Hill Heat

Witnesses

Panel 1

• Harry Reid – Member, U.S. Senate

Panel 2

• Kevin Kolevar, United States Department of Energy
• T. Boone Pickens, BP Capital
• Rich Halvey, Western Governors’ Association
• Bryce Freeman, Wyoming Infrastructure Authority

Panel 3

• Gary Hanson, South Dakota Public Utilities Commission
• Stephen Wright, Bonneville Power Administration
• Will Kaul, Great River Energy
• Don Furman, Representing American Wind Energy Association

A Call To Consciousness on Climate Change, will explore the ancient messages of living American Indian cultures, the state of the science and reports on important responses to the climate change issue by Native communities. This forum will provide an opportunity to regain that integrated understanding of the world that for millennia has characterized Native traditions. Free Mother Earth Indian Summer Showcase concert follows.

Background:

For more than half a century, American Indian elders have called attention to humankind’s impacts upon our Mother Earth. Elders of many Native cultures subscribe to the concept that our decisions today must take into consideration their effects upon future generations. The climate change dilemma represents an important challenge to the global community to incorporate into its practices and policies the prevailing evidence offered by science as well as the wisdom and knowledge of the inter-relatedness of elements and life on earth.

Preserving the health of the Mother Earth is the gravest responsibility of our generation and the primary reason why the Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian, as an institution of living cultures, is committed to elevating human understanding about global climate change through education, cultural performances and civic engagement programs.

For more information, contact:

Eileen Maxwell Director of Public Affairs Smithsonian Institution National Museum of the American Indian 4th Street and Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20013-7012 Office: 202-633-6615 Mobile: 202-436-6805 Email: [email protected]

Forum schedule: Call to Consciousness on Climate Change

The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) invites you to a briefing on the opportunities and barriers facing renewable energy development in the United States with regard to the electric transmission infrastructure. Like any infrastructure, the transmission grid is aging and needs upgrading to meet future load requirements. While the country has very large low and no-carbon energy resources, including a broad variety of renewable energy resources (solar, geothermal, wind, biomass and water power), the existing transmission grid was not designed to tap into all of these resources. The Western Governors’ Association (WGA) recently said, “A critical barrier to continued expansion of renewable energy in the region has been the lack of transmission lines to areas with the greatest potential.”

There is a significant backlog of renewable energy projects waiting to sign the interconnection agreements necessary to bring power to market. According to the Independent, thousands of wind turbines in the United States are sitting idle or failing to meet their full generating capacity because of a shortage of power lines able to transmit their electricity to the rest of the grid. A proposal for $6.4 billion of new power lines linking new wind farms with Texas’ public electricity grid, whose cost will be borne mainly by consumers, is proving politically controversial. The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) recently said, “There are large backlogs of interconnection requests around the country. . . .The result is that many good projects are unreasonably delayed, harming wind development nationally and harming many states’ ability to meet renewable energy goals.” Additional transmission concerns include cost allocation for new transmission, integration of intermittent resources and energy storage technologies, high upfront capital costs, integrated regional planning, the role of energy efficiency, conservation, demand response programs and distributed generation, and whether DOE transmission studies conducted under EPACT 05 are being done in a manner that takes into account the opportunities for renewable energy. Our speakers include:

• Jon Wellinghoff, Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
• Robert Gramlich, Policy Director, American Wind Energy Association (AWEA)
• Raymond Wuslich, Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58) requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to complete a study of the nation’s electric transmission congestion every three years. On May 28, DOE announced that it will work with the Western Governors’ Association (WGA) to identify areas in the West with substantial renewable energy resources and to expedite the development and delivery of that energy to meet regional energy needs. On September 20, 2007, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) introduced the Clean Renewable Energy and Economic Development Act (S. 2076) which would provide additional financing options for building new transmission lines and interconnections to areas rich with renewable energy resources. By designating renewable energy zones, where natural clean resources could generate at least 1,000 megawatts of power, the bill would establish a framework for developing new renewable energy-dedicated transmission. The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is expected to hold a hearing on renewable energy and transmission in the near future.

This briefing is free and open to the public. No RSVP required. Please forward this notice. For more information, contact Fred Beck at [email protected] or 202-662-1892.

Witnesses:

Panel 1:

• Zbigniew Brzezinski, Counselor and Trustee, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)

Panel 2:

• Dr. Leon Fuerth, Research Professor, The Elliot School of International Affairs, George Washington University
• Zeyno Baran, Director, Center for Eurasian Policy, Hudson Institute
• Roman Kupchinsky, Partner, AZEast Group

Witnesses

Panel 1

• Alexander Karsner, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy
• Dr. Joseph Glauber , Chief Economist, U.S. Department of Agriculture
• Dr. Joe Outlaw, Co-Director of the Agricultural and Food Policy Center, Texas A&M University
• Dr. Joachim von Braun, Director General, International Food Policy Research Institute
• Dr. Jason Pyle, Chief Executive Office, Sapphire Energy
• Jack Huttner, Vice President of Biorefinery Business Development, Genencor

Witnesses: Panel 1

• Bob Morton, Senator, State of Washington
• Bob Johnson, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation
• Dr. Howard Gruenspecht, Deputy Administrator, Energy Information Administration
• Melinda Eden, Oregon Council Member, NW Power and Conservation Council
• Glenn English, Chief Executive Officer, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association

Panel 2

• Scott Corwin, Executive Director, Public Power Council
• Richard Roos-Collins, Director of Legal Services, Natural Heritage Institute (Mr. Roos-Collins also serves as Chairman of the Governing Board for the Low Impact Hydropower Institute, and General Counsel for the Hydropower Reform Coalition.)
• Bruce Howard, Director for Environmental Affairs, Avista Utilities
• Tim Culbertson, General Manager, Grant County Public Utility District

From E&E News:

Appropriations bills are usually on the House floor by June, but they are even further behind schedule this year. It has been years since lawmakers passed most appropriations bills individually. Last year, lawmakers lumped all the domestic spending bills together in one omnibus appropriations measure. Two years ago, they funded federal agencies through a continuing resolution. A CR provides funding for existing federal programs, usually at current or reduced levels.

If Congress opts for a CR this year, it could cause some grief for agencies that sought to boost certain funds. For example, the Bush administration made the largest budget request to date for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for 2009, asking for $4.1 billion, a 5 percent increase over last year. NOAA is part of the Commerce, Justice, Science spending package.

“Unfortunately, if we get a CR in ‘09, it is not going to help agencies, especially NOAA,” said Eric Webster, director of NOAA legislative affairs, during a gathering of oceans advocates on Capitol Hill last week.

The White House budget request would give a boost to fisheries programs, environmental satellites and the National Weather Service.

The program for new weather satellites could be particularly problematic under a CR, since the agency has a schedule to ramp up funding from $250 million up to $860 million over the next three years to pay for new satellites.

“We’re going to go through a little bit of a tough time, the budget must grow significantly to pay for satellites,” Webster said.

The $4.1 billion budget request from NOAA would be a significant boost over the $3.9 billion Congress approved last year. But the sum still falls short of the $4.5 billion that environmental and industry groups have sought for the agency.

• Jerome Ensminger, Master Sergeant, U.S. Marine Corps (ret).
• Sheila Holt-Orsted
• Dr. Linda Greer, Director, Health Program, Natural Resources Defense Council
• Lenny Siegel, Executive Director, The Center for Public Environmental Oversight (CPEO)

The Subcommittee will examine the underground injection of carbon dioxide as a method for increasing production from domestic oil and gas fields while decreasing the amount of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere.

Witnesses:

Panel 1

• Timothy Spisak, Chief, Fluid Minerals Division, Bureau of Land Management
• Scott Klara, Director, Strategic Center for Coal, National Energy Technology Laboratory

Panel 2

• Tracy Evans, Senior Vice President of Reservoir Engineering, Denbury Resources, Incorporated
• William Roby, Vice President, Worldwide Engineering and Technical Services, Occidental Oil and Gas Corporation
• Dr. Greg Kunkel, Vice President, Environmental Affairs, Tenaska, Incorporated
• Dr. Ian Duncan, Associate Director, Earth and Environmental Systems, Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin
• Mark Demchuk, Team Lead, Weyburn, EnCana Oil and Gas Partnership

From E&E News:

A major 2007 report by the National Petroleum Council - an advisory body to DOE - also touted the potential of the technique as a way to help slow declines in U.S. oil production and address climate change. The report called for streamlining regulations and expedited permitting of enhanced recovery projects, pipelines and related infrastructure.

The report notes that the oil industry is already using naturally occuring CO2 for enhanced recovery projects without trying to store the CO2 underground permanently. The technology could be modified with “relative ease” to emphasize storage, the report said, adding that industrial sources of CO2 can also be used.

Enhanced oil recovery would likely only provide a small fraction of the capacity needed for CO2 sequestration, “it does offer a strong technology bridge to carbon sequestration technologies and should be encouraged as an important element of a CCS [carbon capture and storage] strategy,” the report noted.

But not everyone sees using CO2 for enhanced oil recovery as a promising way to help fight global warming. Joseph Romm, a climate expert with the liberal Center for American Progress, says it is a bad idea because the gains of storing the carbon are negated through the refining and burning of the recovered oil.

From E&E News:

For the Interior and Environment bill, the subcommittee will likely make up for what it considers to be major shortfalls in the president’s proposed budget for basic programs for the sake of administration pet projects.

The Bush administration’s $10.7 billion fiscal 2009 budget proposal for the Interior Department represents a slight decrease from last year’s budget and shifts funding from some standard functions like construction and range improvement for specific department initiatives such as the National Park Service’s Centennial Challenge.

Subcommittee Chairman Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) has said his priorities are to increase funding for wildlife refuges and national parks. He plans to increase allocation levels for wildlife refuges, even beyond the boost he gave refuges last year.

Congress gave a $39 million boost to refuges last year, in light of a funding crisis that threatened to downscale refuge programs and lay off staff. Dicks’ spending panel had proposed even more, but the number was lowered in negotiations with the Senate.

Wildfire funding could also see a major boost following months of criticism from Dicks and other members of the subcommittee over what they believe is a lopsided budget for addressing wildfires.

Forest Service fire suppression efforts would get a $148 million increase – to just under $1 billion – under the plan, a total based on the 10-year average of fire suppression costs.

The suppression figure is unlikely to change, but Dicks and others on the committee have slammed other aspects of the Forest Service proposal, claiming it puts too much emphasis on suppression and not enough on preventive measures like fuels reduction. The Bush administration budget proposal would provide $297 million for projects to reduce hazardous fuels, down from $310 million in fiscal 2008.

The subcommittee may also consider an effort by Rep. John Peterson (R-Pa.) to open up part of the outer continental shelf to oil and gas drilling.