Two DOE Undersecretaries Snub House S&T Subcommittee Hearing

Controversy marred a Wednesday hearing on the Department of Energy’s FY2009 budget request for research and development when two DOE undersecretaries invited to testify decided at the last minute to skip the event.

Dr. Raymond Orbach, Undersecretary for Science at the DOE and C.H. Albright Jr., Undersecretary of Energy at the DOE snubbed the House Committee on Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on Energy and Environment hearing at the last moment yesterday, suggesting that the subcommittee unfairly changed its protocol to allow outside experts at the budget hearing, a policy not approved by the DOE.

Representative Jerry Costello (D-IL) was disappointed by DOE representatives and argued that the committee, and not the Administration, have the right to decide hearing protocol. By refusing to testify, the DOE is setting a bad precedent, he said, undermining the ability of Congress to provide oversight and effectively determine budget priorities in the appropriations process.

Rep. Judy Biggert (R-SC) supported the DOE decision, claiming the committee lacked uniformity in hearing procedures, pointing out that the NOAA and NASA witnesses testified with no outside experts. Chairman Nick Lampson (D-TX) countered, saying that other Federal agencies like the NSF and NIST testified with outside experts and asked that the DOE witnesses’ written testimony be excluded from the record. After an appeal by Rep Bob Inglis (R-SC) and a fifteen minute recess for deliberation, the representatives decided not to include their written testimony in the record.

The committee members generally offered praise for the budget when the hearing finally turned to appropriation discussion. Members applauded the boost to physical sciences mandated by the COMPETES Act along with appropriations for ITER, an international collaboration on a nuclear fusion reactor that was jeopardized by the lack of funding support in the 2008 omnibus budget. On the other hand, committee members expressed concerns about the funding cuts to many programs including energy efficiency, weatherization research, and solar research; initiatives supported by the Energy Policy Act; and FutureGen, the world’s first coal-fueled plant with near-zero emissions; they were also concerned about the impact of earmarks on research funding.

Steve Isakowitz, the DOE’s Chief Financial Officer, testified that the 2009 budget was largely unchanged from previous years. He highlighted the increases in biomass fuel research, the loan guarantee program that will help facilitate the move of research discoveries from the lab to application in industry, and said changes in the marketplace and private investments justified revisions of FutureGen project. The project, whose costs have ballooned, was canceled to focus on multiple smaller projects that demonstrate carbon capture and sequestration at power plant project sites.

Dr. Arthur Bienenstock, President of the American Physical Society, chose to highlight the detriment of the 2008 budget to physical sciences which caused layoffs at the Fermilab, the International Linear Collider and cut into U.S. leadership in the field. He testified in support of the 2009 budget, saying that it does much to undo the damage inflicted by the 2008 omnibus, but warned members to resist short-term thinking about investments in the energy and physical sciences. He cited the 700 proposals in energy research that were rejected by the DOE because of the 2008 budget and the unforeseen long-term effects it will have on science as young people turn away from pursing scientific careers on account of dwindling resources.

Mark Gaffigan, Acting Director of the Government Accountability Office’s Natural Resources and Environment Team stressed the need for investment in renewable energy technology. In his testimony, Gaffigan argued that not even the oil crisis of the 1970s did much to reduce the United States’ dependence on foreign oil. Thirty years ago, fossil fuels made up 93 percent of the U.S. energy portfolio, and today it makes up 85 percent. Citing a recent GAO report, Gaffigan said the DOE research budget for renewable, fossil, and nuclear energy fell 92 percent from 1978 to 1998, only making a slight recovery in the past decade. He recommended that Congress should continue to increase funding on advanced energy technologies which could help spur innovation, citing estimates that clean energy technology will receive 7 trillion dollars in investments worldwide over the next 50 years.

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) offered a complaint against the “irrational exuberance” for hydrogen technology. He argued that hydrogen technology is not efficient and will be useless as a viable clean energy until further advancements in fuel cell technology take place. He supported the cuts of funding to hydrogen research and warned against the same sort of hype for biofuels.

Tags: DOE, Energy, funding

Comments on this article

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.