Energy Security

"Changes in climate create diverse challenges across the U.S. energy system. Some energy infrastructure assets have already suffered damage or disruption in services from a variety of climate-related impacts, such as higher temperatures, rising sea levels, and more severe weather events. In the absence of concerted action to improve resilience, energy system vulnerabilities pose a threat to America's national security, energy security, economic well-being, and quality of life. Building climate change resilience into our energy infrastructure planning is a challenging and complex undertaking. Planning horizons can span several decades (the typical service life of most energy assets), associated investments can extend into the billions of dollars, and relevant technologies can change rapidly. Some climate change impacts may trigger cascading effects on natural resources, energy demand, and supply chains. Challenges are compounded when addressing climate risks at the regional or local level, where climate change projections are subject to less certainty than at the national scale. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has proactively launched numerous initiatives to support and facilitate energy sector climate preparedness and resilience at national, regional, and local levels. In addition to enhancing resilience to climate change, these actions may also have co-benefits that accommodate non-climate resilience needs (e.g., aging infrastructure, cybersecurity, physical attacks, geomagnetic storms). To assist infrastructure owners and utility planners, DOE has compiled this report on region-specific energy vulnerabilities to climate change and current resilience solutions."

"According to the NRC [National Research Council] and the USGCRP [U.S. Global Change Research Program], changes in the earth's climate--including higher temperatures, changes in precipitation, rising sea levels, and increases in the severity and frequency of severe weather events--are under way and expected to grow more severe over time. These impacts present significant risks to the nation's energy infrastructure. Economic losses arising from weather-related events--including floods, droughts, and storms--have been large and are increasing, according to USGCRP. Adaptation--an adjustment to natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climate change--is a risk-management strategy to help protect vulnerable sectors and communities that might be affected by climate change. GAO [Government Accountability Office] was asked to examine the vulnerability of the nation's energy infrastructure to climate change impacts. This report examines: (1) what is known about potential impacts of climate change on U.S. energy infrastructure; (2) measures that can reduce climate-related risks and adapt energy infrastructure to climate change; and (3) the role of the federal government in adapting energy infrastructure and adaptation steps selected federal entities have taken. GAO reviewed climate change assessments; analyzed relevant studies and agency documents; and interviewed federal agency officials and industry stakeholders, including energy companies at four sites that have implemented adaptive measures."

"Energy policy in the United States has focused on three major goals: assuring a secure supply of energy, keeping energy costs low, and protecting the environment. In pursuit of those goals, government programs have been developed to improve the efficiency with which energy is utilized, to promote the domestic production of conventional energy sources, and to develop new energy sources, particularly renewable sources. Implementing these programs has been controversial because of varying importance given to different aspects of energy policy. For some, dependence on imports of foreign energy, particularly from the Persian Gulf, is the primary concern; for others, the continued use of fossil fuels, whatever their origin, is most important. The contribution of burning fossil fuels to global climate change is particularly controversial. Another dichotomy is between those who see government intervention as a positive force and those who view it as a necessary evil at best, to be restricted as much as possible."

"In order to create a clean energy economy that will increase our Nation's prosperity, promote energy security, protect the interests of taxpayers, and safeguard the health of our environment, the Federal Government must lead by example. It is therefore the policy of the United States that Federal agencies shall increase energy efficiency; measure, report, and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions from direct and indirect activities; conserve and protect water resources through efficiency, reuse, and stormwater management; eliminate waste, recycle, and prevent pollution; leverage agency acquisitions to foster markets for sustainable technologies and environmentally preferable materials, products, and services; design, construct, maintain, and operate high performance sustainable buildings in sustainable locations; strengthen the vitality and livability of the communities in which Federal facilities are located; and inform Federal employees about and involve them in the achievement of these goals. It is further the policy of the United States that to achieve these goals and support their respective missions, agencies shall prioritize actions based on a full accounting of both economic and social benefits and costs and shall drive continuous improvement by annually evaluating performance, extending or expanding projects that have net benefits, and reassessing or discontinuing under-performing projects. Finally, it is also the policy of the United States that agencies' efforts and outcomes in implementing this order shall be transparent and that agencies shall therefore disclose results associated with the actions taken pursuant to this order on publicly available Federal websites."

From the section 'Summary for Policymakers': "The U.S. energy landscape is changing. The United States has become the world's leading producer of oil and natural gas combined. The country is less dependent on foreign oil, as a percentage of national oil consumption, than it has been since 1971. Current cars can go farther on a gallon of gas than ever before. Between 2005 and 2014, U.S. consumption of motor gasoline fell 2.6 percent despite population growth of 7.6 percent and gross domestic product growth of 13.0 percent. Additionally, as a result of changes in economic structure and conditions and policies to promote energy efficiency, U.S. electricity consumption was flat over that 10-year period and total energy use declined by 1.9 percent. […] This first installment of the QER [Quadrennial Energy Review] addresses infrastructures for energy transmission, storage, and distribution (TS&D), broadly defined as infrastructures that link energy supplies, carriers, or by-products to intermediate and end users. This focus was chosen because the dramatic changes in the U.S. energy landscape have significant implications for TS&D infrastructure needs and choices. Well-informed and forward-looking decisions that lead to a more robust and resilient infrastructure can enable substantial new economic, consumer service, climate protection, and system reliability benefits. Good decisions on TS&D infrastructure can also provide flexibility in taking advantage of new opportunities to achieve our national energy objectives."

This is a testimony compilation from the March 4, 2015 hearing "The 21st Century Electricity Challenge: Ensuring a Secure, Reliable and Modern Electricity System," held before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. From the opening statement of Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield: "The availability of advanced, user-friendly communications technologies has disrupted the traditional business model for nearly every consumer sector from home entertainment to taxis. The electricity sector is witnessing a similar shift. New innovative products and technologies in the electricity space hold the potential to empower consumers to make smarter decisions in energy usage, while providing new, more efficient and responsive ways to generate and distribute power. As consumer expectations and technology evolve, new business and regulatory models within the electricity sector also may be necessary to better reflect changing market conditions. A more modern and resilient grid will be better positioned to withstand and minimize any impacts resulting from severe weather, cyber-attacks or any other threats to the grid. However, as the grid becomes increasingly reliant on information technology and digital communications devices, thousands of potential new grid access points are being created. While encouraging technology and innovation in the electricity sector should be a priority, policies must ensure that new grid-related products do no leave the grid more exposed or compromise customer information and privacy." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Tom Siebel, Dean Kamen, Michael Atkinson, Christopher Christiansen, Joel Ivy, Paul Nahi, and Naimish Patel.

This is a testimony compilation from the March 3, 2015 hearing "21st Century Energy Markets: How the Changing Dynamics of World Energy Markets Impact our Economy and Energy Security," held before the House Committee on Energy and Power. From the opening statement of Chairman Ed Whitfield: "When it comes to energy markets, the transformation over the last decade has been dramatic. In fact, several longstanding energy trends have completely reversed themselves. America has gone from declining oil and natural gas production to unprecedented increases that now make us the world's largest energy producer and a potential exporter. As a result, fears about rising import dependence and skyrocketing energy prices have been replaced with surging domestic supplies that are driving down prices - so low in fact that they are now discouraging additional drilling in the U.S. The downstream changes have been every bit as dramatic. Domestic refineries, a number of which were optimized to handle imported crude, now have the option of transitioning to use more North American oil. And for manufacturers, the offshoring trend has stalled, and in fact some of the manufacturing capacity that had been forced overseas by competitive pressures is now returning to the U.S. because of the low energy prices. And North America's new energy supplies have necessitated a major infrastructure build-out in order to deliver this energy to the consumers and businesses that need it. The changes also have significant geopolitical implications. Many of our energy-importing allies were resigned to growing dependence on OPEC [Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries] and other unfriendly exporters like Russia, but now they see America as a potential new source of reliable and affordable energy supplies. As a result, America has the opportunity to fight back against the geopolitical influence of the countries that used to dominate global energy markets, and exert our own influence instead." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Adam Sieminski, John Kingston, Amy Jaffe, Scott Sheffield, Charles Drevna, Graeme Burnett, and Brad Markell.

This testimony is from the May 21, 2014 hearing, "Energy and Security Research" before the Subcommittee on Defense of the Senate Committee on Appropriations. Testimony from the panel discusses military operational energy programs, energy innovation, climate change, and Arctic Armed Forces infrastructure. Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Tom Morehouse, Dennis V. McGinn, Daniel Y. Chiu, and Kenneth D. Lewis, Jr..

From the opening statement of Edward J. Markey: "The national security threats from climate change are not going away. During the first select committee hearing, we discussed the drought-influenced Somali conflict that led to Black Hawk down. A warming world exacerbated a military hotspot. This September, we hosted the Pakistani ambassador to discuss his country's devastating floods. He discussed how his country diverted resources like helicopters away from fighting Al Qaeda to assist in the flood response. An increasingly destabilized climate will invariably lead to more of these destabilizing geopolitical events. The economic security threats stemming from America's lack of an energy plan are not going away. China is pushing ahead with clean energy investment along with other emerging technologies to capture and store carbon from coal. Twice as much money was invested in clean energy in China as was invested by the United States last year. As we heard from the private investment community, this move by China will attract trillions in private capital money that could be invested in jobs here at home in the United States. And China is not alone. Germany, Japan, South Korea, and other countries recognize that dominating the trillion dollar market of tomorrow requires foresight and public investment today." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Edward J. Markey, F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., John Hall, Marsha Blackburn, Wesley K. Clark, Dennis McGinn, Peter Gleick, Richard L. Kauffman, Kenneth Green, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Kenneth Green.

This is the May 9, 2013 hearing, "American Energy Security and Innovation: Grid Reliability Challenges in a Shifting Energy Resource Landscape," before the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Energy and Power. From the opening statement of Ed Whitfield: "This hearing is entitled 'American Energy Security and Innovation: Grid Reliability Challenges in a Shifting Energy Resource Landscape.' Today's discussion builds on earlier hearings that addressed the challenges posed by changes in the nation's electricity generation portfolio. The proportion of electricity we get from coal, natural gas, nuclear, hydroelectric, and non-hydro renewables has remained relatively constant over the last several decades. However, a shift is occurring and what is alarming is how fast the mix has changed during the past few years. And it is this rapid transition that presents a number of pressing concerns that must be addressed in order to ensure a reliable and affordable electricity supply. Most significantly, we are seeing a sharp drop in coal use and its replacement with natural gas. Part of this is due to market forces, namely the increased supply and relatively low price of domestic natural gas. But part is also the result of policy decisions made in Washington, particularly EPA's [Environmental Protection Agency] regulatory attack on coal. Policy decisions are also behind the increase in intermittent renewable resources such as wind and solar power, especially the generous federal tax breaks and subsidies that favor them as well as state-level renewable electricity mandates." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Ed Whitfield, Fred Upton, Gary Sypolt, John Shelk, Paul Cicio, Daniel Weiss, Robert Gramlich, and Jonathan Lesser.

The purpose of this public law is "to move the United States toward greater energy independence and security, to increase the production of clean renewable fuels, to protect consumers, to increase the efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles, to promote research on and deploy greenhouse gas capture and storage options, and to improve the energy performance of the Federal Government, and for other purposes."

From the report's Executive Summary: "The U.S. energy sector is undergoing a profound transformation. The United States is producing more oil and natural gas, is generating more electricity from renewables such as wind and solar, and is consuming less petroleum while holding electricity consumption constant. These developments have had substantial economic and energy security benefits, and they are helping to reduce carbon emissions in the energy sector and thereby tackle the challenge posed by climate change. To build on this progress, to foster economic growth, and to protect the planet for future generations, the President has set out an aggressive All-of-the-Above strategy on energy. Some of the recent trends in the energy sector predate the Administration and stem from technological advances and risk-taking by American entrepreneurs and businesses, as well as from government-supported research and other public policies. [...] The All-of-the-Above energy strategy has three key elements: to support economic growth and job creation, to enhance energy security, and to deploy low-carbon energy technologies and lay the foundation for a clean energy future. This report lays out these three elements of the All-of-the-Above energy strategy, and takes stock of the progress that has been made to date and the work that remains to be done."

"On the one-year anniversary of your Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future, which outlined your goals for American energy, we wanted to present a report on the significant progress we have made. During the last year alone, we established new incentives to increase safe and responsible domestic oil and gas production; proposed the toughest fuel economy standards for cars and trucks in history; provided millions of Americans with efficient and affordable transportation choices; launched new programs to improve energy efficiency in our homes, buildings, public transit, aviation and roadway systems; and took unprecedented steps to make the United States a leader in the clean energy race."

"The Army ES2 [Energy Security and Sustainability] Strategy is designed to guide the Army's use of energy, water, and land resources well into the 21st Century. Resource management is a dynamic process that will require the Army to continuously incorporate new information and make improvements to maintain freedom of action. The goals and supporting actions presented in this strategy are mutually reinforcing and facilitate a holistic, cross-organizational approach towards goal achievement now and in the future. To implement the aggressive goals of this strategy, the Army will identify initiatives and continually assess and refine efforts to assure progress towards these goals. Where tools and management initiatives already exist, they will be applied; where they do not, we will develop them. Implementation of this strategy is vital to the Army's continued relevance, especially in support of the Army Campaign Plan. This ES2 Strategy will make the Army ready and resilient while preserving future choice in our rapidly changing world."

"A smarter, modernized, and expanded grid will be pivotal to the United States' world leadership in a clean energy future. This policy framework focuses on the deployment of information and communications technologies in the electricity sector. As they are developed and deployed, these smart grid technologies and applications will bring new capabilities to utilities and their customers. In tandem with the development and deployment of high-capacity transmission lines, which is a topic beyond the scope of this report, smart grid technologies will play an important role in supporting the increased use of clean energy. A 21st century clean energy economy demands a 21st century grid. Much of the traditional electricity infrastructure has changed little from the original design and form of the electric grid as envisioned by Thomas Edison and George Westinghouse at the end of the 19th century. In a 21st century grid, smart grid technologies will help integrate more variable renewable sources of electricity, including both utility scale generation systems such as large wind turbines and distributed generation systems such as rooftop solar panels, in addition to facilitating the greater use of electric vehicles and energy storage. Moreover, such technologies will help enable utilities to manage stresses on the grid, such as peak demand, and pass savings on to consumers as a result. The evolution towards a 21st century grid is already taking place. With the Recovery Act investment of $4.5 billion for electricity delivery and energy reliability modernization efforts, the promise of a smarter grid is becoming a reality."

From the thesis abstract: "Addiction to oil threatens America's national security. The lack of an alternative to oil created over $1.4 Trillion of drag on the U.S. economy over the last five years. Demand for oil as a fuel source for ground transportation will cause the nation's wealth to continue hemorrhaging for the foreseeable future, weakening America's domestic and international power. Identifying the problem oil addiction causes is simple. Comprehending the magnitude of oil use and the complexity of replacing it is not. Protecting Americans against the threat oil addiction poses requires bold policy and a comprehensive energy strategy. This must involve partnerships between the public and private sector to introduce technologies to the market that will decrease oil use and still meet consumers' transportation requirements. Disparate transportation requirements necessitate a portfolio of innovative vehicle and alternative fuel solutions. Flawed U.S. policy and strategy has created a gap in the energy portfolio and poses a threat to national security. That gap is the absence of comprehensive and aggressive U.S. government investment in the development and commercialization of hydrogen fuel programs."

From the thesis abstract: "The United States has long been dependent on foreign oil and foreign energy sources. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) identified multiple areas in which the U.S. should focus in order to become more energy independent. Throughout the course of the historic 2008 Presidential primaries and Presidential campaign, one of the common themes and promises from each candidate was to set a course for the U.S. to achieve energy independence. The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) continues to look for ways to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels and foreign oil, while at the same time maximizing our energy efficiency and conservation. This paper will look at DOD's energy demand and examine the economic and national security impacts it has on our nation. The paper will also examine renewable energy sources that can be used on DOD installations to create 'off the grid' energy capabilities."

From the thesis abstract: "The United States must balance securing our energy future with protecting our environment from climate change. A holistic approach is required to solve this complex problem. We must reduce demand for petroleum, improve energy efficiency, and develop feasible alternative energy solutions to include emission capture technologies. The United States remains the largest consumer of energy products in the world and is the second leading producer of green house gas (GHG) emissions. Our dependence on imported petroleum is undermining our control of our national security interests. Petroleum comprises 63% of the United States' energy consumption, with the transportation sector accounting for 68% of the oil consumed. Energy flexibility or diversity, rather than energy independence, is the key to improving our national energy security."

The Department of Energy's mission is to advance the national, economic and energy security of the United States: to promote scientific and technological innovation in support of that mission; and to ensure the environmental cleanup of the national nuclear weapons complex.