[ speaking in foreign language ] [ speaking foreign language ]

[ applause ]

[ speak being foreigning foreign language ]

[ speaking foreign language ]

>> friends, noble committee inviting me to present a lecture. respectfully, i am unable to do that, because i am presenting here, the sound of silence. the cry of innocence, and the face of invisibility. those children who are left behind. that's why, i have kept an empty chair as to remind us. as a reminder. i have come here only to share

the voices and dreams of our children. because they are all our children. i have looked into their frighteppfrigh frightened and exhausted eyes. i have held their injured bodies and have felt their broken spirits. 20 years ago, in the foot hills, a small, skinny child. he asked me, is the world so poor, instead of forcing me to take a gun.

a child soldier that was kidnapped boy an extremist militia. as his first lesson, he was forced to kill his friends and family. he asked me, what is my fault? 12 years ago, a child murder from the streets of colombia, trafficked, and slaved, raped, asked me this. i never had a dream. can my child have one?

friends, all the great religions teach us to care for our children. this is s jesus said, let the children come to me. do not hinder me. the kingdom of god belongs to them. >> friends, there is no greater violence than to deny the dreams of our children. therefore, i refuse to accept that all the temples and mosque and pray houses have no places for the dreams of our children. i refuse to accept that the world is so poor, when just one week of military expenditure can

bring all children to classrooms. i refuse to accept that all the laws and constitutions and police and judges, are unable to protect our children. i refuse to accept that the slavery can be stronger than freedom. i refuse to accept here. my only aim in life is that every child is free to be a

child. free to grow, free to eat, sleep, and see the light. free to love and -- laugh and cry. free to play and learn. free to go to school. and tree to dream. i have the privilege of working with many courageous people, who have the same aim. we have never given up on any threat or attack, we will never. we have made progress in a couple of year, couple of decades. we have reduced the number of out of school children by half. we have reduced the number of

child laborers by a third. we have reduced child mortality, malnutrition, and we have prevented millions of child deaths. but let us make no mistake, the great challenges still remain. friends, the biggest challenge, the biggest crisis knocking on the doors of human kind are fear and intolerance. we have -- in ed kagsz. something that gives them meaning and objective of life. education that gives a sense of glowal cities among youth. i am afraid.

that day is not very far when the result of all of this failure will culminate in an unprecedented violence and that will be suicidal for the human kind. rights, security, hope. can only be restored through education. young people like malala, i started calling her my daughter malala, not just malala, and other daughters, including kinaughts, and shazia, and the daughters from all over the world.

they are rising up, and choosing peace over violence, volerance over extremism, and over fear, the solutions are emerging, these solutions cannot be found in the deliberations in conferences alone. cannot be from a distance. the line of small groups and oceans, and individuals, who are confronting the problems every day. even if they remain unacknowledged, unrecognized and unknown to the world, the solutions are with them.

friends. what is missing now of course, my paper is missing. [ laughter ] no problem. i will continue without that. we can do it. i, you may ask, that what one person can do? i could recall a story of my childhood.

a heavy fire broke out in the forest. thank you so much. i don't know whether it happened with some noble laureate or not, but many things are happening today. [ applause ] and the best thing happened that a young courageous pakistani girl has met an indian father, and indian father met the pakistani daughter. so i was it willing you the story of my what i remember from my childhood. a heavy fire broke out in the

jungle, in the forest. everyone was running away, including lion, the king of fore forest. suddenly, he saw a bird rushing straight to the fire. he asked the bird, what are you doing? the bird said, i am going to extinguish the fire. the lion laughed and said, how can you do it? keeping just one drop of water in your beak? the bird said, i am doing my bit.

18 years ago, millions of peo e people, individuals, march across the globe. they demanded a new international law for the abolition of child labor, it has happened. we did it. millions of individuals together, did it. friends, we live in an age of rapid globalization. we are connected through high speed internet, we exchange our goods and services, and in one single global market, thousands of flights every day, connect us from one corner to another

corner of of the globe. but this one serious disconnect. the level of compassion. let us transform individual compassion into global compassion. let us globalize compassion. ga ghandi said, if we will teach peace to the world, we will have to begin with the children. i humbly abdullah akadi, let us

unite the world for compassion for our children. i ask, whose children are these? footballs, but never played with one. whose children are these, who harvest coco, but have never tasted chocolate? whose children are dying of ebola? whose children are these, who are kidnapped and made hostage today? >> they are all our children. i remember an 8-year-old girl, rescued from forced labor from a

stone quarry. she was sitting with me in my car, right after the rescue. she asked me, why did you not come earlier? that question still shakes me, has the power to shake the world. what are we doing? what are we waiting for? how many girls will we allow to go without rescue? children are questioning. children are questioning our inaction. watching our action. we need collective action. every single minute matters. every single child matters.

every single childhood matters. therefore, the pessimism surrounding our children, i challenge the culture of silence. and the culture of culture of neutrality. i call on the governments and intergovernmental agencies, workers, businesses, teachers and you, faith leaders, and each one of us. put an end to all forms of violence against children. sa slave slavery, child sexual abuse, illiteracy, these things have no place in any civilized society.

friends, we can do this. governments must make children-friendly policies, and invest in education, and young people. the businesses must be more responsible, accountable, and partnerships. intergovernmental agencies must work together to accelerate action. global society faith leaders, institutions, and all offers must stand with our which were. we must be bold. we must be ambitious, and we must have the will.

keep our promises. over 50 years ago, on the first day of my school. i met a boy. a cobbler boy, sitting outside the gate of my school. i asked my teacher, why is he sitting outside? why is he not with us in the classroom? no answer. one day, i gathered my courage, and went to the father of that cobbler boy. and he said, sir, i have never talked about it. we are born to work. his answer made me angry. it still makes me angry. as a child, i had a vision of

tomorrow. a vision that cobbler boy is sitting with me in my classroom. now, the tomorrow has become today. i am today, you are today, today is the time for every child to have the right to life. a right to freedom, a right to health, a right to education, a right to safety, a right to equality and a right to peace. today, beyond the darkness, i see the smiling faces of children and blinking stars. today, i see my children are

playing and dancing. today, in every plant, in every mountain, i see children are growing freely. with dignity. friends, i want to see this today, inside you. my dear sisters and brothers, as i said many interesting things are happening today. i request you to put your hand close to your heart, close your eyes, and feel the child inside you.

i am sure you can. listen to that child. listen, please. today i see thousands of nelson mendelas, martin luther kings calling us on gandhi.

>> i call for a march from slavery to liberty and a march from violence to peace. let usz march from darkness to light. let us march to divinity. llt us march! let us march. thank you.

[ applause ] ♪

♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ [ applause ]

>> thank you, you proved what i said referring to gh andi, the only tyrant of yours, is the voice coming from the inside. which is also the case with regard to the second noble peace prize laureate for 2014. malala, i call upon you to come forward and give your noble lecture.

>> thank you so much. thank you. thank you so much. >> in the name of god, the most merciful, the most beneficent, your majesties, your royal highnesses, distinct members of the noble committee, dear sisters and brothers. today is the day of great happiness for me. i am humbled that noble committee has selected me for

this precious award. thank you to everyone for your continued support and love. thank you for the letters and cards i still receive from around the world. your kind and currentlying words strengthens and inspires me. i would like to thank my parents for their unconditional love. thank you to my father, for not clipping my wings, and for letting me fly.

thank you to my mother, to always speak the struth, the true message of islam. and also, thank you to all of my wonderful teachers, who inspired me to believe in myself and be brave. i am proud, infact, i am very proud to be the first pakistani, and the youngest person to receive this award. along with that, i am pretty

certain that i am also the first who still fights with her younger brothers. i want there to be peace everywhere, but my brothers and i are still working on that. i am honored to receive this award together who has been a champion for children's rights for a long time. twice as long as i have been alive. i am proud that we can work together, we can work together, and show the world that an indian and a pakistani that can work together and achieve their goals, of childrens' rights.

dear brothers and sisters, i was named after the inspiration al, who is the joan of arc, the word malala means grief stricken and sad. in order to bring happiness to it, my grandfather would always call me malala, the happiest girl in the world. today, i am very happy that we are together, fighting for an important cause.

this award is not just for me, it is for those forgotten children, it is for those frightened children, who want peace. it is for those children who want change, i am here to stand up for their rights, to raise their voice, it is not time to pity them. it is not time to pity them. it is time to take action so it becomes the last time -- the last time. so it becomes the last time that we see a child deprived of education.

i have found that people describe me in many different ways. some people call me the girl who was shot by the taliban. some the girl who fought for her rights. some people call me a noble laureate now. however, my brothers still call me their annoying, bossy sister. as far as i know, i am just a committed and even stubborn person, who wants to see every child getting quality education, who wants to see women having equal rights, and who wants peace in every corner of the world.

>> in the 17 years of my life, i always loved learning and discovering new things. i remember when my friends and i would decorate our hands with henna, on special occasions. instead of drawing flowers a, w would paint our hands with mathematical formulas and equations.

we had a thirst for education. because our future was right there, in the classroom. we would sit and learn and read together. we loved to wear school uniforms, and still there with big dreams in our eyes. we wanted to make our parents proud. and prove that we could all achieve those goals, which some people only boys can. thing i things did not remain the same. when i was in -- it was a place of tourism and beauty, changed

suddenly into a place of terrorism. more than 400 schools were destroyed. women were flogged. people were killed. and our beautiful dreams turned into nightmares. education went from being a right to being a crime. girls were stopped from going to school. my priorities changed, too. i had two options, one, remain silent. wait to be killed. the second was to speak up. then be killed.

i chose the second one. i decided to speak up. denying it our rights, fruitlessly killing people and misusing the name of islam. we decided to raise our voice, and tell them. have you not learned? have you not learned that in the holy koran, if you kill one person, it is like you kill humanity? do you not know that mohammed he

says, do not harm yourself or othe others. do you not know that very first word of the holy koran means read. the terrorists tried to stop us. take me and my friends, who are here today t on our school bus in 2012. neither did ideas northeir bullets could win. we survived. since that day, our voices have run louder and louder.

i tell my sister, not because it is unique, because it is not. it is the story of many girls. today, i tell their stories, too. i have brought with me some of my sisters from pakistan, from nig nigeria, my brave sisters, who were shot that day on our school bus, but they have not stopped learning.

her brother was killed. she didn't succumb. my 16-year-old courageous sister, mazoon, from syria. who now lives in jordan as a refugee. she goes from tent to tent, encouraging boys and girls and to learn. my sister, amina, from the north of nigeria, stops girls, and even kidnaps girls, just for wanting to go to school. one girl. the idea is one person.

who is five foot two inches tall. if you include my high heels, it means i am five foot only. i am not alone voice. i am not alone voice. i am many. i am malala, i am kyno it, i am mazoon, i am amina, i am those 66 million girls deprived of education. and today, i am not raising my voice, it is the voice of those 66 million girls.

sometimes, people like to ask me, why should girls go to school? why is it important for them? but i think the more question is, why shouldn't they? why shouldn't they have this right to go to school? dear brothers and sisters, today in half of the world, we see progress and development. however, there are many

countries where millions still suffer from the very old problems of war, poverty and injustice. we still see conflicts. in which innocent people lose their lives, children become orphans. we see many people and syria, iraq, and afghanistan. we see families, being killed. suicide attacks and bomb blasts. many children in africa do not don't have education because of poverty. as i said, we still see girls who have no freedom to go to school in the north of nigeria.

many children in countries like pakistan and india, many children, especially in india and pakistan, are deprived of their right to education because of social -- or forced into child marriage or into child labor. one of my school friends, who has always been bold and confident girl, dreamed of becoming a doctor. her dream remained a dream. at the age of 12, she was forced to get married and then soon she

had a son. she had a child. only 14. i know she could have been a very good doctor. she couldn't because she was a girl. her story is why i dedicate the noble peace prize money to the malala fund, to give girls quality education, anywhere in the world, and to raise their voices, the first place, the funding will go to is where my heart s -- is. to girls schools in pakistan, in my home.

in my own village, there is still no secondary school for girls. it is my wish and my commitment and my challenge, to build one. so that my friends and my sisters can go there, to school and get quality education, and get this opportunity to fulfill their dreams. this is where i will begin but it is not until i see every child, every child in school. dear brothers and sisterings,

great people who brought change like martin luther king and nelson man del amother theresa, once stood here on this stage. i hope that the steps that he and i have taken so far, and take on this journey, will bring change. lasting change. my great hope is that this will be the last time that we must fight for education. let's solve this. once and for all. we have taken many steps.

now, it is time to take a leap. to realize how important education is. they already know it. their own children are in good schools. now, it is time to call them to take action for the rest of the world's children. we ask the world leaders tou night and make education their top priority. 15 years ago, the world leaders decided on a set of global goals. development goals. in the years that have followed, we have seen some progress. the number of children out of school has been halved.

as he said. the world focused on primary education, and progress did not reach everyone. in the year 2015, representatives from all around the world will meet. in the united nations, to set the next set of goals, sustain able development goals. this will start the world's ambition for the next generations. the world can no longer accept basic education is enough. why do leaders accept that for children in developing countries, only basis literacy is sufficient, when their own

children do homework in algebra, science and algebra, mathematics and science. leaders must ensure that primary and secondary education is allowed for every child. someone said this is impractical or too expensive or too hard. or maybe even impossible. sisters and brothers, the world

may understand, but we children don't. why is it that countries which we call strong are so powerful in creating wars but are so weak in this? why -- in bringing peace. why is it that giving guns is so easy, but giving books is so hard? why is it -- why is it that making tanks is so easy, but building schools is so hard?

we are living in the modern age. and we believe that nothing is impossible. we have reached the moon 45 years ago and maybe we'll soon land on mars. then in this 21st century we must be able to give every child quality education. yes, sisters and brothers, their fellow children, we must work, not wait. not just the politicians and the world leaders. we all need to contribute. me, you, we. it is our duty. let us become the first generation to decide to be the

last. let us become the first generation that decides to be the last that has empty classrooms, lost childhood and wasted potential. let this be the last time that the guns, or a boy, spend their time in a factory. let this be the last time that a child is forced into a marriage. let this be the last time that a child loses life in war. let this be the last time that we see a child out of school. let this end with us. let's begin this ending together, today, right here, right now. let's begin this ending now.

thank you so much. thank you.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

how is the white house approaching arms control in the last two years of the obama presidency? the brookings institution is asking that question in a conversation that is expected to touch on the arms treaty with russia, and how the ukraine

process is affecting coverage. live coverage begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern time. russia is kpft currency is expected to be a factor when they discuss oil prices. federal chair janet yellin holds a conference after the meeting. that is live at 2:30 p.m. eastern time. this month is the tenth anniversary of our sunday prime time program question and answer and we're featuring a one-time question and answer headed by leaders, thinkers and policymakers, from 2006, lonnie bunch, on the importance of the african-american experience to u.s. history, to 2007, robert novak, through years of reporting, and from 2009,

conservative commentator, s. e. cub, question and answer at 10:00, at 7:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. now, a house hearing on the effect of repealing the decades-old ban against exporting, u.s. production, while u.s. fuel consumption is declining. witnesses before the energy and commerce subcommittee include the administrator for the u.s. energy administration information and energy policy analysts, this is two hours and 20 minutes.

i would like to call the hearing to order this morning. and before we get into the subject of the hearing i would mention that this will be the last hearing of the 113th congress for the subcommittee. and i did want to recognize a number of members who are on the s subcommittee, and who have been valuable members of congress for a number of years, who will not be coming back. first on our side of the aisle we have ralph hall of texas. all of you know ralph. and unfortunately, he was involved in a car accident during the -- right after the election. and i think is still in the

hospital. we have lee terry, from the great state of nebraska. on the subcommittee, and did bill cassidy will be moving over to the u.s. senate and corey gardner will be moving over to the u.s. senate. but i just want to thank them for the many contributions they have made and the great job they did representing their constituents. and on the democratic side, henry waxman served for many years as chairman and as ranking member will not be returning. mr. john dingle, who all of you know is chairman of the committee for years. john barrow of georgia, and donna christianson of the virgin islands.

so i just want to thank all of them. you can talk in the opening statement. if that is okay. but anyway, at this time i'll go ahead and recognize myself foro. we're going to get a little history lesson. as many of you remember, that act established the price controls on domestic oil. and also established the strategic petroleum reserve. also established the cafe standards. and also set the prohibition on the export of crude oil. and as you know, ronald reagan eliminated the price controls when he became president, certainly strategic petroleum reserve and the cafe standards are still out there. and have a great impact on our economy and our society. and the big question that we

hear more and more about, though, is the wisdom of maintaining this prohibition on the export of crude oil. of course, under the act, the president does have the authority to allow the export of crude oil. but joe barton and others have raised the issue about adopting legislation that would remove this prohibition. and just as we had extensive review of the impact of such a move on the export of natural gas, that is what we intend to do on this question of export of crude oil. so we're going to have a lot of hearings. we want to hear from all sides of the issue because there are a lot of different opinions about it. and that is why we're delighted to have our distinguished witnesses with us this morning to provide us with this historical perspective. and we'll be having some more hearings about it because as i

said we want to be very thorough before we make a decision to go one way or the other. and with that, i yield back the balance of my time and i recognize the gentleman from illinois, mr. rush, for his opening statements. >> i want to thank you, mr. chairman, i, too, want to thank and congratulate and commend those departing members from this subcommittee. they were all correcting mightlely to the work on the subcommittee, work on the congress, and certainly benefitting all the citizens of our great nation. and i just want to take my hats off to them and wish them good biddings and bright futures and many continuing presence as they go forward in their lives.

i want to take particular time to bid farewell to mr. westland who has been the former chairman of this -- on the subcommittee. he is an extraordinary leader on environmental issues and other issues, particularly as it relates to the environment and the harsh realities that we're confronted with today. climate change and many, many others. and i want to also take a moment out of my opening statements to commend the one man who has affected my life more than any other legislator in my tenure in congress, john dingle, who has not only been a terrific friend of mine but has advised me.

john was legislator, and was involved in many other ways. we learned by watching john we didn't have to be doing anything, you just learn how he operates. watch him from afar and you will learn more than most legislators learn in a lifetime just watching the example of john dingle. so mr. chairman, i want to thank all of those departing members for their contribution. and i want to thank you, mr. chairman, for holding this important hearing as we enter into an era of the new american energy renaissance that we are experiencing. it is important to better understand all of the implications that are associated with exporting crude oil due to the recent surge in domestic production. i think it is entirely appropriate for this

subcommittee to bring to light the conservation. conditions today just dramatically from the 1970s, when the bill was first enacted. what is less clear is how long this current inquiry and oil production will last. and what type of impact will this demand have permanently on the domestic consumers. mr. chairman, i consider this issue with truly an open mind and i look forward to hearing from today's panel of experts. to be more specific, i'm looking for answers regarding how exporting this important commodity will impact american

families. and the american committee in general. in regards to the domestic gas prices, consumer goods, manufacturing, and jobs. mr. chairman, i'm going to close my mouth and open my mind now and i want to thank you, now -- i yield my time. but i will yield my time back, mr. chairman. thank you so very much. >> okay, thank you very much. is there anyone on our side of the aisle that -- okay. joe, you are recognized for five minutes. they had not instructed me who a all was speaking, so i recognize the gentleman. >> i do want to talk for a couple of minutes.

i can give some of my time back. thank you, mr. chairman. we have a number of members in this committee who probably were not alive when we passed the energy policy and conservation act of 1975. in that same time period and i believe in that act we put into place a ban on the export of crude oil from the united states. now, in the mid-1970s mr. chairman, the opec oil cartel had had an oil embargo against the united states in western europe. and it devastated our economy. i can remember living in crockett, texas, and i could buy ten gallons of gas on odd days. i could go to the gas station and buy ten gallons of gas on odd days based on the last digit in my license plate.

that was not fun. there were gas lines. there were plant closures. we were producing -- i can't remember exactly -- but we were probably producing 5 or 6 million barrels of oil a day but we were consuming ten to 15 or 16, i think. so putting a ban on crude oil exports at that time made some sense. to husband that resources as a strategic commodity. well, what is the situation today, mr. chairman? the united states is the number one oil producer on a daily basis in the world. today, we'll produce in the neighborhood of 9.5 million barrels of oil in the united states of america. if you combine the oil that we import from canada and mexico, our nafta partners, you can put that up to another 2 million barrels a day, maybe even three.

our consumption is down, our production is up. we have a surplus on the world market today, mr. chairman of 2 to 3 million barrels of oil a day. and the result, instead of ten million barrels of oil, i think today west texas intermediate closed at six dollars a barrel. that is a good thing for the american consumer, mr. chairman. it is a good thing you're holding this hearing. and i would hope in the new congress we take a look at the bill that i have introduced this week, hr-5814. it's a page and a half, it is very simple. it reduces the ban, and reports to this committee of what we do with the strategic petroleum reserve. it is a different world today, mr. chairman. and when you're number one you use that status.

if we allow our producers to export the crude oil that can't be consumed here in the united states or refined in the united states we put pressure on opec and russia. we create jobs here at home. and we make sure that that world price which sets the crude oil price is based on real supply and demand. and that is a good thing for everybody. so i am extremely pleased that you're holding this hearing. i would ask you also to look at such acronisms, i think we should also look at the jones act. and as i said earlier the strategic petroleum reserve. with that, mr. chairman, i still have about a minute and would be happy to yield to whoever you wish me to. >> does anyone seek this

additional moment? okay, the gentleman yields back, either to you, ms. caps, or mr. yarmuth, do either of you want to make a statement -- we've already thanked you for your service, john -- okay, well, that concludes the opening statement. and as i said we have a distinguished panel of witnesses. and i will just introduce you as i introduce you to make your opening statement. so first opening statement will be by adam kiminsky, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you for the opportunity to be here today and to contrast

the issues today. it is a statistical and analytical organization. the views expressed here should not be construed as representing the department of energy. at the time of the passage of the department of energy conservation in 2005, the imports were growing quickly while growth in consumption was rocketing up. u.s. oil imports more than doubled between 1970 and 78. driving imports as a share of consumption, internationally when opec declared an oil

embargo against the united states in 1973, 65% of rising u.s. crude imports were coming from other countries. the response at the time was to limit the price for oil produced from u.s. wells existing in 1972 while allowing new oil to sell at world market prices, limiting exports prevented, the separation of new and old oil rising did not really stem the production as the production in the lower states fell. by 198 is it was clear the policy was not working. on figure two of my testimony. for nearly 30 years after the removal of price controls the decline in production combined with rising demand increased net

imports, until u.s. petroleum peaked to 60% in 2005. restrictions on crude oil exports remained in place. but limited modifications from time to time allowed exports to canada, exports of production from alaska that went through the trans-alaska pipeline. since 2008, these conditions have been reversed, partly because of the result of domestic growth and supply, and also as a result of slowing demand. u.s. domestic crude oil production is estimated by 3.4 million barrels a day, to its highest level since 1986. meanwhile, between 2008 and 2014 this year, we're estimating for the full year, total u.s. liquid fuel consumption fell from 19.5 million barrels a day to 18.9 billion barrels a day, the u.s. went from being the world's

largest net importer to becoming a big net exporter of petroleum products. in 2014, net importss share of total u.s. consumption now down to below 30%, close to 25. the dramatic production growth in the u.s. mid-continent, canada, resulting in logistical restraints. in 2008, benchmark crude oil, west texas intermediate sold for a premium of 2.73, a premium up higher than -- that comes from the north sea. wti has been trading a discount over 6,000 a barrel. the energy outlook forecast, recent trends in petroleum markets will continue into 2015 with domestic crude oil production averaging 9.4 million barrels a day, 10% above the

2014 level. gasoline demand and net imports as a share of domestic consumption could be 21%, as recent dramatic declines in crude prices may affect our outlook. but more so in the longer term rather than in the very short term. so petroleum market conditions today are very different than they were in the '70s when the ban on crude oil exports was enacted. key trends in u.s. oil markets have reversed. then demand was rising quickly and production was falling. now, production is rising quickly and demand is falling. u.s. crude oil production pay soon hit an all-time high, surpassing the previous record set in 1970. gasoline is down from its peak and is likely to climb even more as the vehicle fleet becomes more efficient. in addition to this trend reversal, oil production is less

concentrated. opec is down from 35% today. the existence of oil contracts on the futures markets, the development of bench mark crude oil pricing and the availability of basic data from eia created by congress in 1977 have all brought greater transparency to the oil markets. as described in my written statement, eia is actively pursuing a number of important initiatives relating to the timeliness and detail of oil market data. i would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify here today and i hope to be able to answer your questions. thank you. >> thank you, very much. and our next witness is mr. lou bellorisi, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you very much. >> be sure to turn your microphone on. >> yes, i think we have a next slide. what i would like to do is put a

little bit of this in context. the first thing we all talk about is what is energy security? we tend to think of concentration, low cost reserves in parts of the world which tend to provide a risk to the u.s. one, they can restrict out put and charge higher prices that would prevail a more competitive environment. and two, some of these guys will go out of business with war, terrorism, even embargoes, also imposing price spike on the national economy. so one of the best ways to deal with this threat or this problem is to have a production platform in a stable part of the world which turns out to be north america. and if you look at what has happened here in this slide you can see that you can take the u.s. and canada, which the congressman just spoke about. we have had a remarkable

increase in production. and it is very important to look upon this through a north american lens. because it is this north american lens that is so stable. and it is this rapid run-up in production, particularly if you include natural gas liquids that has made a remarkable change. next line. now, you can see prices have come down. but i don't think we quite understand what this means. a reduction in price, i have testified here many times where members have said, well, you know if we open up anwar, and x or y, we'll get more production. the price has come down, and this price decrease is an enormous benefit to the world economy. the world consuming centers are going to get a savings of approximately $1.3 trillion next year if these prices persist. the american driver who spends about $3,000 a year is going to

get an enormous savings. this is an enormous boom and benefit to the national economy, to the world economy, and it's being delivered to us through these production gains in this stable -- in this platform. we want to preserve that platform. we want the distribution to be efficient. we want to have keystone, open up the federal lands. all of this production we've seen has come from federal lands. next slide. this shows you the permit activity for oil and gas drilling activities. just prior to the day january 1st, 2014. we're giving evidence that the permit activity is coming off. this is a good reason to have this hearing. we need to look at our whole regulatory structure and say what do we need to do to make it

as efficient as possible? because once again we have this platform. the upstream and mid-stream, we want it to perform as best as possible. we are concern borded about thi we met with extraction experts in the past couple of days. there is a lot of stuff going on out there. as long as we have an open system i think we'll find ways to drive down the extraction costs. i mean, there are very interesting things happening out there. this is our estimate of a sort of $80 environment of what we think the u.s. can do. you see we're producing a lot of light, sweet crude. and we're not sure how much this is going to be disturbed by these lower price environment, probably going to see some reduction there. but you know, the outlook is still very positive. next slide. i want to leave you with just a couple of things here, one, if

you look at this slide it is quite interesting. traditionally, they had a modest decline rate, maybe 5% and a pretty high recovery rate as much as 50%. what i don't understand is, even though we have this very high decline rate and these unconventional resources severe weather a now, we have to keep drilling. the recovery factor is quite small. small improvements in this recovery factor are going to make a big difference. that is why we want to see this technology continue to progress. and you know, if you look at this whole north american success story, and we get back, keep in mind that we should have a lot of humility about how we proceed. we had six-month oil embargo, and six-month price controls. so as we go forward i think one

thing we want the members to think about, what are the benefits of an open system. william pratt, the geologist said, we want to keep an open mind. >> thank you very much. our next witness is dr. charles ebinger, a senior fellow at the brookings institution. thank you for joining us, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, thank you, congressman rush, for inviting me to testify this morning on the origins of the crude oil export ban, which ironically was enacted nearly 40 years ago. given the profound changes that have occurred in the gas production that we have already heard about over the last six years i think it is important to look back and remind ourselves how our energy situation has evolved since 1975. in the years prior to the opec

oil embargo, the chief issues dominating the oil policy in the united states were the debate over the nuclear power, especially whether we should recycle plutonium. and i remind you, those that were enacted by nixon were because of the concern of the dangerous levels. both the voluntary oil import program, for review. this is a critical point, what stands out is just as the case is today. most energy issues were discussed in isolation from one another. on the geopolitical front, the early '70s saw huge changes in the middle east and north africa. and in response to a decline in

real oil prices the major oil-producing countries mounted a unified campaign to extract economic rent from their oil production. under the negotiations in tehran and tripoli between the oil companies and opec, they were concerned in a general sense that they were not treated fairly by the oil companies demanded a major increase for their oil. after this, opec was able to negotiate with the contracts that they believed would protect the owners from inflation. this proved not to be the case. but what helped opec, as mr. sieminsky noted, they allowed opec to every time a contract was up for renegotiation demand further upward price revisions. mr. chairman it is worth noting

that the global markets could not have been more different than they are today as we heard from congressman burton. in the united states the production had peaked in 1970. under the demands of the oil import program. in retrospect, began the change, the circumstances confronting the u.s. it is remarkable that this recommendation didn't receive more salience from the congress, despite the fact that the u.s. oil production was spiking. and oil imports were up to 30% consumption on the eve of the oil embargo. the u.s. could not have been more prepared for the embargo. the enactment taken was the act of complex regulator procedure and gas prices as well as an

incredibly complex system of all indication controls leading to gasoline lines in the districts and surplus supplies in potomac. unfortunately, these were so ill-conceived that they caused more attention to the crisis and exacerbated lines, with angry motorists buying lines of fuel. as a graduate student i only got five gallons in new england. in response to the crisis, president nixon launched a project designed to eliminate the oil imports by 1980. we have comprised a host of initiatives, including the policy act. the president was granted authority to respect exports of coal products, petro chemical feed stocks and supplies and material of equipment for the exploration and refining of

energy. epco allowed them crude oil, where such restrictions was deemed by the president to be in the national interest. the main exceptions made are mainly for shipments to neighbors in canada and mexico and recognition of the historic trading relationships. other notes in the ban are directed in my testimony. the u.s. allows unrestricted exports of all fuels except natural gas. the only express ban that remains today is on crude oil. in reviewing the history since the early '70s, it is apparent that whenever the u.s. government has tried to favor a particular fuel absent the market realities there have been unintended consequences, which have been deleterious to the

national economy and security. it led to the failure of the transportation system creating national gas shortages in my home territory and the industrial midwest in the winter of '77 and '78 with deservesing economic impact, some of which remains to this day. the ban on using gas and the power generation led to a major switch from gas and oil towards coal. this rush towards coal has led to scores of facilities that now have to be replaced as part of our environmental policy and the international climate policy. mr. chairman, in conclusion, it is clear that the energy situation today is far different than it was when epca was enacted. if crude oil continues to rise, it could be a detriment. attempting to manipulate policy with hopes of the u.s. oil boom

will lead to energy independence is a phallacy, as the u.s. attempts to participate. it will increase u.s. gdp and brookings did a major study that is on our website if anyone cares to look at it. it will reduce energy. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, and our next witness is deborah gordon, who is the director at the carnegie endowment for the national fees. >> subcommittee members, thank you for the opportunity to testify today about epca in an era of oil transition. in my remarks, they will discuss three key points. first, the need to understand the changing conditionss influencing the market, lastly,

the need to deal with the consequences of the unintended consequences of lifting the ban. the bottom line is that oils are changing. and a more complex array are replacing the conventional oil. the public stakeholders need to understand the differences in oils. the best way to position america for success amid energy abundance is to generate information necessary to make wise decisions among many oil options. the truth is, we know precious little about these resources. the nation needs reliable, consistent, detailed open source data about composition and operation elements about the u.s. oils. the significant gaps have complicated the oil production. although epca was adopted in response to a set of problems, its template is a model for

situations today. as america struggles to maintain the balance. it will be important for policymakers to think about the full range of oil issues. several issues merit possible updating. one, widely expanding oil data collection, making this information publicly available, two, increasing the heavy duty vehicle, efficiency standard trucks and vehicles that would move the oil. and three, the accounting practices so that the sec is set to bolster markets. despite new found energy resources at home, the u.s. exists in an increasingly oil-dependent world. as such, if the u.s. and others enact policies against unintended consequences, america will be better set to chart a

path so that others can follow. two questions require attention. first, do others have information about america's oil? unfortunately, they do not. ironically there is more data about the opec crude oil than oil in the balkans. we have encountered several obstacles to with hold data -- to withhold data to government limitations on expanding oil reporting. i would be happy to elaborate on any of these issues. the overriding concern is that oil markets cannot function efficiently without high-quality information. question two, what are the environmental risk the oils pose? the carnegie company is comparing ideas with others. together with stanford

university, we're monitoring the entire oil value chain from where the oil comes out of the ground through to how the products are used. our merit based findings are that oil's greenhouse gas imprints vary by at least 80% from one another. in other words, replacing a high amount will replace. there are several types that include emissions, like the balkans, where gas is flared instead of burned or sold. heavy oils, through the value change to yield more bottom of the barrel products like trolds or complicate. watery oil, like those in california, san joaquin valley, where it takes a tremendous amount of energy to lift as much as 50 barrels of water for every one barrel of oil that you

produced. and the extreme goals like those in california, or those in alberta where carbon is naturally sequestered. as one of the fastest growing makers of oil, the u.s. has a responsibility to be a global leader in the energy sector. the balanced oil may strengthen consumers, protect the climate and enhance the national global security. in closing, a national discussion, one informed by reliable open source data about the composition quality and environmental profile of new oils will be key to making effective and sustainable decisions. thank you. >> and thank you, mr. gordon, thank all of you for your testimony. at this time i recognize myself for questions and then we'll give every other member the

opportunity, as well. >> just from a practical aspect, any time you start talking about crude oil, most of the american people think about gasoline prices. that is why it is more volatile, i think, when you talk about exporting crude oil than certainly natural gas or anything like that. do any of you have an opinion on if you were at a rotary club, how you would explain exporting additional crude oil would not raise gasoline prices? mr. siemonsky? >> mr. chairman, it is always a challenge, usually at the rotary functions i get asked why gasoline prices are so high. and lately i haven't gotten that question. eia has tried to examine your

question from the standpoint of how gasoline prices are set in the u.s. markets and what gasoline prices relate to. and what we found in a study we published just a short while ago was that -- that these two benchmark crude oils that i talked about, the one in the u.s., wti, west texas, and brent, in the national markets that gasoline prices historically tend to be much more closely related to brent crude oil prices than to the domestic bench mark. the second thing that we found was that u.s. gasoline prices tend to be more closely related to gasoline prices in markets like singapore and rotterdam in the global markets than to comparing, let's say, chicago prices with prices in the gulf

coast. the conclusion that one would draw from that is that that gas prices, because we are exporting and importing so much gasoline, are really set in the global markets. there's one market gasoline prices in the u.s. tend to reflect that global market and that if exports of crude oil resulted in higher prices for west texas ind immediate or crudes benchmarked to that would not have much impact on gasoline prices. >> did you have a comment? >> how i would explain it, if you want to constrain volatility in the market, if you want to constrain rising gasoline

prices, you should promote a stable production of crude oil in north america. we have evidence that this is having a big effect. what we can do is have a stable growing production of crude oil. >> if we have a set volume of crude oil in that market and all of a sudden we put more oil into that market adding to supply while demand stays relatively constant on the basis of fundamental economics, more supply, constant demand, prices should come down and then refiners buying that oil around

the world will in theory if they wish to be competitive will lower their product, petroleum product prices including gasoline an for new england home heating fuel. i think that's the way i find sometimes trying to explain it seems to have say in it. >> you have a comment? >> i don't know that it would be easy for consumers to understand this, but because oils are so different, the oil that's we are largely now set to refine, the heavier oils, don't preferentially make more gasoline, they make more diesel. they make more gasoline. we might be getting ready to export the perfect oil to make more gasoline in order to keep and refine the oil that makes more diesel. it's not a consumer issue then. our consuming public doesn't use diesel, they use gasoline. it gets a little complicated here. the big question that lou raised is volatility. i think consumers need to

understand in the future possibly not being playing high prices but volatile prices. volatility will really hurt america. we're large part producer and consumer of oil and product. if the markets become volatile, we'll hurt more than anyone else. my time has expired. >> i want to thank you, mr. chairman. i share in the opt imism of the panel. there are things i want on the record. what type of impact would lifting the crude oil ban have on climate change? are these