administration. >> thank you. that's my questions. i yield to the ranking member. okay, to mr. pallone. ranking member of the full committee for his five minutes of questions. >> mr. secretary, i wanted to ask you some questions on lng, particularly related to language in the energy bill on lng exports that is concerning me. applications for lng export have been increasing in recent years. since revising the approval process for lng applications in 2014, d.o.e. has been able to quickly approve applications after ferc completes their review. is that correct? >> yes it is. >> typically how long does it take d.o.e. to turn these applications around? >> it's been between a day and a few weeks since 2014. >> the energy conference is considering two provisions that would require d.o.e. to approve an application for export within 30 days of ferc publishing the final eis.

proponents argue this deadline is necessary to ensure timely consideration by d.o.e., but given the department's track record, i find this arbitrary deadline to be completely unnecessary. in fact it could be detrimental to the ultimate approval of an export application. in light of recent events related to the jordan cove application in oregon, do you believe it makes sense to force d.o.e. to hastily make a decision on an application based on the final eis? >> we have consistently said we see no need for this. by performance. and as you've said, i think very correctly, there can be unintended consequences. the jordan cove, when that was rejected by ferc for nonenvironmental reasons, would have caused a problem with the bills as proposed. so, you know, we really should be having records of decision by ferc in this case or marad for

an offshore facility because that is the complete set of information that informs our final judgment. >> i want to ask you about climate change and note that climate change has to play a significant in terms of energy security. by lessening our reliance on fossil fuels and reducing our carbon emissions we can make our energy future more secure. you recognize this in your testimony when you reference the vulnerability of our energy systems to climate change. can you talk a bit more about the impacts climate change is having on our energy security and what can be done to address this important issue. >> climate change, first of all, we've seen just this week that a number of military leaders pointed out howe how climate change is a risk to our national security broadly which has energy security implications as well. then there are the issues around rising sea levels and weather, et cetera. but, of course, the threats of

energy security ultimately come to fossil fuel supplies since we all have our own solar supply, et cetera. so, clearly, we need to, as we go into a low carbon transition, we are addressing energy security, but in the near to midterm, we are also going to have to increase our approach to resilience of infrastructure because among the many threats, the threats associated with climate change to our infrastructure are just growing and they'll grow further. so that's where we need to harden our infrastructure. also improve our response to the inevitable disruptions we've been seeing. flooding, obviously, in the southeast is an enormous issue. wildfires in the west. droughts in the southwest, in california. we can go on and on with these regional impacts. so it's -- we need to really

think about addressing our security and our climate issues in an integrated way. >> i'm going to try to get one more question here. and that's about the electricity grid. in your testimony discussing modernizing our energy infrastructure, we have an electricity grid that represents the energy mix of the 20th century and not the present more dynamic state in which we currently exist. in your view, what parts of our energy infrastructure are currently the most vulnerable and in need of attention? >> well, i think it's many parts, including as you mention our oil, natural gas pipelines as a major safety and environmental problem. but i would just focus my comments on electricity because, as we know, kind of electricity is the grid that all the other infrastructures depend upon as well. there, we have many tasks at hand. one is we have to better be able

to integrate resources that are distributed, and i think that's ray lot of consumer and customer interest in more distributed generation, but that does not fit the traditional model of how electricity is delivered so we have both technical and regulatory issues. but i would say one very big overaerching issue is that we need to really get on with the job, in my view, of a much more complete integration of information technologies into the grid, both to provide reliability and resilience, but also to integrate that with providing new consumer services. so it's really an end to end utilization of information technology. i think we're just scratching the surface right now. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair recognizes the head of the full committee, mr. upton, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. secretary, welcome back.

good to see you. appreciate the relationship that we have all these different years. i want to go back to some of the questions as relates to spro. if you aren't able to answer something in writing afterwards will be certainly sufficient. some would argue that spro should, now, be eliminated or somewhat phased down. it's a relic of the '70s era when we're subject to the arab embargo. point out that, of course, domestic energy production is up, imports are down. private domestic oil stockpiles are at record levels and we're able to export crude for almost a year now. and, in fact, we see that happening. and there's more than -- there's almost a billion and a half barrels of crude oil, petroleum products in private storage so they asked, do we really need a government-owned stockpile. are we actually required to hold public stocks of oil to meet international agreements, and how do other countries do it?

>> well, first of all, maybe it's worth saying we are still importers of about 7 million barrels a day of crude oil. why are now net exporters of oil products but a lot of crude oil imports. the -- we are required by our agreements in the -- with the international energy agency formed in the 1970s, not only to hold strategic reserves, but also to have a particular share, which is about 44%, of the collective response capability of the oecd -- >> is there a mix that's required in terms of public and private supplies or not? >> it's done differently in different countries. we do it by, obviously, having a physical reserve with four locations. some other countries do it by requiring -- requiring reserves

with distributors, for example. so there are different ways, but always has to be on call that amount of oil. i would say that, and just you can go into more detail, but as you opened up your question, do we need a petroleum reserve, i think most vociferously, i would answer yes, and that's -- >> i knew the answer, which is why i didn't define it. >> but again, the issue as i said, in my opening remarks, is that we cannot become complacent because we're producing more oil because we are and we will remain linked to the global oil price and our economy is exposed to that. and this is a very important tool. it's our premier energy security tool. >> let me go into the

maintenance. in the d.o.e./ig report, more than 70% of spro's equipment or infrastructure exceeded its serviceable life. the report identified five separate major equipment failures in the last couple of years. i know that we authorized $2 billion for spro modernization which was intended to go to needed repairs and upgrades. is there a focus on major maintenance in the back log of the repairs? >> yes. so we estimate, and we will be seeking -- well, we've already asked for the first appropriation. $800 million roughly for the modernization, the upgrading of the equipment, and another billion roughly for enhancing the marine distribution capability which we really need now because of the new oil flow patterns with the shale -- >> if that money came through, how long would it take to complete the work?

>> it would be a few years. the authorization you all provided is for four years. we need to get on it and it should be finished in around three years. >> thank you. yield back. >> the chairman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman -- ranking member of the subcommittee, mr. rush. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, as always, nice to see you and welcome back to the committee. during these waning days of the obama administration, i want you to know that for some of us, you will always be our rock star, superstar secretary. >> for 128 more days. >> mr. secretary, it's indeed a pleasure working with you to establish the critically important minorities and energy initiative at d.o.e. and some

time before those 128 days are up, i would like to sit down with you and look at the progress, what needs to be done and what we've accomplished so far in this particular area. my staff will be in contact with the appropriate people in order for us to arrange that meeting. >> that would be a pleasure. if we could help to set up the transition to the next administration to continue that work. >> we look forward to it. mr. secretary, in the energy bill, the house bill, there's a provision that would have delayed any action on new efficiency standard for furnaces. the department had issued a notice of proposed rule making. this was a provision that chairman whitfield and i put together by bringing together

all the industry stakeholders and all the efficiency community stakeholders in a room together and having them negotiate directly with each other until a consensus was reached. to the best of my knowledge, everyone on both sides of the aisle supported that provision. however, a little less than two weeks ago, your department actually issued that suppleme supplementsupplemen supplemental notice of rule making. to my mind, you met the bar and we and more importantly the stakeholders made for you and the condition for moving forward with the first new furnace efficiency standards in almo almost -- in around 15 years. as we're in conference on the house and senate energy, we have

proposed that the house, as well as in similar provision in the senate bill be dropped because, once again, mr. secretary, and i emphasize, you met the mark that we set for you. do you agree that we should let the department move forward on the standards now that you have done what we asked? should we enforce this as the american gas association proposed or let you and the department attempt to respond to any concerns? is it in your report? should it be in your report right now? >> yes, congressman rush. i agree this process has worked well for all kinds of efficiency standards. we go through the process.

we listen, which is why, as you said, we heard the input of industry acknowledged that there was some issues raised. that's why we went went back with the snoper which did establish a new class of small furnaces addressed perhaps not all but some certainly of the industry's concerns. so this is working. we are now absorbing their comments on the snoeper n would look to try to get a final roll out this year. the process is working. there's a slippery slope if one starts to have the process interfered with for very specific rule makings and because we do have a successful process that we are executing expeditiously. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes a fellow texan, chairman joe barton for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

appreciate that. welcome, mr. secretary. good to see you. i've got a few folks in the audience. congressman gingrey. glad to have you back, sir. former member of the committee and i think the subcommittee. and mr. bud albright, former chief of staff of the committee. glad to have you. i can't think of the last time we had a cabinet secretary volunteer to testify. i'm told that you wanted to be here. usually we have to drag you guys kicking and screaming and threatening and all kinds of -- >> it's an important discussion. >> you said you wanted to come by. we dropped everything so we could hear you. we appreciate that. you mentioned in your opening statement the strategic petroleum reserve and the function. you put out a report as you pointed out a month or two ago. that report's a little hazy on details. i have had a few inquiries in my

office about do you -- when do you plan to put out perhaps hopefully for competitive bids some of the big projects, the life extension project and maritime terminal enhancement. are you going to competitively bid those, and do you have a timetable for when those requests for bids might go out? >> yes, we have, of course, we need the appropriation before we can go out and so we have our first request in for the first appropriation, which would be focused on the principally on the modernization part. but just -- >> so the next year or so? >> so early in the next year, we'd like to move out. early in the next year. and again, with only four years of authorization, we need to, you know, be pretty snappy in terms of moving this all forward. but the -- >> snappy is a technical term

that you learned? >> yes, that's right. the -- we have this under our formal project management system. the first milestone for the modernization was done last year. so we're ready to go. the first milestone for the marine terminal distribution only just happened last month. so that project will kind of be second in line, but we will be starting the conceptual ener energieenerg engineering next year. >> you answered a question to chairman upton that -- how important the strategic petroleum reserve is and that it's still relevant, but you also answered his question that other countries do it differently. when we passed the ban on repeal the ban of crude oil exports, we also put in a provision to do a study of the spr.

i think it would be worthwhile to look at privatizing. you mention in an answer to chairman upton's question you're going to need almost $2 billion to modernize it. it would seem that now would be a good time to maybe take a pgeg out of the playbook of the europeans and look at privatizing the spr and so that the government is not on the hook for the namaintenance and modernization. any interest in doing that, while you're moving forward, also look at privatizing? >> we can certainly make the next team aware of that possibility. >> you may be part of the next team, you know. you are sitting there smiling and volunteering. mr. trump is the president, he may just ask you to stick around for a while. >> we can discuss that.

>> i'm about to run out of time here. >> good. >> yeah, good. we'll strike that. >> stricken. >> the folks in chicago just have an attitude. that's all there is to it. what's your view of the market for crude oil exports now that we have repealed that ban and we are exporting crude oil? and we did it in a way that we really set up a market. there's not a lot of bells and whistles in terms of government oversight or interference or anything. i think it's doing very well, and i'm very happy that we've brought balance to the world oil markets by repealing the ability of our domestic producers to export. you have any views on that? >> well, i think i would, in many ways, just repeat what i said last year in the discussion because i believe it's being played out. certainly the amount of exports,

the increase in the amount of exports has been very modest. about 10%. because we used to export to canada. but -- and that's because in the context that we still import 7 million barrels. of course, what's happened is that there are customers who really want the light sweet oil coming out of the shale. so i think that's probably -- there's been some optimization of refinery operations in various countries by getting some of our light sweet oil. it's had some ironic changes and also, for example, i recently visited the biggest east coast refinery in philadelphia. and they, at one point, they were taking 20% of the bachen crude and shut off their imports from africa and now that's flipped. they're back to three-quarters african imports as the market

has readjusted. but macro, as i expected, frankly, at least for some years, i don't see an enormous increase in the exports. and that's shown because, especially the louisiana light index, has actually been trading even above brink. so the idea -- so there's not a big price differential. >> that's the whole point of the market. you let them actually operate and that's in itself a tremendous achievement. and over time, i think it's going to be benefits to the producers and to the consumer. my time has expired. i simply want to say thank you for your service to the country. you've always been available to the members of the committee. you've always been cordial. our differences have been on policy, not on personality. i think you have served our country well, mr. secretary. i wish you the best in whatever

the future may hold for you. >> thank you very much. >> with that, i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. mcnerney for five minutes. >> i thank the chair. mr. secretary, as more renewables come on to the grid, and as localized generation increases, what future do you see for the transmission as a business going forward? for electrical transmission? >> well, the -- clearly one of the important issues is the ability to integrate large sources, wind and solar, typically from potentially over large distances. as we know, there is difficulty in the signing and building of these long-distance high voltage lines. we did use the congressional authorities given to the

department of energy earlier this year to prove one such project that crosses several state borders. it's sufficient probably to say that that is now in litigation. but it's very important. if we're going to be able to really maximize our system for the 21st century, we need everything from the very long distance transmission to distribute a generation and bringing all of those things together is going to require grid and storage solutions. >> following up with that question, what do you see the business models looking like for the large utilities? as we get more distributed generation? >> i think there's clearly a bit of a challenge in terms hough these business models evolve. and it's not just distributor generation. it's a very important part of that, but i would just also note

that, you know, our success in demand side management is also a challenge to traditional business models because, particularly when the pie is getting bigger, when the market is getting bigger, there's many more ways of bringing in new players. so there's that kind of system. and finally, i think the -- not finally, but one other factor is that the regulatory structures clearly largely, in many ways state-based, certainly on the distribution side clearly, but the issue of how to value all the new pieces in the grid, like storage, like capacity value, like low carbon value, et cetera. we really have not yet managed to solve that problem. and so valuation, which will open up new business

we hope to get out in december. >> well, water is an essential component to energy security. can you elaborate on the doe's water energy technology team? how are they addressing that issue of water security? >> we have a very -- for the last two years we've been ramping up this water energy nexus work, and there's several elements there. one, by the way, we are focused on besides new technologies, and we have proposed, by the way, in our fy 17 budget a newly roughly $25 million a year hub around water. it's not just about the membranes. it's about the system and how you clean up the water and

everything else. in addition, i would note from our perspective, we think the quality and comprehensiveness of data on water is not up to where it needs to be. this issue we're working on data, working on technology, and working on the systems issues are all critical. international partners are excited about working with us on, this and israel, which is so far advanced in these technologies is one that we are building up a stronger collaboration on. >> can you talk about the energy storage at the department? >> the energy storage program is one that we have expanded. a lot of congressional interest in that support, which we

appreciate, so we are working -- we have a battery hub, which is doing extremely well. it is centered at argon. berkeley is the major partner. we recently put out maybe a month ago a report on hydro and pointed out in terms of storage we still have a lot of capacity for pump hydro in the country, which today is the most cost-effective in the places where you can do it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio for five minutes. >> i thank the chairman very much, and mr. secretary, thanks for being with us. i would like to touch on a couple of areas that you brought up in your testimony. one being fixing america's surface transportation under the fast act, and under the fast act provides the d.o.e. with a new

authority to protect and restore critical infrastructure when the president declares a grid security emergency. how has this new authority changed the way d.o.e. works with critical infrastructure? >> so we are really ramping up that intersection. in fact, our secretary just hosted a meeting with leaders from the electricity sector last week at our sandia laboratory. we have -- in fact, if i just mention, say, cyber security as an example of that, we have developed now with the private sector ceos of -- well, ceos and people who work for the ceos, a number of tools. partly it's something called crisp. i forgot what the acronym stands for, but it is a program of much

more by directional exchange and situational awareness about cyber threats, including the exchange of classified information. secondly, we have developed what's called a maturity model, which allows the electricity sector, but also we've extended it to the oil and gas sectors to get a much better understanding of where they are in their cyber capabilities and, third, we have just instituted in august a dd.u.e., an integrated joint cyber activity that knits together all of our capabilities from our laboratories on cyber to get faster response for faster iechksz and response of cyber threats. that's already shown its potential in a particular cyber

threat that was identified much faster than was done in the industry itself. >> since you brought up the cyber side especially what's happening there, how is your cooperation been working with other departments and agencies in the government? especially homeland security. >> i think it's been good and getting better. in fact, this information sharing crisp initiative is with d.h.s., and certainly we also worked, i might say, not if in electricity so much -- well, electricity too, but it's other areas. work extremely well with fema in temz terms of addressing issues. that included some of the flooding issues, for example. >> the fast act also requires you to submit a plan to congress by the end of the year evaluating the feasibility of establishing a strategic

transformer reserve for the storage of spare large power transformers and emergency mobile substations for temporarily replace critically damaged equipment. can you tell me what the status of the review is and how to complete that? >> we expect to meet that december target. >> one other thing if i could, it's one of the areas i'm always interested in, in your testimony you also brought it up in the opening statement that when you are talking about different things, that are either natural or manmade, where are we at on especially d.o.e. and trying to combat electromagnetic pulses, especially when they're manmade. >> we've done quite a bit of work on that in collaboration with epry. in fact, this is part of a report we have to share with you on resilient strategy. that was done with epry.

we also have, of course, classified information that could be discussed in a different venue. >> well, thank you very much, mr. secretary. mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. >> the chair now is happy. recognize university of houston's biggest -- in florida, ms. caster for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. he says that because the university president used to be the provost at the university of south florida campus. we can take ownership of her too. i want to thank you at the hotel center for global sustainability dr. lidia secarra. your director at the office of solar technologies to give a presentation, and the room was packed even though we were in the midst of a huge rain event due to a tropical storm, and i think you're absolutely correct

that american families and businesses across the country have so much interest in the growing renewable market and the potential to save money through energy efficiency. in fact, at the end of august during the primary election we had a constitutional amendment on the ballot to provide a little help to solar industry, and it passed by 73%, and i think folks are frustrated in the sunshine state because we have no goals for renewable standards. they cut back on energy efficiency. what you say about the business models at the state level really hit home, and we can talk a little bit more about that, but the energy information administration is projecting that growth in renewable energy is going to grow faster than just go any other energy sector. in fact, they say over the past

year we've exceeded projections month after month after month. you've said in this qer right now that it's outdated, that we've got to look beyond oil security, and energy security needs to be more broadly defined to cover not only oil, but other sources combatting climate change is also essential to strengthening collecting energy security. how far behind are we? i know the big grid modernization effort is very important, but what else do we need? >> well, i think, first of all, in terms of the addressing the clean energy part, which was the third, fourth, and fifth principles, their major initiative that we put forward is the idea of doubling our innovation budgets over, say, a

five-year period. we've been pleased that the concept has gotten i think very strong bipartisan support. that's got to get translated into numbers over these years, but i think that's very important. i might also add and it will probably be referred to soon by mr. mckinley that i was in morgantown earlier this week for our 13th regional innovation meeting. we are emphasizing that we think regional portfolio management will actually be a real plus, and needless to say there's been a lot of support for that too. now we need congress to hopefully authorize that. that's on that side, but in terms of the more global aspects of energy security, i think since 2014 when those principles were put out, we have made

substantial progress particularly in our discussions with the e.u., with the european commission, the european commission then adopted a very strong energy security policy in line with those principles, and we work closely with them. there's still a lot of implementation to go in the european context, but that's been important. a lot of it was driven initially by the ukraine aggression. >> what i hear back home, they think they write it into the thermostat in their home. climate change. they see the cost right now after this recent tropical

storm. they understand when you have salt water intrusion, the huge rain events are costing people money. flood insurance. emergency response. if we don't do more up front, it's going to be very, very costly, and i understand that. >> i visited florida power and light, and they're doing a lot, but it cost money to harden the system because of the obvious sea level rise. >> gentlemenlady yields back. we recognize the gentleman from west virginia, mr. mckinley, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you again, mr. secretary, for coming to participate in that panel, and the trip to long view power plant. we hope it was beneficial to you. i have a couple of comments. i want to build up a little with my friends from california

because when i read the written statements and listened to your opening statement, there were two it admissions that i heard. one is you didn't talk about water as being part of our national economic security, which i thought was -- but even more so you didn't mention -- i think it deserved to have some mention as part of our national economic kurt of this country on that. let me go to some questions, however, quickly. we've had testimony from phil mohler when he was back, and he has since confirmed again that we've apparently talked about grid security reliability and that we've lost somewhere in the naubd of 70 gigawatts.

it's an intermittent low. not a base low. we're still at a net loss, but much of that gain that we've made that replacement is over renewables, which we can't count on because there's intermittent use with it. how can -- how can congress get involved in value iing just dependable base load power plants. whether that's using gas or coal. what do we do to incentivize that? we have a satisfactory grid then. we know -- we know we can't count on wind and solar to power our base load. in in effect, the grid is the

storage system for wind and solar. now, as those penetrations, if they get much, much higher, of course, then we will have to manage the variability of those sources. part of it is technology like storage, energy storage would take care of that, but your suggestion, i think, goes right to something i mentioned earlier. that is what is the way of valuing different services in the grid that are have not been part of the traditional regulated utility model, and one of those would be the question of value and base load, which, by the way,ing right now that's a major issue as well with nuclear power with the shutdown of a number of nuclear plants as

well. in terms of response, the -- current i would say that there are certainly very few authorities in the federal government, certainly the d.u.e. ferk is doing work on what they call price formation, which is a question of how do you value these other qualities and states are the center of the action. part of the house package and the senate package, the energy bill, there is the ethane storage skpk what we refer to as the appalachian hub. wepd be able to have storage of it in the northeast. are you aware of that? do you see an advantage of having a for energy security and

national security. >> i would say that, of cour course -- given the ethane production. it's extremely valuable commodity, but, again, i specifically on the issue of ethane storage, i have to admit i have not thought that through. >> just in the meantime, just quickly when you met with longview and they made the statement that as they are the most efficient, cleanest coal fire plant in america ahead of terk, but they said they can't get a permit to build off that. what would we learn -- what did you learn and how we could help another facility like that be constructed? >> well, again, as we discussed

in morgantown, first of all, we continue to be very committed to carbon capture sequestration as a critical technology that we will need and everyone else says that. they will need to meet our climate goals most economically, so that's very important. i thought the proposal that they made there about coal firing was quite interesting, and, in fact, i hoped -- i do get a spreadsheet on that to look at. meeting the clean power plant goals with the goal and gas. coal fire would be quite interesting. again, i'm happy to discuss it. a third one, which i mentioned, is a big game changer, if we can really solve it, but it's probably longer term, is the question of what are the technologies for economic --

very, very large scale utilization of co2. that's a big deal. if we can solve that problem. >> gentleman's time has expired. the number one houston cougars from houston. houston green for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. welcome, mr. secretary. i appreciate the job that you are doing. let me start out on the strategic petroleum reserve. we have 7 million barrels a day. how long would it take if all of a sudden we had an embargo and we couldn't ramp up in our own domestic production, which i think we could and be able to drain -- draw anything out of it? >> we could certainly start withdrawing from it. i think it's a weak time frame, something like that. it's a rapid reaction.

whereas, going to the uncompleted wells would be a several month activity. >> i was told it was much longer than that. that's why some of the things we did -- >> i'll check on that, but eebl it's more like -- it's not so much a technical issue as it is getting all of the sometimes all of the bids required for the distribution of the oil. >> even though we have a great pipeline in louisiana and texas, like you said, the maritime issues that we have to actually get -- >> also because of reverse flows in some of the pipes to get incremental barrels out is probably going to require, as we said, much more maritime distribution. >> the main questions i have -- you've talked a little bit about it, is that in 2014 one-third of the intention cyber attacks targeted energy infrastructure. in your testimony speaking about cyber security you stated we are seeing threats continuing to

increase in numbers and sophisticated. this evolution is profound impact on security and resilience of our energy sector. i hope our hearing today we can understand what's being done, and on more of what we can do in congress to protect against these increasing hazards. it's not just looking at democrat or republican, but we're talking about refineries in east harris county and louisiana. you know, coal plants, natural gas facilities, and things like that. one of the most significant challenges in securing energy delivery systems against the cyber attacks. >> i'm just adding, if i may, that the point you make about the interconnectedness is very important and as we've pointed out that electricity problems have led to enormous refinery and fuels problems, et cetera, et cetera. it's really important that cyber is just a growing threat.

i think the key as i said earlier, working with industry is -- i mean, at d.u.e., let me emphasize, we would have i would say three different kinds of cyber challenges. someone a standard big entity administrative systems and personal information. the second is our nuclear weapons information, and third, in the hardest one in many ways is working with the private sector, the energy system. it's really information exchange, including making technology available to the private sector is really a key in many ways. a second key for us is to use all of our assets, including those at our laboratories and bring those to the table on cyber threats, and we've done enterprise-wide. the one thing that i would say is -- in terms of possible

changes in maybe legislative and it's not only for cyber, but it's for other issues as well. we need to make sure there are not barriers which could be competitiveness barriers, for example, that are out there for different parts of the industry working together on the response. >> well, i'll give you -- when we had hurricane ike come through east harris county, and it shut down the refineries in galveston bay in both united airlines. we said we would never light our airplanes out of houston, and we are having to do it, and the air force is there too saying -- we need to have this jet fuel. that's why we need that grid up. >> coordination. >> the plan has -- each plan has their own, but you can't run a

plant for generators. you have to have the grid to help. that's why it's so important. i know in some areas like in east harris county, we have a partnership both for security and other things, but i just want to make sure that everybody is on the same page. >> i might add that, for example, in may we ran a very big so-called table top exercise in the northwest, and lots of industry participation, many agencies, so that everybody could understand the challenges of everybody working together on the same page. that's important. another thing i just mentioned is that even though it's much smaller, you know, we have moved out in a couple of product reserves as opposed crude oil reserves, and that came into play with sandy when we released that to some of the first responders so that they would

have the fuel to respond. >> that's another interesting discussion. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from the commonwealth, mr. griffith, for five minutes. >> thank you very much. mr. secretary, thank you for being here as well. >> has time you were before this committee back in march, i expressed my appreciation for the folks at the department of energy working with me to set up the future of coal. about a month later david mohllor for clean coil and carbon management came to the coal -- a public symposium at the university of is a are have a's college at wise was held on the future of coal technology, innovation, and industry, and i also highlight after i did that with all the opinion shapers in the business leaders and the folks who work in the coal industry, your team went over to clintwood, which doesn't get many visitors. there's no four-lane highways in

dickenson county to visit students at ridgeview high school, which is a brand new high school built with a lot of dollars from the federal government because the county is not wealthy. it's in central appealachiaeara coal fields. that visit was particularly important for the students there in dickerson county because your team made it clear that there are possibilities in science that can affect the coal industry positively. i commend your folks for doing that. i also commend you for having the leadership to have folks. i think it speaks highly of the work that you are doing. while we may not always agree, i would have headed in your leadership the department of energy, and i appreciate that.

>> maybe it's been provided to you, but just to make sure actually at the end of august we produced i think a very nice synthetic paper on all of the coal issues that we're dealing with, and if you have not seen that, we'll shoot it to your office. >> i haven't seen it, but my staff may have it. it's been one of those busy times in d.c., as you know, when you have a few weeks, but i'll try to read that when i come home. we had a lot of good constitution discussions, and we talked about how to get our coal miners back to work and how we continued to refine the coal region in our economy and in our electric generation. it meant a lot to the people in southwest virginia and particularly in the coal fields in those counties, so i appreciate the hard work that you did in making all that happen. one of the main things that i found particularly interesting in our discussions is we talked about the need for research parody for clean coal technology and why you've touched today already on some of the things with carbon capture and

sequestration. i think that's the hot button issue and probably a good source in the short run, but with research i'm convinced we can use our fossil fuels, not just coal, but the other fossil fuels as well in better ways. can you just take a minute and discuss some of the things you all are working on with all the different fossil fuels and research and the importance of having parody? there's nothing wrong with renewables. parody with the renewables because we'll need the fossil fuels as well. >> on carbon capture, that's not only about coal. coal is obviously kind of the mark key application in many ways, but i believe ultimately we will need it for natural gas and very importantly, for a whole variety of industrial facilities. we also support, like, ethnatural plants and natural gas processing plants, et cetera. that's important. i want to emphasize we have spent $5 billion on ccs.

we also have an $8.5 billion loan guarantee program open right now for fossil technologies, et cetera. one of the things that really excites me for the longer term and would have -- i just mentioned one example of really breakthrough carbon management would have enormous implications for how fossil fuels can then be used in the economy. one of those is, as i said, the potential for really big scale co2 utilization, and if i toss out, you know, like a holy grail of that, sunlight water and co2 to hydrocarbon fuels. some of the fuels industry might be, you know -- would be challenged, but that would be,

for example, a game changer. there are negative carbon technologies that we should pursue. i think in terms of coal -- i say coal -- there's three big thrusts. one is the jaebd around things like ccs. another is the transitional assistance to economies and workers in coal country, and we just issued $39 million there. third is the really big breakthrough possibilities that could change the entire carbon management equation. >> thank you. my time is up. i yield back. >> the gentleman is back. recognize the gentleman from california. for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to echo what my colleague mr. barton said earlier, and thank you for being a pretty regular witness here on our committee over the ten-year at the white house.

by all appearances you are very willing to answer all kinds of questions, which is the most pressing topic. thank you for the time you have spent with us. your testimony today indicates this is a timely and pressing issue before us. we're currently in a conference level, a committee, of trying to negotiate an energy bill that will help define our energy landscape for the next decade. at the same time we know these threats from climate change are real, so bold action needs to be taken. communities across the nation are already facing the threats of climate change. in fact, i don't care call it a threat anymore as much as dealing with the outcomes, which we are experiencing, whether through increased storm severity or flooding or as in california, the crippling impacts of our drought. my area five-year drought.

we're building -- it's very expensive. the technology is pretty precarious. the massive forest fires have been costly too. i believe it's time we stopped considering these conditions as anomalies and addressing -- start addressing them as the new normal. if we start implementing strategies to adopt the scenarios, and also to the extent possible to mitigate them by reducing our contributions to climate change that's happening. president obama has made real progress in laying out a framework to start this transition, but there's a lot more work that needs to be done. we must expand the existing green technologies, such as solar power and increased energy efficiency and invest in the new technologies that will carry us into the future. many of our research universities are really leading the way in doing this. it will benefit our energy

security, and also our national security and our economy at the same time. can you -- you mentioned this in your opening statement, but i would like to give you more time to discuss the ways of renewable agencies and investment and inefficiency will bolster our energy security. >> i think, again, the answer to the last part is pretty straight forward. the renewable technologies are not looking at -- there's no issue of importing or exporting the fuels. that's true anywhere. a mix maybe. that's true anywhere. the importance of this as an element of our energy and national security is quite clear. in terms of moving -- i, of

course, maybe not totally objective, but i think innovation is absolutely core to this, and that's good news for us because we lead in innovation. we have to stay the leaders in innovation. particularly because as one of my -- one of our ceo friends in the energy industry tom fanning, the head of southern company, says they can't keep the waves off the beach. i mean, we are heading in this direction in terms of lower carbon and the paris agreement. no matter what you think about it, it tells you that we are developing a multi-trillion dollar global clean energy technology business. the head of that train. now, cost reductions is critical, and we have -- through innovation and through deployment, they work together. more deployment, more innovation drives those costs down. we've seen that now for solar.

we've seen it for wind. we've seen it for l.e.d.'s, which is not quite renewable energy, but uses less energy. we need to have the cost reduction pathway going and do it for carbon capture, and do it for nuclear and do it for off shore wind. we just got to keep at this across the board. i remain an all of the above guy aimed at a low carbon future where hopefully our industries, all of our industries, all of our people can be part of that solution. >> just the right amount of time, but a word to say thank you because this path of progress during your administration, your leader shim at the department and to the extent that we are able to work

with you is really made, i hope, significant progress although, as i said, there's a lot more work to be done. hopefully this is a movement now that will not be questioned as much as it used to be, but that we'll see it as progress all along the way. innovation is a great word. >> gentle lady's time has expired. recognize the fellow texan, mr. flores, for five minutes. >> the u.s. is now the leading producer of oil and natural gas, and how is this new age benefitted our global competitiveness and allowed the u.s. to position itself as a global super power? >> oh, it's had an enormous impact on natural gas. first of all, we have not become

major importers. we expect to be net natural gas exporters in 2017. domestically it has led to both a tremendous renewal in manufacturing. $170 billion capital invested in just in the kind of chemical arena and, by the way, also reducing carbon emissions. on the oil side, again, we remain very large crude oil importers, but the dramatic decrease in our net oil and oil products imports has had a tremendous balance payments impact. both of them have changed the world energy scene and we are now looked at in a very different way. >> you haven't talked about the geopolitical implications.

>> we are looked at in a different way. >> i'm talking about from a global stability standpoint. that's a different thing. moving on, you have talked about the failure of our nation's infrastructure to keep up with the new dynamics that we have in this energy industry. not only with respect to transmission, but also transmission of natural gas. the lack of capacity of the recent opposition to new infrastructure means that the average consumer pays more for energy than they should, but we headed for price spikes because of lack of infrastructure? >> i -- i would not want to predict, but obviously there's a vulnerability if infrastructure is not there. another polar vortex or who knows what would happen. >> right. >> also, it's not just -- it's not even just wires and pipes, but also, as we pointed out in the q.e.r., inland waterways,

dock -- i mean, ports, et cetera. >> and also. >> it makes no mention of the issues that arise with cross-border presidential permitting in general or in particular of the keystone xl pipeline. do you agreure silent permitting process is the qer because it creates significant uncertainty. >> that's what the qer said. therefore, we -- >> it's -- that goes to the next question. that is how is the inability to render a decision in the keystone pipeline impacted other energy projects? >> again, i think the qer

pointed out. i had forgotten to use that number. we have a lot of infrastructure crossing the border and certainly our electricity systems are essentially integrated with canada and now with mexico there's going to be increasing integration there as well. >> right. >> are you -- >> texas and mexico, as you know, do trade electricity. including lead power as well. let me ask you this. let me ask you about the time it took to reach the decision on keystone? >> that's a question for the department of state. that's not my responsibility. >> okay. you're the head of d.o.e. i would say you have a dog in this hunt. >> that's a question for the department of state. >> all right. okay. is there room to establish a more uniform coordinated modern process for the consideration of the cross-border pipeline and transmission? i'm sure you have --

>> well, i think that the only thing i would say more broadly and it implies to also -- it does apply to other d.o.e. responsibilities is i think the congress has for good reason over the years put in all of these statutory, you know, assignments the idea of national interest determinations. i think that is what we do for lng exports and that's what the state does for their responsibilities. we have it for cross-border electricity lines. >> in my opinion this is something congress needs to get involved with the stat other underpinnings of the decision making process with regard to this. i'm assuming you would be willing to provide technical assistance to congress? >> we're always happy to provide technical assistance. >> thank you very much. i yield back my time. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the chair calls upon a gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. doyle for five minutes. >> approximate secretary, first of all, thank you for your

service. i've been in congress 22 yoerz and been through five or six secretaries of energy. you're by far one of the best, and you're going to be missed here. i want to say that right up front. just two quick things. i know we all agree on the importance of carbon capture utilization of storage. there's international consensus that it be very difficult if not impossible to meet our climate change goals by 2050 without this in place, and also without additional investment in this sector, the electricity sector, if we try to limit global warming to the 2 degree scenario without it it's going to cost $2 trillion over the next 40 years. it's not only necessary to meet the goal, but it's necessary to meet the goal in an affordable way. i know the white paper that you recently listed several bills

here in congress which would change tax credits or financing options for ccus. my question is you think what we're doing is substantial enough and what other options might we pursue. it seems like we've been talking about ccs forever. it doesn't seem we're any closer to actually seeing, you know, implementation of this technology on a scale where it can be helpful, and as you said, it's not just coal. it's natural gas too. what do we need to do to sort of make this, you know, a moon shot and get this technology out there. the point is that there's -- there has not been a price signal to the private sector there, and i think that's what

we need to have for sure. i would just make another point, if i might, on this kind of finance side. as you know, the administration has proposed now for two years tax credits for carbon capture. both investment tax credits and storage credits. in congress there's a lot of discussion around 45q as -- they have some different numbers, but fundamentally the same idea. i think a point that's not been appreciated enough and is why i think, you know, congress addressing this with some urgency was called for is that big capital expenditures by utilities, by investors, et cetera, have a long gestation ti

time. there are two signals that would be very powerful for pushing on ccu.s. one would be something like these tax credits that were put in place for a long period of time. okay. now i understand. you know, what i'm getting into. secondly, of course, is the carb carbon. the power plant does that through the regulatory approach. there are other approaches, obviously, including a direct one, but all i'm saying, i think signals now. it's not, you know, saying ccs might be a big deal in 2030, so let's wait. you'll need the signals now if you are going to get those investments made. in 16 and 17 we have -- we are

moving forward into pilot project scale, ten megawatt scale. we could take a lot bigger steps with more resources. i think those are the two areas that signal side on finance and carbon management and the innovation. >> we're seeing some of these premature nuclear plant retiermts and that could cause a threat to our diversity, and i know during the summit, you emphasized some of the valuable attributes like carbon-free electricity, reliable service, fuel diversity, and explain that these are not systematically valued by electricity markets. you further stated that the department is prepared to take action to help address the economic market and valuation challenges for nuclear power, so could you explain the actions that the department has taken since the nuclear summit to insure nuclear plants are

compensated for the energy security reliability, and other benefits they provide to the electricity? >> we don't have the authorities to take those regulatory actions, but what we've been doing and are doing is doing the studies of how to value those attributes, and that will lead to some recommendations in our quadrennial energy review at the end of the year. that's one thing. we also continued to have discussions with ferk which does have some authorities in terms of the price formation on the wholesale level. that's going on. of course, a lot of the action is at the states, and certainly one of the notable actions was the new york initiative in august for the so-called clean energy standard and carbon neutral approach. that's very important. the other thing is in terms of

the nuclear plant shutting down is clearly the clean power plant implementation plans and, you know, neck year we are rather confident on the courtside. 2018 is when the implementation plans are due. now, it would seem ironic to have lost zero carbon assets just as states are going forward with implementation plans. that's why something like the new york activity and illinois is considering something similar. i think they are quite important. >> mr. secretary, i do want to ek quo the comments of some of my colleagues. it's been a pleasure working with you over the last few years. i -- you know, as we talk about

these important ideas around energy security, i am glad to hear you say that you remain an all of the above advocate. i certainly hope that as you transition assuming that you transition out, someone else transitions in, that you will pass that advocacy on to your successor in the sense that, you know, we -- one of these days because we're problem solvers here in america. we always have been. you look back throughout our history. we won't go through the littany, but there have been a lot of them. someday somebody might soofl the problem of harnessing the sun's energy and storing it up so that it can be made available on the

energy grid for base load. same thing with wind energy. other alternative energy forms. i just hope that we can return once again to kind of a commonsense approach to an all of the above energy policy where we don't throw out the baby with the bath water and we're not killing jobs and that we're looking more for market driven solutions rather than solution from inside the washington beltway because i think the american people are -- are screaming for that. i don't think we can forget about the impact that we've made to our communities that have served our energy and national security needs, and i hope that we can continue to work together throughout the rest of your tenure and you will also pass along the importance of finding a long-term funding solution for those funding challenges at

d.o.e.'s cleanup sites, like the portsmouth piped in facility. those are very important that we keep those projects on a path to completion so that we can redevelop those properties and put them back into good use for the communities that have given so much already for our energy future. mr. secretary, you know d.o.e., as you well know all too well, is central to america's role in international civil nuclear commerce markets through what is known as the part 8-10 process under the atomic energy act doe authorizes certain foreign sbe actions supper as technical nothing transfer and assistance on commercial nuclear power plants provided by our domestic nuclear industry. this authorization process has been the subject of scrutiny

from both gao and this committee due to a long bureaucratic approval process, and i recognize that d.o.e. has been working to address these criticisms over the last several years by developing and implementing an updated streamline process. are you or the deputy secretary monitoring progress of these reforms? >> yes, we are. in fact, i would be happy to share with you some data that i saw just maybe two months ago, i think, in terms of some progress actually in terms of shortening the times because there were -- one of the issues is we've managed to -- with the inner agency because the d.o.e. is responsible, but we work with state and other agencies, and what i think we have succeeded in is eliminating a lot of different serial activity with some parallel activity, and so the data suggests that there's been some progress. i would be happy to hair is a those with you.

>> can you send that over to us? that would be great. that would be great. in the remaining time, i understand d.o.e. after two years of talking about it has not yet deployed its ek will trong tracking system to incorporate transparency and accountability and to the process and assist applicants. what is the source of that delay, and do you have an estimate for when this new tracking system will be active? >> on that i'll have to get back to you and respond. i'm not up to she'd speed on that. >> you can respond back on both of those. that would be great, mr. secretary. good luck to you. i too have enjoyed working with you, and i appreciate your sound reasoned approach on most of the issues that we've dealt with here. >> thank you. mr. chairman, may i just -- >> yes. >> i'm going back to earlier statements that on the job creation front i do want to

emphasize that things like, you know, the renewable space, energy efficiency, we have had tremendous job growth, so certainly in the energy sector -- i'm not talking about oil and gas production. there's that too, but we've had tremendous job growth net. we also recognize that there are distributional issues. that's not a uniform issue, and that's why working with our communities and talking about transitional activities is quite important, but the net job growth has been actually quite substantial. just solar alone is over 200,000 full-time jobs. energy efficiency jobs, which are a little harder to find, i would also be happy to share with you a jobs report that we did earlier this year. energy jobs report. it was quite surprising. it was 1.9 million jobs associated with energy efficiency in the country, but we have distribution problems,

and obviously appalachianaa is prime among those. >> and the coal industry. it's pretty hard to get my folks to look at a jobs report that shows all of this optimism that you are reflecting when we're seeing communities going to shut down mode because of the coal industry. i yield back, mr. chairman. >> the gentleman's time is expired. the chair now calls upon the gentleman from new york for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair. mr. secretary, thank you for your bold leadership and for your visionary approach to what is a very difficult policy area. we have prospered from your knowledge base and your determination to make a difference. for the leadership of the past and i'm certain into the future. thank you. thank you for leading us.

in the past tradition was you spin those meters, assess the bills, print those bills to the customer and all functioned. as we transition, transform with technology, with renewables, with research, with distributed generation, with -- how do we bring the utilities along in that effort to make certain that they're able to tb a strong a player as possible assisting to grow for the commerce and responding to quality opportunities to the residential base and commercial base they serve and at the same time address national security. there is a big challenge there as we transition and transform. how can we best assist in that effort? >> well, i think with the link

to security, certainly a critical element is their responsibilities and maybe opportunities to address resilience and reliability together because that's a new challenge. now, that has to be typically, of course, appropriately internalized in rate structures, which tends to be a state by state activity. i think the congress would have to think through how we wanted to do that intersection with the states perhaps by incentiveiz g incentiveizing. the build-out of infrastructure that we need, particularly for resilien resilience, against that entire threat spectrum i mentioned earlier, including climate-induced threats, to physical threats, to cyber and the like. i think that is a very, very

important part. the second part, which, again, would typically be at the state level, because it involves the distribution system as opposed to the high voltage transmission lines is the question of what are utilities able to do regulatorily and what are they able to do in a business sense in terms of bundling new services to customers along with electricity supply because, again, as i said earlier, we don't anticipate a big growth in electricity demand. maybe even eventually increasing demand even as the economy grows. then that means a business model needs to evolve as well into probably new services. >> yeah. well, as you know in new york, my home state, the process is up

and underway, and everyone is waiting for what that produces. i think it looks very strateg strategically at the transformation taking place in this industry. and, again, with having lived through superstorm sandy, we saw what worked and what didn't. distributed generation had a major plus report card after that aftermath of superstorm sandy. >> new york is certainly a leader and also, i might say, not in the policy arena, but also integrated with its very strong and strong arm d as well. >> thank you for mentioning that. what do commitments to mission innovations, and other investments in clean energy research mean to a stronger outcome for national security. >> well, i

absolutely critical because, as we said, first of all, the whole clean energy push is in parcel of a modern energy security picture. so, i've said it before, that i think -- well i said it also here, it's also an enormous economic opportunity that we have to take advantage of and it wasn't exactly your question, but i want to emphasize that the question of doubling our innovation budget raises the question of, you know, do you have the capacity to absorb it well. i think we have so much unused capacity for innovation in this country that that will not be a problem. i can go with problems like arthur e where we're funding 2.5% of the proposal in a program that's by any logical measure, extremely successful.

i think there's a big pay off for us in economy, environment and security with that kind of investment. >> i agree. having watched some of the activities the ripple effects of sound paying jobs that that are associated and also a shot in the arm for the economy. >> it's that and the infrastructure renewal agenda, which is just absolutely critical. >> again, secretary, thank you. and we're all made stronger because of your leadership. >> thank you. >> the time has expired the chairman calls on the gentleman from new york, mr. ingle, for five minutes. >> first of all, i want to add my voice to the thanks and the accolades that have been given to you. you've been accessible. you've been intelligent. you've been just terrific and only with energy and things that this committee does, you're on the iran deal you were right up

front in answering questions. we didn't always agree, but you were always brilliant. i want to thank you. we really appreciate it. i want to start by talking about offshore wind energy, it hasn't been talked about very much here today. a small percentage of our global wind energy is generated offshore and much of the capacities in northern europe. but we're now starting to invest here in the united states. the first offshore wind farm is set to begin commercial operation in early november and several are being developed in new york, long island power authority is currently working to improve 90 mega watt farm that will become the largest in the united states. can you talk a little bit about that wind generation, the u.s., what are the challenges, security, or otherwise, that the federal government needs to address with this?

>> you know, this is a very interesting time for off-shore wind. as you mentioned the 30-mega watt project, actually, they finished construction and they'll start to get into the grid in november. that's the first off-shore wind farm. two, last friday secretary jewel and i released a jointly developed off-shore wind strategy, and if you haven't seen that we'll be happy to shoot that over to you to kind of lay out a bunch of the issues. by the way, one of the issues is not just only the kind of technology you think about. there's a lot more data we need to understand the development of offshore wind. third, i do want to emphasize that in the block island project, that there's really excellent collaboration between

the wind people and the wild life, like wild life federation, projecting whales and this kind of thing. i think that's an important part of the development. that's kind of going well. then i think we are now moving into this where we'll start to see platforms and we have a three-pilot projects, one main, one new jersey, new jersey new york area, fisherman's wharf. and one lake eerie, so-called north coast, that are looking at novel technologies. two, the main project, in particular, is a floating platform that will ultimately be for deep water. there's discussion of a massive deep water wind farm off of hawaii, as well. so i say all of this that i

think it's the same story that i said earlier, technology, development and deployment going hand in hand to drive cost down. i think we're now at that place for offshore wind where we can anticipate that kind of trajectory of getting the cost down. the block island project, ppa is like 24 cents per kilowatt hour, for an island like that, that's a lot less that they're now playing by bringing in diesel fuel. so i think, you know, i think we're at the beginning of that virtual cycle. >> i want to talk about the testimony that we've read, turned on certain aspects of the economy including telecommunications and transportation and i want to talk about how the relationships apply to the emergency response

responsibility. talk about super storm sandy, when it hit the east coast in 2012, the impact on energy structure was devastating and illustrated in many ways that our energy systems were vulnerable to disruption, as we all know more than 8 million people lost power. networks were power liezed and service stations couldn't pump gas. products were badly damaged. since that time, we've instituted a wide range of policies and procedures that design to better protect our citizens and infrastructure, we've made improvements but it's still a work in progress. in your view, what are the biggest remaining vulnerabilities that need to be addressed. and what's that should the government and the private sector take next. >> well, we certainly for sandy

and, obviously, katrina and rita and we can go through the list, certainly in the costal areas, the reality is that we have to be preparing much more and hardening our infrastructure for the inevitable continually increasing sea level and water temperature, which both contribute to the amplification of storm surges and the damage that we -- that we have seen. so there's a lot of blocking and tackling there that we have to do. i mentioned earlier, for example, florida powered light, you know, they're going through replacement of all the -- essentially, the wooden poles. they're worried about the substations that are in flood areas. as they're doing it and i think, i'm sure they can do other

things, too, but i give them credit. as they do the kind of straightforward hardening at the same time, they integrate smart technology. so they are getting resilience, reliability and the possibilities, also, of more information for managing the grid. so i think there's a lot of that that we have to do. the second point i'll make and, again, in new jersey we did a project of the laboratory after sandy was to design a major micro grid system with distributed energy that will sustain the electrified transport corridor, which is a critical public safety issue. that went down, too, sandy. so there's also now getting that kind of micro grid structure to make sure that really critical pieces of infrastructure can operate during these storms, so that's important and this is a whole string of things, but

those are some examples. >> okay. thank you. and once again, thanks for all you've done. we ae appreciate it. >> thank you. >> time has expired. mr. secretary, whooo, it's over. i'll close by saying thank you so very much for your patience, your expertise and your frankness. in texas we say you're a straight shooter, that's a very high compliment. no matter what happens in the future, i want to extend invitation in my district, at mit and doe, she's coming online this december, she'll capture 95% of the co 2 of one stack that's made by powerful coal captured 95% user to get oil at about 65 miles south. it's the first viable, economically viable

sequestration project in america. that's a big part. >> thank you. thank you. thank you. >> we're excited about it. >> if you come by, too, give us a little more time. best barbecue in rosenburg and bob's taco station, best tacos in fort ben county. with that, members, you have five days to submit questions for the record, this hearing is adjourned. >> thank you. >> join us friday on discussion.

saturd >> in any war, in any time, weapons dictate tactics. you've probably heard that the civil war was faugtd with modern weapons and antiquated tactics and that's not quite true. the civil war is actually an evolutionary war, as both weapons and the men who employ those weapons learn different methods to fight with. >> author david powell talks about formations during the civil war. then at 9:00, military historian michael talks about hi book about the 1945 meeting of harry true man, winston church hill to negotiate the end of world war ii and the reconstruction of

europe. so the power in europe became a zero sum game. create a european union and the phrase is already out there. so that france, germany, russia, poland, don't see events on the continent as a zero-sum game. >> the idea that american presidents have always gotten the very best health care available in ever euro they live. i want to tell you that this is a charming myth and problems began almost immediately with george washington. >> parkway central librarian richard on myths surrounding presidents and their health. he'll talk about how doctors have sometimes contributed to a president's death or saved them from dying without public knowledge. for our complete american history tv schedule go to

cspan.org. that is grand rapids and grand rivers which divides the city. >> there's a good chance that most people over the course of any given day will see or interact with a piece of furniture made in grand rapids. >> we were the first city to receive a grant from the endowment to be used specifically to commission an original work of art for a specific civic site. >> this weekend, the c span city's tour, along with the comcast cable partners will explore the literary life and michigan. gordon olson, author of the book "thin ice" talks about notable people. in about his newest biography on gerald ford. and gordon andrews talking about the life of charles hamilton

houston and his role on the early civil rights movement. >> on american history tv on cspan three. grand rapids talks about the letter she wrote to then congressman gerald ford to help spark a movement bringing art work to public places across the country. we'll visit the public museum and talk about why the city is nicknamed the furniture city. we'll take you to the newly renovated exhibits at the gerald r. ford presidential library and museum. >> a new car pulled up and stopped in front of the store and this big fellow stepped out of it and stepped into the entry way of the store and paused there, for a long time, and staired at junior. ford asked him if he could help

him. the man looked at him and said, you' you're leslie lynch king, jr. he said, no. i'm gerald ford, jr. he said well, i'm your son, you're my father and i want to take you to lunch working with our cable affiliates and visiting cities across the country. >> now, it's a look at u.s. views on refugees and their treatment. photographers who captured images and refugee communities talk about how their pictures have influenced the public perception, refugees and other migrant communities. gonzalez correspondent for pbs moderates this discussion for center, from last month, this runs about an hour 15 minutes.

see, mike work greats. one challenge. first off, thank you for the generous introduction and that run down of my -- some of my bio, appreciate that. and thank you all for coming. it's a beautiful day in southern california. there are many things you can be doing other than hearing a conversation about refugees and photo exhibit. i hope you've all seen the exhibit, which is fantastic, i saw it myself last week. and i come to the photo space as frequently as i can. and i tell every visitor to los angeles who i know is a friend or a relative, go to the photo space, you have to see this place. it's a gem of los angeles. it's a great way to spend a few hours in terms of their exhibition, whether it's on this refugee or anything else they've covered in the past. thank you very much for being here. let's turn to the conversation

at hand and our guests here today starting from just a short introduction. and as i told them, conversations in the green room, if you're curious about their background, you google them, they have very very long resumes, much longer than my own, very distinguished but i'll be very brief in my introductions to them. first on the far left is professor of law at ucla. she's the new -- new director of center of near eastern studies atlanta ucla. a graduate of yale law school and laws of war. to her right and in the center is nikita she's a historian and photography with an emphasis on war report aj, social activism and photography. she earned her ba at which

college? >> varner college. got her nf a&m a and phd at har vord, correct? >> yes. >> and you are working on a project, now, about the civil war? civil war. >> and then to my immediate left is win, he teaches at usc. american studies. >> american studies and ethnicity. >> and ethnicity and he's the author of the novel "sympathier" which won an award, which i think i've heard of it. and it's, essentially, it's about the vietmanese immigration experience but told in the context of a thriller. it's a great read. he's working on another book that's coming out next week called the refugee, correct. >> "refugees". >> check it out so you can order

it online or the refugees next year. let's set up the issue with the international refugee crisis as it exists right now. in preparation for this, did a little homework. the united nations said there are 65 million refugees now in the world. that's about one out of every 113 people on the planet. it's about the same size population of canada, australia, and new zealand combined or to put in california terms, there are as many refugees now or people have been forced from their homes as there are the entire population of california plus about another 20 to 25 million people. you cannot check out a web site. you cannot see a news program. you cannot read a newspaper without hearing something about refugees, particularly in this super heated environment of the presidential campaign. i was at both cleveland and philadelphia covering the conventions, and certainly at one political convention in cleveland you heard a lot about

refugees and you heard a lot of fear expressed about refugees and what they -- the they may pose to america according to some right now. i can throw it -- throw this conversation to you. it's often described in the context of crisis, crisis of historic proportions, the people forced to leave their homelands and try to seek out a new life someplace else, is it. >> thank you so much i will say that the choice to frame this as a crisis isn't self political. what i mean by that is this, obviously there are very serious threats to the lives of people who are forced into the kind of migration that have just described. people face horrific circumstances in syria, in somalia and iraq and many other places that are considering and they're experiencing genuine crisis. when we talk about these

numbers, really needs to put it in a broader perspective. for example, country like france processes about 80 million tourists a year without any challenges. they're able to manage those flows and cope with that level of population ability as an ordinary course in the way in which they run their society. the question is can we manage the kind of flows of populations that we see. and the answer to that is absolutely yes, if we chose to. if we chose to address this as something which could be managed as a matter of policy, if we chose to determine what we need to put in place to meet humanitarian objectives, the numbers themselves do not represent an unimaginable or uncontrollable flow, but the framing as crisis, or as the framing as controlled does get into a set of political choices, which are problematic. first, because we think of this in terms of crisis, i think we tend to go to the most extreme sorts of solutions rather than

thinking calmly about what a manageable framework will look like. secondly, the political strategies themselves tend to endorse, i think, a way of framing refugees as assertive rather than a potential benefit of the societies that host them and that contributes to a climate of uni phobia. so these are challenges, i think that we would want to manage without resorting to a framing of crisis. >> -- you wanted the to say something. >> figure of 65 million refugee that is you cited, i used it, too from the u.n. the interesting thing i did an event with the u.n. in new york city with samantha power, the u.s. ambassador to the u.n. i was about to use that figure

until samantha powers said 21 million refugees. if i understand this right, i believe that 60 plus is displaced people of whom 21 people are refugees. i wanted to point that out. it is a very political term. and it gets to the issue why it is refugees are considered a trouble some figure, why do we want to classify and why other situations we don't want to classify people as refugees. >> very quickly, that 65 million that includes will be the classic refugee, something crossing borders driven by war, poverty, fa men, what hamine an basically staying with the borders. >> i think the number you're referencing is 21 million, 65 million facing forced migration, crossing. . people who choose to leave their country of origin and live at

least one year outside. they're internally displaced people, which is the group that you just referred to and they're not included in any of those three categories. >> refugee yourself, you proudly embrace that term. >> i have to forcefully claim that term, so many people want to call me immigrant and i say, no, absolutely not. i'm a refugee, and this is a refugee novel and war novel. the reason i have to insist on these kind of things because in the context of the united states to be an immigrant, it's really well with adamant american mythology. to talk about refugees throws that into crisis. i'll give you an example hurricane katrina when that happened we saw all the people who had been displaced the question rose, what do we call these people.

some people were using the term refugees. they both said these people are not refugees, the only two in time these two people have agreed with each other. they said these people are not refugees because that's un-american. for jessie jackson was racist to call because so many displaced to call them refugees as well. there's something about being a refugee that runs counter to how it is americans perceive themselves that's not possible for americans to be refugees. >> we'll come back to that. nikita when it comes to these issues, your field of specialization when it comes to how they've been presented in popular culture, through photography, how they've been presented by the media, what's the same and what's changed over the last hundred years.

>> perhaps, we can pull up a slide here. we can see the kind of images that americans would have been exposed to in the early 20th century and the way in which the kind of mythology that was referred to was formulated. >> this is classic immigrant and going to get his name changed something americans can pronounce. >> and they are humble. it is processed. you see the ticket booth or you see the booth there. you see the orderly there checking the documents. it's orderly processed and people who are enduring it are very humble. that is not the image that we see now. we see images of refugees and immigrants as kind of disorderly, often we have these kind -- >> is that it? >> well, actually this photographer is kind of ejecting the kind of image of what we see in the news, whiches the kind of, you know, invasion image,

people on boats -- invading this country or another country. >> i think the photo that was used in the campaign union members very controversial still photo of a line of people who knows where they were from and where they were going. >> these are crowds of people whom we can't pick out individuals, right and here the use of that hand in the foregrou foreground, immediately, brings us into the image as participants. we're not looking at a horde invading us. it brings us into this space. and if we look at these people on this boat, we can see a range of emotions being expressed there and we can pick out individuals and see their reactions to their arrival and that's one of the things that tom discussed also in the film in the exhibition. >> have they been going back to

the ellis island photo, that was a much more controversial issue at the time. you look at that photo now, say hindsight that's the classic american success story and that man is going to make a new life here in america. but at the time, wouldn't have people looked at that photo and drawn other kind of conclusions, like this is the invasion of the america in that era. >> well, but if you look back at the photograph, it is a very orderly image. these are particular types of immigrants, they are bias. i mean, this is one of many. you have to understand you'll be looking at more than just this one, they're often portrayed as very religious. they are the type of people that we wanted, if they're going to be people coming, they are at least religious people, and humble people. >> can you tell me whether there were captures to dictate whether it would be interpreted. >> a caption something as this,

is something that we see applied. it's applied here later on. they'll be used in news stories, yes. and often by themselves. at that time you wouldn't necessarily, as we do today, read a story, we read a news story with a new company image. at that time they would put an image in the newspaper and it might not have any type of contextual information. >> do you think we sometimes overromanticize. that we remember in hindsight we remember it being an orderly process, we remember the united states opening them with opening arms -- but at the time, it was a much more chaotic, ugly reception than we may want to think now. >> yeah, i think that now we look at contemporary refugees like syrian refugees, for

example. i got an e-mail from a swiss doctor saying, you don't understand what it's like out here. we're being overwhelmed. and i looked back at images of chinese immigrants who came here to the united states. when you look at the cartoon depiction from that time, they were horrifying now, because chinese americans are so well assimilated. it's hard for people to believe that it existed and instead what must be happening that new immigrants must be much more terrifying than the chinese back then. that's probably not true. >> yeah. >> those attitudes are certainly there in images if we scroll forward a little bit to the image of the or fan city, two

more. >> i'll talk about an image for a moment and call attention to the fact that this is an image that portrays refugees as a population to be managed and controlled. we associate with aerial view often with the military. you make an aerial view to show your organizational skills so we soo that here in this image of this camp. we see an aerial view. we see people who are organizing the different sections. we see people wearing uniform, these are all the same. the area emphasizes that and shows the lay out of the camp itself. we see a image of refugees as a people to be controlled. it's an image that implies criminalization like they're inherently criminals or population in need of some sort of management. >> sorry, do you have anything to add to that. >> one thing i find striking in thinking about the current

refugee crisis is that basically the same lens are witnessing very similar seams, century apart. one -- one way to think about it, we imagine horrors, is to think about sort of the legacy of the genocide and its survivors and its refugee population today, a century letter. for example, we know that the community there, which is 700,000 strong in the united states and who are largely descendants of those survivors are viewed as an important element of what makes the city a thriving city and part of a mosaic that you would won in the language that attributed to the swiss correspondent. yes, you can manage that a century ago, the framings were echoed probably many that we're seeing today. it's both distressing to see that cycle and maybe enables us to begin to think about refugees

and contribution a little differently. we in this country have an advantage in thinking about this. we pride ourselves on being an immigrant nation, that's unlevel. >> as yuan phonetic as they've been, very an alternative narrative that one can make appeal, too. this is less true in europe. but i think the distress that refugees face in trying to flip that narrative to the benefit side is greater there. >> do you agree with what he said, in our heads we sometimes put the immigrant on one side and the immigrant represents hard work and goodness and ready to assimilate in his or her new country. and the refugee is the more other, kind of person, and some sm one who we think of being more suspicious or skeptical of. >> i'm being condenseden what you said.

that's how often it plays out. >> the world that i enhibt which is about international law, framings and policy. strangely, i think there's a different play. refugees are framed rather than people entitled to various types of protection. and the framing is deeply troubling and we couldn't speak more about why that is, there's a way in which there's a category deployed to exclude people from both material benefits and material assistance in ways that are damaging and produces a struggle to be defined as a refugee. as opposed to a migrant who represents this kind of greater threat. the other piece that i think is interesting to think about is, we tend to think of refugees not just vulnerable and needy, but sort of a population defined by its humanitarian needs, which eliminates agency, which removes their ability, ag