of energy funding that led the way. our budget calls in modest amounts for funding not in shale gas, that's now an established technology, but in other things like methane gas. so this is methane, no, methane is gas. this is methane hydrate gas. so in any case, we think we still have the opportunity to help fulfill the promise of other energy technologies. the blue river commission came out with a set of recommendations. we're taking those very seriously and our budget includes $60 million for nuclear waste, r&d, that aligns with the recommendations of the blue river commission.

now, in unleashing american innovation, president obama also said the world is shifting to an innovation economy. and nobody does innovation better than america. in today's innovation economy, we also need a world class commitment to science and research. to that end, our budget calls for $5 million to the office of science, which promotes -- which funds much of our more fundamental research with its mission. its mission being the department of energy missions. we have now five hubs -- three that are up and running, two more that are in preparatory stage of foas. these hubs, and if you add the centers that are the prototype of our hubs that were started in the previous administration, there's a lot of very, very good things now coming out of the first set of hubs, but our

budget calls for a new hub on electricity systems. electricity systems means the unification of the power distribution, how do you si synchronize renewables with energy storage. our budget also calls for $120 million to continue the sport of the 46 energy frontier research centers we have. these centers are published more than a thousand peer review papers and filed patent disclosures. very, very productive, as are the hubs. the budget asks for $350 million to fund rpe. rpe in 11 project received $47 million of rpe funding over the the last two years has attracted more than $200 million of private capital funding. after they did the research. and this is again based on this

very strong performance and early successes, we think this is certainly money very well spent and we're asking for an additional increase in funding. . nuclear security, we're asking for nuclear security objects. and let me just ask you through this. nuclear security means we're responsible for our weapons systems. it means we're also trying to lock down and we're ahead of schedule in locking down all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world. we're also responsible for work in nonproliferation. in terms of the budget, in order to reduce the nuclear dangers, environmental risks, we're asking for $7.6 billion to maintain a safe, secure, and effective nuclear deterrent. $2.5 billion for or nonproliferation work.