▶ 0:12:48Good morning. How's everyone doing this morning? I hope well. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will now come to order. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare recess of the committee at any time. Welcome to today's hearing entitled an overview of the Department of Energy's fiscal year 2027 budget request. I'd like to recognize myself for 5 minutes for an opening statement. Thank you for joining us here today.
▶ 0:13:19An overview of the Department of Energy's fiscal year 2027 budget request. It is a pleasure to have the Secretary of energy, Secretary Wright, with us this morning as we examine the department's priorities, ongoing reforms, and vision for America's energy Over the past year, the Department of Energy has undergone a dramatic transformation.
▶ 0:13:44The current administration inherited a department that had shifted away from its traditional focus on basic science toward a greater emphasis on applied The basic research serves as the backbone of scientific and technological breakthroughs. However, because those breakthroughs are often years away from industry frequently struggles to justify funding such work.
▶ 0:14:11Applied research, by contrast, focuses on solving specific challenges and bridging the gap between scientific discovery and practical application. To address this imbalance, DOE announced a sweeping recognition reorganization in November, and led by Secretary Wright, the effort sought to refocus the department on its core mission and improve its ability to deliver for the American people.
▶ 0:14:40As a result, new offices were created, and the Under Secretary of Science and Under Secretary of Energy portfolios were rebalanced. By realigning offices and responsibilities, DOE established more clear priorities, I should say. Current geopolitical tensions have only underscored the importance of this effort.
▶ 0:15:03Combating the Chinese Communist Party's efforts to corner the market in emerging technologies should be a bipartisan and a bicameral mission. We have seen the CCP implement its market takeover playbook in sectors ranging from critical minerals to solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries over and over again. The US cannot afford to rely on a single country for technologies and infrastructure that power our future.
▶ 0:15:33We are in a global competition where energy is the common thread. For decades, electricity demand in the United States remained for relatively flat. But in recent years, it has surged. Maintaining our technological advantage over China requires expanding reliable baseload power generation.
▶ 0:15:54In an effort to surpass us and dominate emerging technologies, the CCP races to add as much power as possible to its grid, including approximately 78 gigawatts of brand new coal-fired power generation just last year alone.
▶ 0:16:13The ongoing conflict in the Middle East is further strained global energy Before the conflict, approximately 1/5 of the world's oil and liquefied natural gas or LNG supply flowed through the Strait of Hormuz. More than 13 million barrels of oil per day are now at risk due to the Iranian regime's harassment of shipping.
▶ 0:16:38Relying on foreign energy sources exposes our nation to macroeconomic volatility, national security risks, and supply chain bottlenecks. I want to applaud Secretary Wright and the Trump administration championing domestic energy production to strengthen our energy security, support economic growth, and ensure that the United States has the power needed to compete and to win in the technologies of
▶ 0:17:09Many factors contribute to rising electricity demands. And while artificial intelligence, AI, and data centers receive much of the the electrification of everyday American life and the return of manufacturing and industrial activity, manufacturing change to the United States, are also increasing the demand for reliable, affordable power.
▶ 0:17:34These challenges were compounded during the Biden administration, which pushed regulations that accelerated the retirement of reliable power plants without ensuring adequate replacement generation was available. As demand grew, these policies placed grid stability at grave risk. Simply put, America must produce more energy, not less.
▶ 0:18:00I look forward to hearing from the Secretary today about the steps that were have been taken over the past year to modernize the department and how this budget request builds up on that progress. So again, I would like to thank the Secretary for being here today and appearing before our committee, and I will yield my time back. And now I'd like to recognize the ranking member of the full committee, uh Ms. Lofgren.
▶ 0:18:23Uh good morning and thank you uh Chairman Babin for holding this hearing today. Uh Secretary Wright, it's been over 16 months since you were sworn in as Secretary of Energy, yet this is the first time you've testified before the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. This is quite unacceptable.
▶ 0:18:40As you and your team know, uh this committee has sole jurisdiction in the House of Representatives over the authorization of all of DOE's non-military science and energy research, development, demonstration, and commercialization uh programs that you have said you care deeply about. In fact, this is the first time I've even speaking with you. I expect uh to engage with you far more directly and frequently going forward.
▶ 0:19:08Moving on to examine your tenure as Secretary to date, the damage that you and the broader administration have already inflicted on our national energy innovation enterprise is frankly staggering. You had a team of seriously unqualified political appointees cancel billions of dollars in DOE awards across the country that had been provided as directed by Congress through extremely rigorous independent merit-based processes.
▶ 0:19:37A federal court has found these terminations concentrated in so-called blue states per the unhinged public boasting of OMB Director Russell Boyd to be blatantly illegal. These politically motivated cuts include well over a billion dollars in support for vital next generation energy projects throughout my home state of California.
▶ 0:20:02Now, I'll note 3 weeks ago and without congressional authorization, President Trump attempted to set up a slush fund to pay out money to people, mostly convicted criminals, fraudsters, cop killers, no shortage of sex offenders, that he claims were victimized by the government. I hope Congress will take actions to prohibit the establishment of this fund, but if not, maybe the 40 million people of California should apply for funding under this program given the administration's illegal actions against our citizens.
▶ 0:20:33There must be accountability for the mass firings and coerced departures of thousands of dedicated experts throughout DOE and our national laboratories, as well as the illegal elimination of a functional office of clean energy demonstrations as spelled out in the law. You can call these efficiencies or business informed decisions all you want, but that doesn't make them smart or good for the American people.
▶ 0:20:57Last year, you yourself recognized that perhaps arbitrarily firing hundreds of professionals at the National Nuclear Security Administration whose job it is to safeguard our nuclear secrets and ensure the reliability of our weapon stockpile, was not the best idea in the world.
▶ 0:21:15We now have reports from practically every relevant sector that these personnel cuts at DOE have severely harmed the ability of congressionally mandated research and security programs across the department to carry out their statutory missions. But I suspect that was the point all along.
▶ 0:21:33I don't know how we can reconcile your devoted expertise in the energy sector with your absurdly inaccurate statements on the role that wind and solar power play in lowering consumer costs and ensuring the reliability of our electric grid. Yeah, we all know that wind doesn't always blow, the sun doesn't always shine. Believe it or not, we're not idiots. But look at those crazy liberal bastions called Iowa and Texas.
▶ 0:21:58Their grid operators will tell you they have been managing variable electricity demand with large amounts of electricity generated by renewables for decades. And the energy costs are far less expensive for their citizens than they would be if wind and solar weren't a major part of their portfolios, even without federal subsidies. So, are Iowa and Texas stupid? I think not. Lastly, I know you went to MIT.
▶ 0:22:24I'm sure you're a very smart person, but you must recognize that you have lost credibility as a scientific expert after commissioning a widely debunked, error-filled climate so-called science report through a slap-dash process that has proven to be illegal in a court of law. So much for restoring gold standard of science. This would be funny if it weren't true.
▶ 0:22:48I would have loved to have focused with you today on our mutual support for dramatically accelerate accelerating the development and commercialization of fusion energy. But as you hopefully understand by now, you have a lot of explaining to do before this committee today and throughout the remainder of your time in this job. And with that, Mr. I yield back.
▶ 0:23:11General lady yields back. Thank you. Today, I want to recognize our witness Secretary Chris Wright. He's the 17th Secretary of the United States Department of Energy. And now I'd like to recognize Secretary Wright for 5 minutes for your testimony. You're recognized, sir.
▶ 0:23:31Thank you, Chairman Babbitt, Ranking Member Lofgren, and members of the committee. It is an honor to appear
▶ 0:23:36Secretary, you want to put on your mic.
▶ 0:23:39Thank you. First mistake already. It is an honor to appear before you today as Secretary of Energy to discuss the President's fiscal year 2027 budget and request for the Department of Energy and the remarkable progress we are making to advance American scientific and technological leadership.
▶ 0:23:59Under President Trump's leadership, we are strengthening America's scientific edge and securing our position across critical frontiers of innovation, ensuring that discovery translates directly into American economic strength, national security, and technological leadership. Throughout our history, from the Manhattan Project to the Apollo missions, America's innovators have always risen to meet the moment. Today, we are doing it again.
▶ 0:24:28President Trump launched the Genesis mission with one clear and urgent goal: to make the United States the undisputed leader in AI and unlock a new era of American scientific discovery. This is not just a program.
▶ 0:24:44It is a nationwide mobilization, bringing together all 17 DOE national laboratories, the full force of American computing power, and the brightest scientific minds to solve the defining challenges of our time. Thanks to funding from the one big beautiful bill, we initiated the American Science Cloud Platform and ModCon projects and foundational investments in data curation and model development.
▶ 0:25:13We [clears throat] have launched 26 national science and technology challenges spanning energy, advanced materials, biotechnology, quantum science, and other critical domains. Each one identified to deliver measurable real-world impact for the American people. Take nuclear energy. The competitive drive of American industry is flowing directly into our pilot program.
▶ 0:25:40President Trump set an ambitious goal, three reactors critical by our nation's 250th birthday. Today, I'm proud to say the first new non-light water reactor in over four decades reached criticality on June 4th. This is a historic moment. And it is what happens when American innovators are empowered to lead.
▶ 0:26:06By marrying science, technology, and private enterprise, we are not just marking a milestone, we are launching the American nuclear renaissance. The momentum doesn't stop there. The response to Genesis mission was historic, the largest number of submissions in DOE history, twice the next largest solicitation. Over 800 institutions applied spanning industry, national labs, and academia.
▶ 0:26:35American science showed up. We are doubling down on quantum. We renewed the five national quantum information science research centers focused on accelerating next-generation technologies and securing American leadership in quantum computing hardware and applications. Two of the 2025 Nobel Prize winners in physics are associated with these quantum centers. We are driving two bold initiatives.
▶ 0:27:04First, an incentive-based competition to build and demonstrate the first scientifically relevant quantum computer by 2028. Orders of magnitude more powerful than anything that exists today. Second, a national quantum supercomputing user facility to house these technologies, partner with industry to build the workforce ready to harness them. America will lead the quantum age.
▶ 0:27:33We're using science to accelerate the future of energy. Yesterday, DOE realized the fusion science and technology roadmap, a national strategy to develop and commercialize fusion energy.
▶ 0:27:48DOE's ARPA-E office has committed 135 million to further fusion technologies over the next 18 months, the largest concentrated commitment to ARPA-E's Fusion's potential is transformative. We are treating it that way. We're investing boldly in technology that will shape America's future.
▶ 0:28:10In ARPA-E has already committed 170 million in investments across administration priority areas, next-generation lithium extraction, deep nuclear waste storage, grid modernization, quantum advances, and AI-accelerated catalyst discovery. We are seeing this We are seeing progress that shrinks experimentation from months to days.
▶ 0:28:39And with that, I will conclude my remarks to stay on time.
▶ 0:28:43Thank you very much, um, Secretary Wright, uh, for your testimony. Now, we will move on to our questions, and the chair would like to recognize himself for 5 minutes. Let's cut to the issue on most American minds today, gas prices. I find it ironic that the other side of the aisle is bemoaning high gas prices when this time 4 years ago the national average for gas was at $5 a gallon. And they were nowhere to be found.
▶ 0:29:13Secretary Wright, can you speak to everything that you and the current administration are doing to bring down not not just gas prices, but energy prices writ large for the American That's a long dialogue, but I I I would love to have it, you know. As you know, gasoline prices in inflation-adjusted terms were about as low as they had ever been before this conflict, under $3 a gallon in in today's nominal dollars.
▶ 0:29:42And we've done it by just bringing common sense back, getting out of the way, and let Americans produce energy, and focus on the human impacts. Humans prefer more reliable energy, affordable energy that not only lowers their cost for their daily lives, but enables businesses to locate in their districts. But we But I am very proud of President Trump's courage.
▶ 0:30:06I've not met anyone that's comfortable with a nuclear-armed Iran, and he said we just can't kick the can down the road and leave the next administration with an Iran that becomes untouchable cuz they're empowered by nuclear weapons. So, he has leaned in to to prevent that from happening. I support it 100%. Yes, it's moved gasoline prices up by a little more than a dollar a gallon from just under $3 to a little over $4.
▶ 0:30:32I'll note that gas prices in the midst of a existential conflict are lower today nationally than And were in the state of California before the crisis even began. The energy prices escalation from this conflict is real on American people. We are working every day to drive that down by releasing strategic petroleum reserves, changing regulations on gas formulations this summer. I could go on with seven other actions.
▶ 0:31:01But that that is temporary. Democratic policies that drive up electricity prices, gasoline prices, diesel prices, they have been permanent and they are a larger force, a larger factor in energy prices today than the Iran conflict. And this conflict will pass and we will prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear weapon and long-term threatening energy supplies and peace and stability in the Middle East.
▶ 0:31:26We will lead to a an era of lower energy prices, more abundant energy resources, and a more secure and prosperous world.
▶ 0:31:34Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Forecast continue to show growing electricity demand in the years ahead and placing increased pressure on the nation's electric grid and generating resources. Under the previous administration, DOE released several studies and analyses that raised concerns about expanding liquefied natural gas exports and the long-term role of natural gas and the nation's energy mix.
▶ 0:31:59Did DOE review these studies to ensure that they were scientifically sound when that happened and informed by input from the national laboratories and As short as you can. Did they do so?
▶ 0:32:14Well, the story is actually a little different. They produced a report and completed it in October of 2023 and it showed what they didn't want to find. It showed that exporting LNG from the United States would actually on average drive down global carbon dioxide emissions and it would have no economic impact on the United States. They buried that report and never released it.
▶ 0:32:37They came out 3 months later saying they were going to study the issue of LNG exports and therefore put a pause and at the very end of their administration, they released a report which was just a subset of the original scientific report that showed a couple cases where on a very much at the margin you could have a slight increase in greenhouse gas emissions with US LNG exports and then they said that it would raise gas prices by 30% if you looked over a 30-year time frame.
▶ 0:33:08So, yeah, that the the abuse of science and and and facts was reprehensible.
▶ 0:33:15Yes, sir. Based on that review, what conclusions did DOE reach regarding the potential impacts of these policies on energy prices, energy security, and the American consumer, particularly in light of the recent global developments? Uh and if these policies had been implemented, what effect do you believe that they would have had on energy costs for American families and businesses?
▶ 0:33:37Oh, energy prices would be significantly higher today, not just in the United States, but globally. Our ability to help and support our allies would be hindered dramatically and the fastest-growing export from the United States of America, liquefied natural gas, would have been dead in its tracks. On inauguration night, the Indian foreign minister said, "Will you be there to supply natural gas to our future?" Fortunately, I could tell him, "Yes, we're reversing those ruinous policies. We will be there."
▶ 0:34:07Thank you. My time has expired, so we're like to recognize the ranking member from California.
▶ 0:34:12Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, last week uh the Government Accountability Office issued a legal decision about your department's spend plan for fiscal year 2025 under a year-long continuing resolution in which Congress clearly directed you to maintain the programmatic funding levels that we enacted for the previous year.
▶ 0:34:34GAO determined that your plan to reallocate hundreds of millions of dollars that Congress appropriated for R&D in wind, solar, hydrogen, buildings, vehicles, and other energy technologies to your own uh favored industries is unambiguously illegal.
▶ 0:34:54A GAO concluded, and this is a quote, "DOE is required to obligate and expend its FY 2025 appropriations in accordance with the reference congressional control point amounts in the FY 2024 explanatory statement." Now, if DOE implemented the FY 2025 stand uh spend plan, the department would be in clear violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act.
▶ 0:35:23Uh GAO clearly states, and again, I quote, "To the extent that DOE obligated or expended FY 2025 funds in excess of appropriated amounts, that is, the FY 2024 levels described above, DOE should report an Anti-Deficiency Act violation." I'm interested whether that occurred.
▶ 0:35:45The GAO says they're unable to make a final determination of whether the department actually violated the law because DOE, quote, "has not provided adequate information or an explanation concerning the source of funds to enable a determination." I'm wondering if you have made your staff aware that obligating funds beyond what Congress prescribed could lead them, not just you, to incur significant civil as well as criminal penalties under title
▶ 0:36:1531, section 1350 of the US Code, which includes fines and potential
▶ 0:36:23Uh we are aware of the GAO report. Uh it's been referred to OMB and they are engaging on that issue and there will be a dialogue back and forth to find out uh what the resolution of that issue will
▶ 0:36:37I just like to note in April this year the Wall Street Journal uh reported that uh the president uh said quote I'll pardon everyone who's come within 200 ft of the Oval Office. I'm wondering whether the president has made such an offer to you or your staff in terms of the violation of the anti deficiency
▶ 0:37:00Uh no, I've I've heard no such offer and of course we take uh our mission and the law and and the rule of Congress quite seriously. Um I despite your implication that we're flipping about it and violating the law, I think that's a mischaracterization.
▶ 0:37:18Uh Secretary White, I'm concerned about decision-making at the DOE uh in awards that undermine the competitive market and the department's own processes to ensure integrity. In late October uh you announced that DOE would build nine new supercomputers with five companies at the cost of $1 billion in taxpayers' money.
▶ 0:37:42There were no open competitions for these awards, no notice to Congress as required by the anti deficiency act, and no indication of where this funding would come from. Um my understanding is that the deal was inked and announced before the public servants at the Office of Science even knew about it. Can you tell us about the process uh for selecting these awards and how you ensure integrity uh in your deal making?
▶ 0:38:10So we put out a solicitation for for developers of advanced computing systems, data centers, and said if you're having trouble permitting them, we have a a of land at the deep the Department of Energy National Labs, and we want to increase our scientific computing capacity as rapidly and as cost-effectively as we can. And what we And And we had overwhelming response.
▶ 0:38:34So, what the what you're referring to are deals where developers will pay entirely the capital cost of building compute at our national labs. We will run and maintain those systems and get delivered to us a meaningful percentage of the total computing power developed.
▶ 0:38:53So, in fact, I think it's quite a creative way to bring on computing power faster and at wildly lower price so we can drive innovations to solve health challenges, to to drive energy challenges um at a much faster pace and dramatically lower cost to the American people. Super proud of the effort and the work we're doing there, and we've been open about it every day.
▶ 0:39:15We announced our solicitation, we announced we got hundreds of feedback from them, we announced as you just said uh the deals we agreed to have computing systems built at no taxpayer cost on our It's They are tremendous deals, very proud of them.
▶ 0:39:31I have more questions, but I'll submit them for the record, Mr. Chairman, as my time is expired.
▶ 0:39:35Yes, ma'am. Uh now I'd like to recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Weber.
▶ 0:39:41Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for coming to our district over the LNG plants just two or three weeks ago. We appreciated that. I want to go back to a lot of Americans are complaining about gas high gas prices, for example. But I think it would be safe to say that once the Iranian regime is done away with, then the whole world will benefit from that. We have to remember that we the the Iranian regime is an apocalyptic government that wants to destroy.
▶ 0:40:08They They say they want nuclear energy, but people don't build nuclear plants down in the mountains, right? They usually build them up where they're plain view and they can be accessed equally. So, in police work they call that a clue. The Iranians are an apocalyptic government that wants to destroy America, wants to destroy Israel, and wants to destroy any of their allies. They cannot be allowed to get nuclear weapons for that very reason and the the president is extremely on track with that.
▶ 0:40:34Once that happens, then when the when the home restraints are opened up and ships are flowing and energy is flowing again, gas prices will come down. And I want to remind our uh committee here that there was eight presidents. There was President Carter who could have done something with Iranians. President Carter, President Reagan, President Bush Sr., President Clinton, President Bush Jr., President Obama, and President Biden.
▶ 0:41:00There was seven or eight presidents that could have done something about this, which we wouldn't be experiencing these high energy prices today. President Trump had the guts to take the bull by the horns, we say in Texas, and to make that happen. Anyway, that's my uh apocalyptic discussion about the Iranians. Secretary Wright, thanks for your testimony. I want to take the opportunity to talk about the ongoing SPR, as you probably remember from our discussion.
▶ 0:41:26Strategic Petroleum Reserve is 60% in my district, so that we have a lot in the They're on the Texas Gulf Coast. What's the current status and timeline of the emergency exchange arrangements made in coordination with the IEA, IEA, International Energy Agency. How many barrels do you think we can expect to be returned? And how soon?
▶ 0:41:46So, thank you for that question, Representative Weber. And and as you just said, those barrels that are exchanged, that's the dramatic difference. The Biden administration uh 4 years ago sold 200 million barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve to drive down gasoline prices before an Uh in the early parts of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, where there was not an interruption of Russian oil exports at all.
▶ 0:42:13We had same flow of oil around the world, but they released a bunch of oil for political purposes and they sold those barrels. Um we we have not as you pointed out, we've not sold a single barrel. We've traded those barrels. We've released a barrel now because we have short-term interruptions in flows and to date on average we're getting back 1.28 barrels for every barrel we release.
▶ 0:42:37So ultimately we will release 172 million barrels and we will get well over 200 million barrels of oil back that will start coming back early next year. So we'll end out with a strategic petroleum reserve more full than we started this conflict while still mitigating the price uh impacts of this conflict and the flow in and mitigating the interruption in the flow of oil.
▶ 0:43:02Well, that's a great exchange rate. You'd almost think that our president was used to being in business, wouldn't you? He's doing a great job. I want to jump over your congressional district building maritime sector uh things here that are on the Gulf Coast. In March President Trump issued a 60-day waiver of the Jones Act. That's been a bit Given the Jones Act's impact on domestic industries, do you have an update on the economic effects these waivers have had?
▶ 0:43:27So it it it that it has been used enormously. I think close to 100 ships already have used that Jones Act's waiver and the main route that is used is that that allows sh- your region, the Gulf Coast, where most of American refined products uh are produced, to deliver those, you know, to New England, to California, and to West Coast that are not covered well by pipelines. California's just stood in the way of energy infrastructure.
▶ 0:43:56Democrats have decided to make energy of all kinds expensive in California and President Trump has thought that's deeply unfair and we need to do everything we can to lower the price of energy for all 340 Americans, whatever state they live in. And so a lot of products from your district have been able to transit more cheaply from the Gulf Coast to California. Where does California get over 60% of its oil from?
▶ 0:44:22From the Persian Gulf, from South America, from across the Pacific Ocean. They get refined gasoline from Asian nations that comes on cargos all the way across the Pacific Ocean. They call that green. I I don't I don't see anything green about that. But now they're getting those products uh from the states of Texas and Louisiana, American sources, cleaner and lower cost.
▶ 0:44:45Well, we appreciate that, but we do we want to make it sure that our great maritime industry, we get to work the Jones Act back in place quickly as we can. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
▶ 0:44:53Thank you.
▶ 0:44:55Gentlemen, uh Now, I'd like to recognize the uh gentlewoman from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici.
▶ 0:45:02Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary, right? Too many Oregonians and Americans are struggling to pay their energy bills, and your department is making it worse. Gas in Oregon is more than $5 a gallon, diesel is nearly six, and last fall you terminated 19 awards in Oregon on political grounds, depriving the state of nearly $405 million to modernize our strained grid, to provide rural workforce training, and upgrade transmission planning.
▶ 0:45:27You've gutted the Pacific Northwest hydrogen hub, which would have brought thousands of jobs to Oregon, Washington, and Montana, and hundreds of other projects remain in limbo. You said just weeks ago that prices are going to be high and maybe even rising. Well, American people are already struggling to afford rising costs, and you should care as much about them as you do about your fossil fuel friends.
▶ 0:45:48You've demonized wind and solar, the same sources that paired with Oregon's baseload hydropower keep Oregonians residential electricity rates about 25% below the national average, and instead support aging coal and gas plants that actually drive up costs and continue to spew carbon pollution. This budget is a gift to fossil fuel corporations at the expense of working families and their health.
▶ 0:46:12And Secretary Wright, Congress created OSED, the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, because the department had a poor track record of managing large-scale demonstration projects. The GAO found that OSED lost 85% of its staff last year, including all independent assessment staff. And I'll note that OSED previously managed the Pacific Northwest hydrogen hub. So, how many people currently work in OSED? And what projects do they oversee?
▶ 0:46:40So, that OSED team is now dispersed in the various technical departments that are relevant to the projects they're overseeing. They're overseeing all of the existing projects and whatever new projects come into that.
▶ 0:46:53So, there What you're saying is that there's no staff at OSED?
▶ 0:46:57No, I said they're overseeing all the projects. There's several dozen people working for OSED and overseeing those
▶ 0:47:03How many? Several dozen?
▶ 0:47:05Okay. And GAO also reported that it is unclear, this is a quote, "It is unclear how DOE plans to meet its statutory requirements to manage projects." And you agreed that the department would develop a plan to do so by March. Well, this is June and we haven't seen that plan yet. So, what specific actions has the department taken to meet the statutory requirements for large-scale projects that Congress has established in law?
▶ 0:47:34We are managing all of those projects. The Department of Energy may have less employees now than it did 18 months ago, but the professionalism and the work output of it is dramatically dramatically increased. Please come over and visit or engage with us in a dialogue about any specific
▶ 0:47:52did you submit any sort of plan for how you would have managed these projects? Have you given that to Congress? Have you released a plan showing how you're going to manage these projects?
▶ 0:48:04I'd I'd have to ask ask my staff staff behind me. We have been incredibly transparent. In anyone who calls me from the house, from the Senate, from anywhere gets a return phone call and a dialogue about whatever they want to talk about.
▶ 0:48:16We will follow up on that. Well, I just want to note that the budget as I read it, it looks like a blueprint to prop up fossil fuel corporations. That pollute and that drive up prices. It seems like it's a retreat from American innovation and clean, cheap, renewable energy. It ignores the unaffordable costs that Americans already face to fill up at the pump, to heat their homes, and to keep the lights on. And I know you were talking a lot about LNG. Oregonians don't want LNG.
▶ 0:48:43They've refused to to permit two large LNG plants for reasons that they don't want to contribute to the fossil fuel economy. We had a lot of concerns about locating those plants on the coast where there's a cascaded subduction zone and risk of tsunami. So, we've rejected LNG in Oregon. In the meantime, China's making massive investments in wind and solar. They're selling more EVs than the rest of the world. So, this budget isn't about American dominance.
▶ 0:49:10It's about ignoring science, seeding leadership to China, and contributing rather than stopping climate change. Americans deserve better. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 0:49:19The gentlewoman yields. I'd like to recognize Mr. Webster from Florida.
▶ 0:49:25Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. Secretary Wright, the president prioritized the Office of Energy Dominance Financing EDF and in his budget request. And you know that office provides access to debt capital for high-impact, large-scale infrastructure projects in the United States.
▶ 0:49:46If the DOE had an option to use a new finance tool, the creation of a federal infrastructure finance corporation that um is totally funded by local by private funding. Not local, not state, not federal monies. Uh to supplement existing funding tools to address infrastructure needs.
▶ 0:50:09Would this new approach, in your opinion, help uh the EDF address the our infrastructure needs?
▶ 0:50:19So, addressing infrastructure needs is central to our office. That's what EDF focuses on right now. With the relatively small credit subsidy we have compared to lending capacity, it means we lend almost entirely to investment grade low-risk borrowers.
▶ 0:50:38and we'd love to work with you to find ways to make that more effective, but we are indeed spending that money to allow companies to build large-scale, long-lasting infrastructure to deliver lower-cost energy uh to Americans across the the state. I'd love at some point in time a chance to respond to our Oregon representative who made so many false assertions that uh hopefully at a future date I'll I'll maybe with another congressman I'll get to engage on that
▶ 0:51:05But I But I appreciate your interest on how can we use and you're right, private capital is the key. Private capital is the key. All of the lending we're doing is paired with lots of private capital and and one of the areas we're lending into, for example, is these new nuclear reactors. Once a few are built, they will be funded entirely with private capital going forward.
▶ 0:51:28We're just getting that ball rolling and again with creditworthy investment grade borrowers so that we don't put the American taxpayer uh at risk as the previous administration rushed out $85 billion in the 76 days after they lost the election and before inauguration. Fortunately, we could prevent most of that money from going out the door because a lot of that money never would have come back into the door.
▶ 0:51:55So, how will permitting and regulatory reform help with the all of above energy
▶ 0:52:04It is a big issue. It is a big issue. The it's just so easy to stop something from being built in the United States and it's hard to build big things in the United States. We didn't get this beautiful fabulous nation without bold people building big things. Our highway systems, our bridges, our cities. Today, it's become just far too hard to do that. I am passionately committed to the issue of permitting reform, have been working with your colleagues on that as well.
▶ 0:52:32If we can ensconce in law some of the common sense that we brought with this administration so that people can build whatever it is they want to build. If they go through a reasonable permitting process in a reasonable time frame and they grant permits, they can build their projects.
▶ 0:52:49Okay, the Department of Energy's national laboratories generate an volumes of engineering, modeling, simulation, scientific data, all of What steps is DOE taking to ensure researchers can collaborate across laboratories, agencies, security domains and contractors without requiring all the data to be centralized into one single repository which creates
▶ 0:53:20cyber security risk.
▶ 0:53:23Great question. Great question. We're calling it the American scientific cloud. So, we're connecting and putting in a in an accessible format all the data sets, you know, from this particle accelerator and from this light source to get gather the world's largest and most exquisite scientific data set because that AI doesn't have its it doesn't make up its things on itself. It just learns from existing data.
▶ 0:53:50So we are creating an an ability to access all these data sets. They're not all in one location, but we're making a secure cloud that allows researchers in our national labs, in our universities, and our partners to access these just incredible data sets that will allow AI to rapidly increase the rate of scientific progress. We will have breathtaking energy and medical breakthroughs um in in the next in the next year or two. I could not be more
▶ 0:54:21Okay. Well, I got one more question, but I'll submit it through the other process. Yield back.
▶ 0:54:28Gentlemen, yields. And now I'd like to represent excuse me, recognize uh Representative Ross from North Carolina. Five minutes.
▶ 0:54:35Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. Thank you, Chairman Babin and Ranking Member Lofgren for convening this very important hearing. And thank you, Secretary Wright, for being so kind to finally appear before this committee today to talk about the President's budget request for the Department of Energy. We saw Secretary Granholm many times before this committee.
▶ 0:54:58I'd like to discuss the so-called independent portfolio review process which allegedly reviewed more than 2,200 projects in your department. One of those projects, uh which is in my home state of North Carolina, appeared on a leaked list of projects slated for This award was helping Duke University study the potential impacts of offshore wind farms and would help us develop
▶ 0:55:29those projects in a safe and effective The status remains unresolved, in case you were wondering. And in October, right after you canceled hundreds of clean energy projects in blue states, you told the press that this project was being conducted by a team of seven or eight people.
▶ 0:55:51Your staff since admitted to this committee and to the committee staff that the portfolio review process was run entirely entirely by political appointees who approached the review with a subjective inconsistent analysis for each project.
▶ 0:56:09This is a stunning departure from the department's long-standing merit-based review process by career experts under both Democratic and Republican administrations, and it is fundamentally unscientific. Despite repeated requests for documentation on these decisions, none none has been provided.
▶ 0:56:33Not to the committee, not to the GAO, and most importantly, not to the American people whose taxpayer funds this taxpayer money funds these projects. The GEO GAO recently reported that they couldn't assess the portfolio review process for canceled projects that had been stewarded by the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations because your department had not provided them with any documentation or analysis to
▶ 0:57:03support those decisions. Elevating political appointees over merit-based review sends a clear warning signal. If you want to do business with the federal government, you need to be friendly with the Trump administration. We've seen this process play out from this administration's shady offshore wind deals to ideological purges of clean energy projects. North Carolina is a purple state.
▶ 0:57:31We have many Republicans in Congress and in our legislature who have actively supported clean energy. It is part of our economy. It is where we have seen job growth even during a recession. This should not be a partisan issue and it shouldn't be The people involved in these decisions should be held accountable. We should know who they are and that American people deserve an explanation.
▶ 0:58:00So, could you tell us the names of the people who did the portfolio review?
▶ 0:58:08Um I I will not I will not list the names of the people right now. The last thing we need is more inaccurate
▶ 0:58:14Would you provide those names to the chair and the ranking member of this committee? They have oversight over your department. You are not fully in charge.
▶ 0:58:26We're very happy to walk through what we did and if you'd had any real interest, pick up the phone and call me. I would walk you through all that.
▶ 0:58:34I WILL GET YOUR I will get your cell phone number shortly. So, you are attacking me. It is And you are just obs- obs- obfuscating the situation for your own political benefit.
▶ 0:58:56Clean energy is an entire sector that has benefited this It has weaned us off of fossil fuel and it has created jobs. This administration has declared
▶ 0:59:11war on clean It is my time. You only speak when I ask you a question. It has declared war on clean energy. It has cost jobs. It is risking our environment. I have not taken any any objection to making sure we do things more efficiently. I want to do that. I've practiced energy law and represented almost every sector. We cannot just say one way of doing it is the right way, and I yield back.
▶ 0:59:41time has expired. I'd like to recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Obernolte.
▶ 0:59:49Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Wright, it's nice to see you again.
▶ 0:59:52Good to see you.
▶ 0:59:52Appreciated your testimony, and particularly appreciated your emphasis on the Genesis mission. Uh you and I have had several conversations about this. Uh as chairman of the House AI Task Force in the last Congress, and as chairman of the House Fusion uh Energy Caucus in this Congress, I am particularly interested in those parts of the Genesis mission. And I find it uh tremendously exciting that uh the DOE is helping to lead that effort.
▶ 1:00:17Uh we last month sent a letter to you uh expressing our support for the Genesis mission, and asking some specific questions uh about what the administration's priorities were. Uh Under Secretary Gill was kind enough to respond to that letter last week on your behalf, but uh we have a couple of questions that remain that I wanted to get your feedback on. Uh first of all, we in that letter called for a dedicated Genesis title in legislation this year that fully funds the Genesis mission.
▶ 1:00:47And we also opined that it would be useful to have a demonstration phase for the Fusion Milestone program. Can you tell me what the DOE stance is on those two issues?
▶ 1:00:58Uh yes, look, fusion energy is is certainly a passion, as science in general, that you that you and I share. we have worked I don't know if you you probably got an advance copy of what we've got, our road map on fusion.
▶ 1:01:13And what we're trying to is leverage both the budget we have from the government end, together with private capital, about how do we what are the basic you know neutron survivability what are the basic issues that are not handled well in the commercial space to focus on at our department research and then how do we as productively as possible with private efforts in it. I'm sorry give me a little more color again on exactly what you want me to
▶ 1:01:43So how about talking about fusion how do you feel about a demonstration phase for the fusion milestone program?
▶ 1:01:51Absolutely. Absolutely. We've got to figure out what the yeah what the right and of course there's different approaches to fusion but I like that
▶ 1:01:59Yeah well I'm very excited that we're moving from investing in the basic science which the DOE has done in fusion for decades now into commercialization. your budget request has a little over three quarters of a billion dollars 755 million for fusion. Can you give us a breakdown of how much of that is focused on commercialization and how much remains focused on the basic science?
▶ 1:02:26I don't I don't have those numbers in front of you but my bet is that more than half of that is probably still on the basic science but again in partnership with with commercial companies of what are the issues that are ultimately going to be those last barriers for them to cross to do it. But but we are working with multiple commercial companies as well and obviously with time that budget will go more and more to partnership funding with commercial
▶ 1:02:54Right well I think it's tremendously exciting that we're seeing such huge private investment in fusion I mean this is the virtuous cycle that happens when we do our jobs and investing in federal research into basic and then when private industry and private capital can see you know a pathway to actually commercializing things and turning a profit is when that investment starts and the fact that we had over a billion dollars of private capital invested in commercialization last year, I think
▶ 1:03:24is is an indication that that this is a process that works. talking about the the the goals of the Genesis mission, one of the stated goals in the executive order was to double the productivity of American research by, uh, by giving people access to these high-quality data sets and leveraging artificial intelligence. Uh, that is an audacious audacious goal. Uh, and I welcome it.
▶ 1:03:54I think it's it's great that we're thinking in those terms, but the the engineer in me can't help but think like how are we going to measure that? Like how do we have a measurement a metric for research productivity? Uh, you know, how are we going to figure out what progress we're making towards that
▶ 1:04:12It is a challenge, but we're going to you know, it's going to be specific. You know, we're trying to develop this drug address this issue. It used to take, uh, 3 years with this method, but we've got a methodology that of course will have to be much more than twice as fast because we're not going to have new tools or new advancements to every aspect of scientific productivity, but I think it's a I think it's a reasonable estimate of what could be achievable and it means we United States spends a trillion dollars a year on basic research.
▶ 1:04:42What we're hoping is if we can get the equivalent of $2 trillion a year of research advancement with spending only $1 trillion, we can drive innovation much faster.
▶ 1:04:53Well, I appreciate your testimony. I see my time's expired. Let's keep this conversation going.
▶ 1:04:56Thank you, Representative. [clears throat] Appreciate your support in these areas.
▶ 1:04:59I'll yield back.
▶ 1:04:59Gentleman's time's expired. I'd like to recognize Representative Fuch Excuse me, Salinas from Oregon.
▶ 1:05:06Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our ranking member. And thank you, Secretary Wright, for being here today. President Trump made a series of promises to bring down costs when he was running for president. I want to review and see if he kept those promises. So, let's start with gas prices. The average cost of gas on the day President Trump took office, not under Biden, but the day he took office was around $3 a gallon. On the campaign trail, he said he would bring the price of gas to under $2 a gallon. What is the price of gasoline today?
▶ 1:05:36It's different in all different districts and in all different gas
▶ 1:05:39The average price of gasoline in the US today is about $4.15.
▶ 1:05:44That's right. It's up over 33% or a dollar a gallon. Um, that is well over the $3 per gallon. It's gone way up, not down. So, what's happened since President Trump took office on electricity? Have electricity rates been cut in half as he promised or have those gone up?
▶ 1:06:01Electricity grids are long-term processes and the Biden administration would not allow the construction of any reliable economic energy sources. So, of course, all the new kit that's coming on the electricity grid, almost all that's coming on today is still what was approved under the Biden administration and yes, it's continued its upward progress electricity, but that will be
▶ 1:06:25reclaiming my time. Um, you work for the Trump administration. I asked a simple question. The answer is that electricity prices have gone up 10% under President Trump and much more than the rate of inflation and certainly more than my constituents, my farmers, my hardworking Oregonians can afford right now. So, let's get this straight. President Trump said he would bring down the price of gas to under $2 a gallon and would cut our energy bills in half.
▶ 1:06:48This has not happened and not only has he broken promises, gas and electricity prices have soared under his leadership and I want to look at why. Did you warn President Trump that going to war with Iran would drive up gas prices for American families?
▶ 1:07:05Uh, the Trump I I I have lots of dialogues with President Trump, which are presidential privilege, but the administration was well aware of the energy price impacts of this war would cause. They knew there would be a cost for it, but are you comfortable with this regime in Iran with nuclear
▶ 1:07:20Okay, I do not want Iran to have a nuclear weapon. So, you knew ahead of time that this would cost American families and President Trump still went to war and has not achieved any kind of of being able to get the his arms around the nuclear um nuclear weapons from Iran.
▶ 1:07:41Many experts have basically said the International Atomic Energy Agency has said, "We have not actually satisfied that." And at the same time, the Strait of Hormuz that President Trump can also not get his arms around is being constricted and oil prices are going up. That is the case right now. The fund- fundamental problem here is that Trump energy policies are completely backwards, and if we want affordable energy, we need to invest in clean energy and not be going into senseless wars.
▶ 1:08:09You have testified before several committees that states with renewable portfolio standards have electricity prices that are 50% higher than the national average. Is this true?
▶ 1:08:17That is true.
▶ 1:08:19All right. It is not true. My state of Oregon alone has strong renewable energy requirements and lower than average electricity prices, and we aren't alone. Many other states have similar requirements to Oregon and have electricity prices below the national average, including Colorado, Minnesota, Nevada, and Washington. And we know
▶ 1:08:38Legacy hydro states, there's a reason for that. It's not because of your wind and solar, and the 50% is true. It's an average. You can always find exceptions. Just trying to stay with accuracy here.
▶ 1:08:49know what happens when we rely on fossil fuels and exclude renewables. Gas prices are up because of Trump's war of choice in Iran, and for the sake of our pocketbooks, our environment, and the jobs and economy of the future, we need to invest in low-cost diverse sources of renewable energy. Instead, you are doing the exact opposite right now and driving up costs. President Trump has broken his promises.
▶ 1:09:13You are promoting backward policies, and my constituents, my farmers, my families, my workers are suffering for I would love to work with you to get us back on track, and I yield back.
▶ 1:09:26The gentle lady yields back. I like to recognize Representative Self from the great state of Texas.
▶ 1:09:31Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, I think we need some historic perspective in this conversation today. Not only are does California cause gas prices to be higher in other states because of their demands. I want to go through a litany of what you inherited.
▶ 1:09:53Uh I want to specifically comment on I am basically answering the merit-based by experts comment that you heard earlier today. The DOE, this is the Biden era. This is the DOE loan programs office conflict of interest, 385 billion dollars in green energy loan authority.
▶ 1:10:16Your own the DOE IG themselves found that they had conflicts of interest in 385 billion dollars of loan. We also had the DOE IG found a billion dollars in potential savings and recoveries in programs that had fraud, waste, and abuse risk. Extreme fraud waste and and abuse risk.
▶ 1:10:46The clean energy demonstrations office had 27 billion dollars that they appropriated, and they hadn't built the oversight necessary for it. That tells you that we're not looking at merit based by experts Then we had the industrial demonstrations program internal controls failure at only 5.8 billion. again, they didn't have the environmental controls ready to control the the program.
▶ 1:11:14And then probably my favorite Well, I know I've got one more. The Microvast grant reversal $200 million to a Chinese based company. Thankfully, we caught that and reversed Then we had the strategic petroleum reserve sale to a you guessed it a Chinese based company. I say it again.
▶ 1:11:38We sold our strategic petroleum base reserve to a Chinese based company. which by the way took our SPR down to its lowest level in in years. And then my favorite 12 days 12 days before Biden left office they tried to rush $23 billion out the door for green new scam grants.
▶ 1:12:09So, with that historic perspective, uh Mr. Secretary, I'll change I'll just let you come In fact, why don't you comment on that because that's what you inherited. That's the environment you
▶ 1:12:22Th- thank you, Congressman Self. When we came in, yeah, $85 billion had been committed from the loan program office from the Biden administration losing the election and the President Trump's inauguration. $85 billion more than had been committed by that office in its 20-year history. So, that was the responsible professional stuff I keep hearing about. It was nothing nothing of the sort.
▶ 1:12:49And let me comment, if I can, quickly on the energy stuff I keep hearing, you know, that what we're we're we're narrowly focused on fossil fuels. Wind, solar, and batteries are are just under 3.5% of American energy. 3.5%. The Biden administration spent all of their money focused on this 3.5%. You know, they moved it from 2 and 3/4% to a little over 3%. They ignored where we get 97% of American energy.
▶ 1:13:19In fact, the expenditures out of the DOE now are still disproportionately as a percent of the energy they produced focused on solar than they are on the other energy sources that actually run our country. Just we're focused on research and progress and not sort of inefficient corporate subsidies. Giving money so people can make something to make energy more expensive. Um so the the the the claims of unprofessional of us narrowly focused on fossil fuels are just false.
▶ 1:13:50Just false. And so, thank you for bringing some facts and some truth into the dialogue.
▶ 1:13:56Uh thank you for that, Mr. Secretary, and I will close with I chair the Europe subcommittee on foreign affairs. It's vitally important we have LNG to ship to Europe so that we can wean them off of Russian energy. It is a strategic need of the US. If you have any comments, uh please so you have 20 seconds.
▶ 1:14:15Fastest growing American export there is is is liquefied natural gas. You know, this is a giant global primary. And for the Democrats who were in theory concerned about climate change, it's the largest source of of carbon dioxide emissions reductions of any It's more than half of the United States entire emissions reduction. It's also the largest global source of emissions
▶ 1:14:37And I could have and I could have mentioned the Biden era uh pause on LNG exports. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 1:14:44Gentleman yields back.
▶ 1:14:45Being from the great state of Texas, was the illegal to export LNG up until President Trump. Now, I'd like to recognize the gentlewoman from North Carolina, Ms. Fudge.
▶ 1:14:55Thank you, Mr. Chairman and ranking member for holding this bipartisan committee hearing today. And thank you also, um Secretary Wright, for your testimony and for appearing before us this morning. It is long overdue. I want to ask you some questions about the Climate Working Group and its July 2025 report entitled A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the US climate.
▶ 1:15:24When did you or your staff first notify EPA that you had formed the Climate Working Group?
▶ 1:15:33Uh, you know, I I raised this idea early on in the administration sort of widely. So, EPA would have would have would have known about it uh and and other potentially interested parties. And then, to me, it's very important to have a real, serious dialogue about climate change based on facts and data. And I try and uh I'm very passionate about having that. I want to have public events and do much more on this. Unfortunately, environmental groups and so many others don't want to actually have that dialogue.
▶ 1:16:02So, we've had crazy lawsuits, legal entanglements to a very professional report that I If you haven't read it, I highly recommend reading it. And I'd love to sit and talk with you about it afterwards.
▶ 1:16:13Thank you for that. And how did you balance EPA's desire to obtain the Climate Working Group report as quickly as possible with your own priorities as Secretary of Energy? And how did you that both EPA and DOE understood that
▶ 1:16:32Uh, well, I mean, my thing is for a scientific paper, I reached out to authors. We told them nothing about what to write. I exercise no editorial control whatsoever about it, but the goal was to get a dialogue going as quickly as possible.
▶ 1:16:49So, in the publication process, you write a draft, you put your thoughts and organize your ideas down, and you release a draft, and then you open it up for for comment, and then you have a iterative process before you issue a final report. A very open, very transparent dialogue around the facts around climate change. And actually, I would say it's been quite successful in that. Enormous amount of comments on that report, enormous amount of But not in the not in as public of a frame as I'd like.
▶ 1:17:18In April 2025, did you personally discuss the deadline for the climate working group's report with EPA Administrator Zeldin, and if so, Administrator Zeldin tell you why he wanted the report to be transmitted to
▶ 1:17:36I don't remember. It's certainly possible. My goal when I called the authors was, "How quick can we do it?" You know, of course, I wanted it as quick as possible. They wanted to make sure they had enough time. We struck a balance of what what could get a credible, serious, uh, relatively comprehensive report out
▶ 1:17:56Let me ask you this. Were you aware that your staff was providing updates to EPA staff about the progress of the climate working group, and did you designate a staff lead for coordinating it with EPA?
▶ 1:18:11Uh, I don't know if coordinating with EPA, but we had a lead, uh, who was coordinating with the authors of the report, and probably with any other interested parties. So, yeah, would would we have been open in communicating about that? I I suspect we would have been, sure.
▶ 1:18:27Let me just say, I want to tell you directly that the Trump administration's approach to policy-making has been a disaster for the people in my district, North Carolina's 4th. It was bad enough when Secretary Lockney and the Commerce Department arbitrarily terminated a 285 bill million dollar contract for the SMART USA Institute in Durham, even though SMART USA had met all of its performance targets, so that the money could be
▶ 1:18:58redirected to some kind of chips slush fund. And I will say to you that my folks say to me that you don't pick up the phone when awards have been canceled. But, it doesn't stop there. You have also failed miserably, Mr. Secretary, to protect my constituents from rising energy costs due to data centers.
▶ 1:19:20And because of this president's illegal war with Iran, gas is now, as we've heard continuously in this hearing, over $4 a gallon in my district. The White House announced its so-called ratepayer protection pledge with a whole lot of fanfare back in March. It sounded good, but guess what?
▶ 1:19:40Duke Energy is proposing to raise utility bills in North Carolina up to 18% over the next 2 years, and a lot of that is because of new data centers. Three of the four counties in my district have passed data center moratoriums, but this is not just a local problem. It's a national problem, and you've dropped the ball when it comes to data centers.
▶ 1:20:03Why should the people of North Carolina's 4th District believe that this administration has a plan to protect them from data center energy costs when your first plan has failed so miserably. And with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
▶ 1:20:17The gentlewoman's time has expired. I'd like to recognize the gentleman, Dr. McCormick from Georgia.
▶ 1:20:25Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate you, and appreciate you, Mr. Secretary, for being here today on this a important topic. It's interesting, I was just listening to my colleague talk about uh global climate change, and I've heard about this uh with data centers, too, and the price of energy and all this.
▶ 1:20:43And what's she echoes China's talking points Uh this is the thing that we know for a fact that China is investing amazing amounts of money into America to make sure that our youth and our politicians believe that we should not be producing data centers. We should not be doing anything other than renewable energy. That we should be falling behind China in this race to basically lead the world into the next generation of intelligence and energy.
▶ 1:21:11Cheap, affordable energy has been the mainstay of an economy in America. What you're doing to build our nuclear facilities, what you're doing to streamline energy production to make it affordable for Americans, the war aside, is going to be the future of America.
▶ 1:21:26What's funny, she's like, "Ah, gosh, 285 285 million dollars for a program that basically buys into what China has said is global climate change, while they produce the coal, while they pollute the the Earth, while they say you need to be part of the Paris Accord so you can basically be hamstrung and pay for us doing the wrong thing." It's so ironic. My constituent on the Sorry, my my colleague on the other side of the aisle is basically buying into the China propaganda.
▶ 1:21:57And that's what drives me crazy right now. Would you agree that everything we can do to produce energy, and by the way, we already know that data centers are going to be offset by those people who produce that energy, but sorry, that consume that energy and that water. We know it's going to offset it. Would you agree that we basically could produce energy cheaply, effectively, without polluting the Earth, and do it as leaders in the economy of the entire world as
▶ 1:22:25Pretty simple. I think we have so many different things outside the box thinking. We're not going to power our data centers with solar panels. If we don't produce data centers, we will fall behind in every major category of information systems. It will hamstring our economy, hamstring Americans. We won't be able to solve all the problems including cancer and all kinds of other things that will afflict Americans into the future. This is a generational time of choosing. One of the things that I came up with when I was in the armed services.
▶ 1:22:55I was a navy guy on navy vessels. I was also a marine on nuclear powered vessels. When we retired those those those ships, one of the things I was like, we have a nuclear module reactor which we've never had an accident with. Which is going to be retired. You have to strip it out of the ship and then scuttle the ship or put it in mothballs. I've always said, why don't we just plug it into the grid? That's a considerable amount of of energy. And by the way, you have a built-in defense structure, security system, one way in, contained double hold.
▶ 1:23:25I think it's a great idea. What are we doing to do something like
▶ 1:23:28Now, it is a great idea and and the performance of those reactors that power our submarines and aircraft carriers, I agree with you is phenomenal. Hyman Rickover, the leader of the development of that effort, true outstanding innovator, great American. And so, yes, they are there, they are real. Obviously, for our grid or whatever, we need much more scale than that.
▶ 1:23:51But yes, they they are viable reactors because of the materials in them, there is concern about they need to stay in that submarine or be in some other secure location. But I think that's a very creative idea. And of course, we could do it.
▶ 1:24:05I I'd love to see that instituted as policy that we can actually take our retired nuclear vessels and plug them into the grid because I think it's a built-in energy source. Takes very little modification, very little money and it's built-in security. I think it's something to look into uh for your department.
▶ 1:24:21Another thing, we obviously know that China's trying to corner the market on alloys uh on whether it be lithium, cobalt, uh other rare earth minerals, but we have alternative uh sources and we have resources right here in America that we've been hamstrung to get to, uh which could put us at a tremendous disadvantage. I was down at Georgia Tech recently looking at their development of battery uh elements that they use and they have other alternative.
▶ 1:24:46What are we doing to make sure that we secure our future and that we're not hamstrung by the fact that China's trying to corner the market in rare uh earth alloys?
▶ 1:24:55So, we you know, we started what in part of our reorg of the DOE, we created the critical minerals and energy innovation department. That's a major department at our thing. So, we are doing we are working with local mines about extracting rare earth elements and other critical minerals in the United States.
▶ 1:25:11We're working with people who are processing them into usable forms, people that are manufacturing them into the final systems, whether they're magnets or you know, munitions that take that need antimony, which we're going to start mining again in the United States, as well. So, all in on that effort. You are so right.
▶ 1:25:29China strategically took over a number of industries that are not giant in size, but they're critical to all the things we make and they ran other people out of business for a strategic reason to control that and have us dependent on them. And we are this Trump administration is all in to break that dependence. A lot of these are technologies that were developed here and then they just took them over there and ruined the economics of them. But, we are reversing that.
▶ 1:25:54I'm glad you feel passionate on that.
▶ 1:25:55Yeah, I'm glad we're getting back to science and not just uh the religion of global climate change, which actually is absolutely been debunked even by scientists who are Democrats. I'm excited about the future as long as you're at the helm. Keep doing great things. Thanks.
▶ 1:26:08Gentleman's time has expired. I'd like to recognize Representative Amo from Rhode Island.
▶ 1:26:14Thank you, Chair Babin, for holding today's hearing and thank you, Secretary Wright uh for testifying. In August 2024, Donald Trump made a promise. He said quote, I will rapidly drive down prices and we will make America affordable again. We're going to get your energy prices down by 50%. Secretary Wright, has Donald Trump fulfilled his promise?
▶ 1:26:35He sets ambitious targets and he is all in on driving in that direction and that that that number of structural changes he's made in how we view energy and what we're doing will absolutely over time deliver that goal.
▶ 1:26:48Okay, so that the answer is is no.
▶ 1:26:51Not yet.
▶ 1:26:51And you know, well, you can waffle you want but the American people know the truth. They can feel it in their wallet every time they fill up at the gas pump, every time their energy bills come in the mail. Look, Rhode Islanders, the people I work for have spent an additional $288 on heating oil and extra $350 at the gas pump since Trump launched his war of choice with Iran.
▶ 1:27:13And I know this might sound strange to someone who has made tens of millions of dollars in oil and gas but my constituents cannot afford of a Trump surcharge to heat their homes and to drive their cars. So Secretary Wright, when Trump made his hollow promise to make America affordable again, was he referring to a specific group of Americans or all Americans?
▶ 1:27:33All Americans.
▶ 1:27:34Well, that's good to hear. That's something that we should agree on and should be a matter of practice because no matter how people voted, your job is to lower costs for everyone. Unfortunately, your actions tell a different story as is the case with Trump and folks like you who answer to him. In October, you canceled more than 300 projects in so-called blue states including $14 million for three grants in Rhode Island. You claim these decisions were not politically motivated.
▶ 1:28:01You said the cancellations were part of an ongoing process and that more cancellations would be announced later in the fall. But the announcement never came. And by your own admission, Uh the review process is done. So now we're left with troubling statistics. Of the 2,200 projects you say you reviewed, 95% of projects in Republican leading states leaning states were retained, while 95% of the projects in Democratic leaning states that you terminated in October remain canceled. That doesn't sound unbiased to me.
▶ 1:28:29Seven awardees sued DOE over their partisan award terminations, and in the litigation you said, quote, "A primary reason for the selection of of which DOE grant termination decisions were included in the October 2025 notice tranche was whether the grantee was located in a blue state." That is a direct quote. I ask unanimous consent to enter this document into the record?
▶ 1:28:52So, ordered.
▶ 1:28:52The court rightfully found that you violated the Constitution. The only meaningful difference between the seven projects that won in court and the hundreds of others you terminated is that those plaintiffs sued. So, Secretary Wright, my question is simple. When will you restore the funding for all the projects that were wrongfully
▶ 1:29:10So, number one, you haven't read the document or misinterpreted the document. We did not involve politics in the decision-making of our review process. Hands down
▶ 1:29:20Explain 95% Secretary.
▶ 1:29:22Did did not You also were creative. You you talked about two different 95%. We did not involve politics in the
▶ 1:29:30What the What about the outcomes Mr.
▶ 1:29:33read was a choice of announcements of some of the awards. The choice of the announcements, not made by our department. No decisions No decisions were made on politics. I keep hearing that charge. It's We're going to say it a million times. not true.
▶ 1:29:51I've got I've got a point of parliamentary procedure.
▶ 1:29:56Can you uh Are we permitting language like that from witnesses?
▶ 1:30:00Uh watch your language there Mr. Secretary, but uh let's keep this civil,
▶ 1:30:04Mr. Mr. here's the problem with your You're willing to huff and puff when it comes to showing up in front of Congress when your audience of one is paying attention. But, the fact of the matter is my constituents and the constituents of people across this Congress are struggling because of your decisions. And yet, you want to use language like that, act out of hand, behave poorly, so you can prove that you have loyalty to the president. That's not how this works. Do your job.
▶ 1:30:35Do your job and work to lower costs for the American people. Instead, you want to pick at at at statistics instead of working for people in every single state, whether it's a blue state or a red state. So, my question for you as my time is is rapidly expiring, when will you restore these grants?
▶ 1:30:53We work every day for We've gone overboard for New England, for California, for blue states.
▶ 1:30:59That's not an answer. I'm reclaiming my time. Mr. Secretary, I'm reclaiming my time. That's not an answer. Do you believe the federal grant decision should be based in any way on how a state's voters cast their ballots in a presidential election?
▶ 1:31:10They shouldn't and they weren't.
▶ 1:31:11Mr. Secretary, this hearing started with Trump's promise to lower energy costs. Instead, you bloviated. We've got to end this
▶ 1:31:19I now yield to the gentlewoman from South Carolina, Ms. Biggs.
▶ 1:31:25Thank you, Chairman Babin, for holding this hearing today with the Department of Energy. And I would like to thank you, Secretary Wright, for coming to Capitol Hill today to testify. I appreciate your efforts and um the steps that you've taken to support the Trump administration to ensure American energy dominance. Contrary to my colleagues on the other side, my constituents in South Carolina, they're very grateful for your efforts and they want to rid the waste, the fraud, and abuse.
▶ 1:31:55And they want real, true, meaningful policy to lead America forward. And I can tell you from our veterans and our military members, they understand exactly what's going on and the importance because if we don't rid the possibility of the nuclear weapons um in Iran, nothing else matters. But um moving on, I feel like it's an exciting time in the energy landscape right now.
▶ 1:32:22American energy independence, it has been restored while scientific advancement has increased the safety, and efficiency of a new generation. Our national labs play a critical role in innovating these technologies that will propel from energy independence into energy These 17 labs, um the research they cover a broad range of scientific endeavors that push the boundaries
▶ 1:32:52of American research. South Carolina is very proud to host one of these labs, the Savannah River National Lab, at the Savannah River site in Aiken, South Their expertise in nuclear waste, the tritium fuel cycle, and national security provides our state a wealth of expertise that make them in make them invaluable.
▶ 1:33:17They are one of the largest nuclear workforces in the United States. I also serve on Homeland Security, so that's an important aspect. Um Secretary Wright, can you tell us the importance of the Savannah River site to the energy security and national security of the United States?
▶ 1:33:39Savannah River National Lab, an ab- absolute gem. The humans there, the research and work that's been done there, the technologies there, and the land and resources for the future of our nuclear uh renaissance, all the ingredients all of the ingredients are in Savannah National Lab. Most of its work, of course, was was in fission energy, which is what we're starting a renaissance right now, but it leads the nation in addition and tritium production, the essential fuel for fusion as well.
▶ 1:34:10So, yeah, Savannah River National Labs um is and and reprocessing of fuels, so many of the things that we did 50 years ago, we stopped doing, but we need to do for our renaissance in fission and fusion, those technologies are pioneered and many of them are still practiced and operating at Savannah River National Lab. So, we would have a slower progress in getting an American nuclear renaissance going if not for Savannah River National Labs.
▶ 1:34:39My only disappointment with Savannah River National Labs is that fantastic director there, Johnny Green, and I are both Denver Nuggets fans, and we thought we were going to the championship this year and and we're disappointed in that, but Johnny and I are aligned in what goes on in that labs and the role it can play not just in the laboratory, but in the commercial evolution and growth again of nuclear power.
▶ 1:35:04Thank you. Can you tell me how Congress can support the Department of Energy to secure American energy dominance for our children and for our grandchildren? one thing that was brought up earlier, too, is permitting reform. We'd love to get a permitting reform bill cuz to build new energy production plants, to build new manufacturing plants, to build big things in America, we've made it very hard these last 20 or 30 years. We made it very hard to build big things in America.
▶ 1:35:32We need to be able to build big things in America today. And continued support for the nuclear renaissance, a lot of Trump administration has driven enormous progress there. My opening statement in June 4th, we had the first non-light water reactor go critical, the first reactor in over 40 years in the United States. We'll probably have two more of those before July 4.
▶ 1:35:56So nuclear is going to move forward and I think take take keep your attitude, your view that more energy is a positive and that's let's technologies with 80 years of safe record. We should believe in those technologies and we should lean in on them. Support for the national lab, support for the Genesis mission that's going to allow us to drive nuclear costs down and build [clears throat] play plants faster and cheaper. Continue doing what you're doing is so helpful and it will matter for all Americans for our energy future.
▶ 1:36:27Thank you so much and I yield back.
▶ 1:36:29Thank you. The gentlewoman yields. I'd like to recognize Representative McBride
▶ 1:36:33Thank you Mr. Chairman and thank you to you and Ranking Member Lofgren for holding this hearing and thank you Mr. Secretary for joining us. In the last few months President Trump has given the world a master class on what energy insecurity looks like. President Trump's war on Iran has shown us that energy security cannot mean dependence on a single fuel source. It cannot mean dependence on one supply chain and it cannot mean dependence on one region of the world. It seems every other country is learning that lesson except for us.
▶ 1:37:02In January at the World Economic Forum President Trump told the world that he hasn't quote been able to find any wind farms in China and said China sells wind turbines to quote the stupid people that buy them but they don't use them Secretary Wright, have you or anyone in your department been able to find any wind turbines in China?
▶ 1:37:24Uh we haven't looked.
▶ 1:37:25You haven't looked. Well, it seems like the the president apparently has explored all 3.6 million square miles of China and apparently declared at Davos that China isn't using any wind turbines. As I mentioned the president said that stupid people buy them. You've articulated increasing the energy supply here in the United States and our energy exports. I assume that includes wind from your perspective. Yes?
▶ 1:37:51I'm for all energy sources that are affordable, reliable, and secure. To me, it's just about math. I don't have a technology I love, and a technology I hate. It's just about the math.
▶ 1:37:59So, does that include wind?
▶ 1:38:01Um its contribution to date so far has has not been so good. But, are there going to be areas or applications where wind makes sense? I suspect there are. Um we just want to get rid of the subsidies, and get rid of the tilted playing field. But, energy energy sources that can compete economically, and can better human lives, I'm for all
▶ 1:38:21So, so I'll take that as you believe that wind [clears throat] should be part of our
▶ 1:38:28Again, it's about that we we've only seen wind where it was subsidized, and it was mandated. So, we forced a lot a lot of wind power to be built in the United States. Um its net impact has been upward on electricity prices cuz it's not dispatchable. It's just when you get a cold front that sits there, the wind doesn't blow. If you're not there at peak demand, you don't matter to our electricity grid.
▶ 1:38:52So, on that note then, do you believe that the United States should not be playing in the global renewable marketplace when it comes to wind then? China is. Other countries seem to be buying. Whether you think or the president thinks those countries are stupid, they're buying from China. Do you think we should be selling wind turbines to other countries, too? Producing them here, and selling them to other countries.
▶ 1:39:15I'm I'm for growing American industry and businesses. But, you you you're talking a lot about wind. Let me just give the numbers real quick. Wind is of global energy. And if you look at the nations that have been big in wind, they lead the world in the most expensive electricity prices, which is all the nations of Northwest Europe. They're the wind [clears throat] powerhouses. They have the most expensive electricity on the planet.
▶ 1:39:36Well, the president himself complained about other countries buying wind from from China. He called them stupid, but he admitted they are buying wind from China. So, do you think we should cede this marketplace to China?
▶ 1:39:47I don't believe we should cede any marketplaces to China.
▶ 1:39:50Okay, well, unfortunately, your actions, the actions of this administration, are undermining our capacity to compete with with China in this marketplace. You've not only cut hundreds of clean energy projects, you've also eliminated the very incentives that helped to spur this industry here in the United States that would allow us to compete with China. So, why are you letting China win in this global economic battle?
▶ 1:40:14So, you said remove the incentives. So, 34 years of subsidy for wind weren't enough to get an infant industry off its feet and going? The 34 years to me, if you can't compete without subsidies after 34 years, your industry doesn't
▶ 1:40:27Let Let's be clear. You're not opposed to subsidies for energy producers. You're just opposed to subsidies for renewable energy producers because the fossil fuel industry gets a ton of money from our our government.
▶ 1:40:40please tell me what subsidies are. I'm not aware of them.
▶ 1:40:42They are getting a ton of investments. They're getting a ton of tax incentives. They're getting a ton of breaks. They are getting a windfall. The executives are getting a windfall while the American people pay the price right now with the increase in in in gas prices. There are a ton of policies. There is a ton of funding. There is a ton of tax incentives that are going to fossil fuel companies. And so, you are fine
▶ 1:41:07You are fine That is That is Tell me what they are. Tell me what they are. There are absolutely You You are the one answering questions here. You know for a fact that there are tax incentives that are going to fossil fuel companies. You know for a fact that that industry has been subsidized in the past and today by this government and by the actions of our government. You just don't want the renewable energy industry to get the same opportunities as the fossil fuel industry. You're playing winners and losers.
▶ 1:41:36And you're picking winners and losers.
▶ 1:41:38Time's expired.
▶ 1:41:39Thank you.
▶ 1:41:39Time's expired. The statement is false. I'm happy to do We should discuss it further together. We could discuss that
▶ 1:41:46I'd like to recognize Dr. Kennedy from Utah.
▶ 1:41:51Chairwoman thank you for the time Secretary Ray. Thank you for being here. We appreciate your willingness to sit for long periods of time and take these questions from us. Utah is an all of the above energy state. We are very invested in oil, gas, coal, renewables powering this fast-growing state of mine and strengthening America's energy security which I know you and President Trump are focused on. We're also heavily invested in bringing nuclear power onto the grid and supporting critical minerals mining and processing.
▶ 1:42:17Continued investments in responsible energy development, innovation, and grid reliability will ensure Utah remains a key contributor to meeting our nation's energy needs while fostering the economic growth we both China currently dominates the global critical minerals supply chain accounting for approximately 60% of global rare earth mining production and 92% of refining and processing capacity which disturbs me and you.
▶ 1:42:41This administration has made clear that expanding domestic critical mineral production is a national priority in order to reduce our dependence on strategic competitors and strengthen America's economic and national security. What steps is the department taking to accelerate domestic mining, processing, and permitting efforts? And what is currently being done to make use of such critical deposits of crucial minerals such as the Silicon Ridge mine in Utah?
▶ 1:43:06Yes. Yes. To get To give one data point at the start, the average time from a mineral discovery to a mine open in the United States right now is 29 years.
▶ 1:43:18Total nonsense.
▶ 1:43:19The Just no wonder we ceded all critical minerals production and processing to China. Am- America is a mining powerhouse or we used to be. We have tremendous resources including credible copper mine and other resources in your own state. These are You cannot have a modern world without these minerals and materials. So, by squelching that in the United States and just pushing that abroad, we thought that we thought that was fine, but it wasn't fine.
▶ 1:43:46And China has used that leverage, as you know as well as I do recently, over us. You know, they can cut off the supply of things we need for our systems. So, we created at the Department of Energy the Critical Minerals and Energy Innovation Office. It's one of our bigger offices.
▶ 1:44:02We are focused on working with existing miners about how to either advance the mining they're doing, take coal tailings and and and get critical minerals out of them, restart, for example, this stibnite gold antimony mine in Idaho, say other ideas in Utah. We're working with companies that want to build processing of rare earth elements here, fabrication of the systems that use these things. It is probably our single biggest focused effort.
▶ 1:44:32Launching a nuclear renaissance and critical minerals. Those are the two biggest commercial efforts at the Department of Energy.
▶ 1:44:38I and my state join you in that, and I'm excited about White Mesa Energy Fuels and their capacity to refine. They're the only operating refinery in the country at this point. So, I also want to thank you for your vision on nuclear life cycle innovation and the campus to support the research, development, and demonstration activities that are related to the nuclear life cycle.
▶ 1:44:57Utah has applied to host this campus in Tooele County, and I believe Utah is ideally suited for this given the research institutions that are nearby as well as the skilled workforce and our willingness on a state and federal level to invest in that. Can you provide us with an update on the process of establishing the nuclear life cycle innovation campus?
▶ 1:45:16Yeah, the the the quick background. The US made a commitment that the federal government would take spent fuel from reactors, and we were supposed to have done this almost 30 years ago. And we did it, I think in the wrong way by imposing it on the state of Nevada, for example, where it's going to be here. You have to accept that. As As you know, we've we've gone a very different direction and said, "Who wants to host this full fuel cycle nuclear life cycle innovation campuses?" 28 states responded.
▶ 1:45:45That just warms my heart. Like this is a win. The nuclear renaissance is real. There's a lot of jobs and technology that are coming from it. Um, it it the it's a process going on. I think we already did leak that Utah's application was particularly
▶ 1:46:00Um, you Utah, the the the people, the government, the business climate, the the land, the public support, pretty tremendous state for the future of the nuclear renaissance. And um, and obviously we're working right now with Utah to see if we can finalize an agreement to work together for one of these nuclear life cycle innovation campuses.
▶ 1:46:22But And I again, so I don't know what's going to happen with that, but I can say with without reservation, nuclear Utah will be a major player in the future of nuclear energy, in the future of geothermal energy, in the future of oil production, the future of gas production, the future of coal production. Nuclear Utah is a energy
▶ 1:46:43Or within all those levels of state and state legislative and governor the bodies are very invest in that. My last question is the the Utah's key to unlocking the nuclear fusion energy efforts with the material beryllium mine at Spor Mountain and site near Delta, commercial fusion companies are projecting that they'll be able to deliver electrons in early 2030. How is DOE supporting that timeline?
▶ 1:47:06Uh, we are all in on fusion. We just released our roadmap to fusion in America. It's a combined effort between our national labs and our research and in a growing number of commercial companies and commercial capital. We are all in to bring fusion electrons to the greatest fast as we can.
▶ 1:47:23Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
▶ 1:47:23Gentlemen, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much.
▶ 1:47:26Uh like to recognize uh gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Subramanyam.
▶ 1:47:32Uh thank you, uh Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for joining us today. I appreciate the time. Uh so, I'm going to bring up a little bit of old news, um but um you tweeted in March that uh the US Navy had successfully escorted an oil tanker through the Strait of Hormuz to ensure oil remains flowing to the global markets. Was that
▶ 1:47:50No. That That That was an error. It was It was not tweeted by me, but it was by my team that misunderstood something I said, but I take responsibility for it. So, it was
▶ 1:47:59you say to the team that that they
▶ 1:48:01I gave a talk and and in Colorado about the state of energy and what was going on in the Strait of Hormuz. I said, "We will restore flows of oil to the Strait of Hormuz using the US Navy if necessary."
▶ 1:48:13Makes us honest mistake. But, the reason I bring that up is because yesterday you just said that the the Strait of Hormuz traffic was rising very meaningfully. Is that true? And what does meaningfully mean to you?
▶ 1:48:24Uh that that is true. Um we are we are uh not talking overly about it, but this is using the US military to increase flows of oil out of the Strait of Hormuz, and uh things are going well.
▶ 1:48:37I'd like to talk a little bit more detail though, at least more than the word meaningfully. Like, what what do you What would you consider meaningful? Like, are we talking about many ships? Are we talking about one ship? Um cuz the I'm a Port Watch seems to indicate that it hasn't actually increased
▶ 1:48:53That That would be incorrect. That data would be incorrect.
▶ 1:48:56Okay, so you have meaningful You have data that shows that there's been a significant increase in the number of ships going through the Strait of Hormuz that would supply the the rest of the world with oil.
▶ 1:49:08That's correct.
▶ 1:49:09And these are not Iranian ships. These are These are ships that would supply us and our allies with oil. And but you can't go into detail about exactly how many or what meaningfully means. Is that correct?
▶ 1:49:21That's correct.
▶ 1:49:21Okay. And then you also said that gas under $3 a gallon may not happen until next year. Do you still stand by that
▶ 1:49:29I shouldn't be in the business of making energy price predictions or predict or predictions of any prices in the future. But the Strait of Hormuz will reopen and energy flows will grow and prices will come down.
▶ 1:49:41I guess but you know, a lot of people want to know when that's going to happen, right? And you said it yourself that under $3 would probably happen next year and not this year. And so I just again want to what what you think. Do you still stand by a statement like that?
▶ 1:49:58Again, not not not going to not going to engage in those predict I will say the policies of this administration on balance are going to drive the price of energy down and the previous administration their policies on balance drove the prices of energy up. So we're at least we we have we have the forces aligned to push energy down. The only offset to that is we decided it was completely unacceptable for this Iranian regime to have a nuclear weapon.
▶ 1:50:25And that that to achieve that mission has caused short-term disruption.
▶ 1:50:29you agree that to get gas under $3 we need to end the Iran war?
▶ 1:50:33We need to get We need to get the flow of oil fully restored through the Strait of Hormuz.
▶ 1:50:39So yes, is that Yes, you would agree that the
▶ 1:50:42They they're what we what you need is fully to have flows uninhibited, not meaningfully inhibited flows of energy from the Strait of Hormuz. That is a necessary condition.
▶ 1:50:55Okay, I'm going to move on to different topics. So you also said that uh data centers lower utility bills, not raise them. Do you still stand by that
▶ 1:51:01Yes, on balance they they are the biggest force we have right now to stop the rise of electricity prices and ultimately to drive them down. Yes.
▶ 1:51:08What if I told you that I represent more data centers than any other member of Congress and data centers have actually doubled our energy costs. So, what do you think of that?
▶ 1:51:16Um I I would uh they've been developed data centers in your area for a long time. So, but it but were data centers the driver of a doubling in the real cost of energy? I would say that that I would say that's what we do.
▶ 1:51:29increase our energy costs. I can show you my utility bill. Anywhere from 25% to 200% increases in our utility bills only because of data centers. And so, we're not taking into consideration other increases in data center and energy cost because of other things.
▶ 1:51:44The The Trump administration has been in power for 16 months. The rate payer protection pledge and all the deals we have done with data centers are going to put downward pressure on electricity prices. Data centers were
▶ 1:51:56payer protection pledge
▶ 1:51:57ago or 20 years ago
▶ 1:51:59voluntary though? So, they don't actually have to protect rate payers unless they want to. Is that correct?
▶ 1:52:04Um they they have pretty it is not in law yet, but I I've not seen any violations of the spirit of that agreement for data center development happening during this
▶ 1:52:14I'll tell you why they went up is because they made us the rate payers pay for the transmission infrastructure for those data centers. And so, that's something that needs to be considered when you're talking about data centers. The last thing is do
▶ 1:52:23I agree with that.
▶ 1:52:24Do you agree that diesel generators are a solution to our electricity shortage?
▶ 1:52:28Uh they are emergency solutions and they saved hundreds of lives in the state of Florida at the end of January running running the backup diesel generators. Absolutely. When when you need them, you you should run them.
▶ 1:52:40They're very noisy and they're very cause a lot of pollution and people hate them in my district, too. So, I'll yield back. Thank you.
▶ 1:52:45Gentleman yields. Like to recognize uh gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Van
▶ 1:52:51Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Secretary Wright, for your testimony. Under the Biden administration, American energy was crippled by green policies, ESG requirements and progressive special interest groups. Coal, natural gas, and hydropowered electricity plants were at risk of closure, tracking us toward a massive energy shortfall. This anti-growth mindset prevented us from harnessing America's abundance, leading to energy scarcity, and rendering us dependent on foreign nations for energy.
▶ 1:53:21Under the Trump administration and Secretary Wright's leadership, we have reversed course. The DOE has taken decisive action to initiate an American nuclear We are reshoring American-made supply chains for critical minerals, aligning energy policy with US national security, and reducing US dependence on foreign supply chains.
▶ 1:53:41Instead of shuffling taxpayer dollars toward unreliable intermittent energy projects, this administration is prioritizing the protection of our energy infrastructure as we face sustained cybersecurity threats from foreign adversaries like China and Iran. The President's FY27 budget request establishes these priorities and secures the golden era of energy dominance by ensuring access to abundant, reliable, and affordable energy.
▶ 1:54:07Secretary Wright, as you know, our critical infrastructure faces mounting threats, including our energy systems. According to a recent North American Electric Reliability Corporation report, power grid asset owners and operators have expressed growing concerns around unmanned aircraft systems attacks. Last year, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission noted that nuclear power plant security forces lack authority to interdict or shoot down drones.
▶ 1:54:31I introduced a bill yesterday to authorize critical infrastructure operators to detect, track, and neutralize unauthorized drones operating over protected sites. The bill gives the Secretary of Homeland Security in consultation with the Secretary of Energy the ability to determine which critical infrastructure facilities need these authorities.
▶ 1:54:50Secretary, what work is DOE's Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response doing to protect energy systems from drone threats, and to what extent would providing commercial energy system operators authorization to neutralize on unauthorized drone threats support DOE's ongoing work in this area.
▶ 1:55:08So, representative, you you you raise a key issue. Dro- Drones are just massively expanding around the world for many applications, but as a threat to our energy infrastructure, absolutely true. Drones fly over our our national labs, they fly over critical energy infrastructure. In fact, I was out in California at the at the returning on of a legacy oil field that California in crazily, foolishly had stopped producing for 12 years. It's in federal waters.
▶ 1:55:36It's producing oil, and the processing facilities right on shore have drones flying overhead. So, is that a real issue? Absolutely, it's a real issue. And we are working across the agency with the National Security with other Department of the Interior about how do we address this thresh- this threat? What's the best way to respond to it? I love your engagement in it and your passionate knowledge about it. So, we definitely want to work with you and across the agencies about, "Hey, the world's changed. How are we going to change our policies?
▶ 1:56:06How how how are we going to stop this growing threat?"
▶ 1:56:09Thank you, sir. I I was glad to see you that the DOE reorganization resulted in the creation of Office of Critical Minerals and Energy Innovation, which you talked about a little bit earlier. Critical minerals and rare earths support key technologies such as EV batteries, semiconductors, and rare earth magnets. Uh Secretary, can you expand on you discussed this a little bit, but the ongoing work the Department's Office of Critical Minerals and Energy Innovation is doing to advance our domestic minerals processing capabilities?
▶ 1:56:36And what are the primary roadblocks to building back our domestic minerals processing capabilities?
▶ 1:56:41God, I mean, the the roadblocks is over the last few decades, we've just exported so much of this expertise and equipment. We just haven't opened many mines in the US in a long time. We have mining technology, the leading mining companies often are American, they mine all over the world. So, we have the know-how, but we need to bring that supply chain, that equipment, and that trained personnel back into the United States to get these mines going.
▶ 1:57:06Um we do have existing mines, obviously, so a lot of our effort is you've got an existing coal mine, you've got a tailings mine there, it's got critical rare earths in it. How can we work with you to bring technology out of our labs to deploy, to harvest those rare earth elements right there in that existing mine. Um we're working with others to re- open existing mines. Critical as well as processing. You you know, when when we we have one rare earth element mine in the United States for a long time out in California.
▶ 1:57:35It mines the ore and it sends it to China and they process it there. So, we are working uh with with that as well to develop the processing of that in the United States. Mine that ore here, process it here, turn it into magnets, fabrication, and manufacturing here. We've got a lot of private sector partners in this as well. There's a lot of private capital flowing into this space, but it's because we are willing to make different decisions.
▶ 1:57:58We're willing to do the things like setting price floors that'll give businesses the economic incentive to reshore these industries to our country.
▶ 1:58:07Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you for your leadership. Mr. Chairman, I yield
▶ 1:58:10Gentleman yields, like to recognize the representative [clears throat] Gillen from New York.
▶ 1:58:15Thank you, Chairman.
▶ 1:58:16Recognize yes, ma'am.
▶ 1:58:17Uh thank you, Secretary, for being here Secretary Wright, Nassau County residents in my district on the South Shore of Long Island are facing record costs, more than 32% above the national average. That includes rising energy costs. Long Islanders pay some of the highest electricity rates in the nation, and power costs have risen 20% since January. We should do everything possible to lower costs, and that includes supporting clean energy tax credits, and embracing renewables.
▶ 1:58:48Secretary, I'd like to work together with an all-of-the-above approach to help reduce energy costs and make life more affordable for people on Long Island. And for this reason, like you, I support the NESE natural gas pipeline project to increase energy supply and drive down costs in my district. Secretary Wright, what kind of cost savings can Nassau County and Long Island families expect to see from this project? And can you confirm on the record when they'll see them?
▶ 1:59:16Well, the the the NESE pipeline last last I heard Representative Gillen, I think it will be ready not in time for this winter, but it will be ready for next winter, the winter of Um number one, as you as you know, and I look, I share your passion for driving down energy prices everywhere. It's so important. I can hear I can hear in your voice. That's fantastic. And I do want to work with you.
▶ 1:59:43Whatever the route to lower the electricity costs is for people in Nassau County. Uh they're going to have better lives. They're going to have more job opportunities, and they're going to do it. The NESE pipeline is a big deal, for sure, because as you know, when it gets cold, natural gas gets diverted just to home heating, because that's the highest use, and it gets starved from the electricity plants, so they have to burn oil, which is much more expensive and much dirtier to burn. Let's Let's have an abundant supply of natural gas, which is cheaper and cleaner. That'll help drive down electricity prices.
▶ 2:00:13And families in in older district communities that were developed a long time ago. New York New York's been a one of our original 13 colonies. If you convert home fuel oil heating in your homes in Nassau County to natural gas heating, and we can supply reliable natural gas to you, that's something like $1,500 a year savings. So, very significant, dramatic cost reductions.
▶ 2:00:38I will tell you, President Trump, myself, and the administration, we want to drive energy costs down everywhere we can, all 50 states. And I have worked probably at least as much of my time in Democrat governed states as Republican governed states. Frankly, I don't care. I'm I'm here for all 340 million Americans, and I share your passion.
▶ 2:00:58Thank you. Well, I do believe bringing back some of those green energy rebates will also help drive down costs as well. Um Secretary, as I mentioned, skyrocketing utility bills in my district, and a recent report in our local paper Newsday detailed how elderly, disabled, and low-income Long Islanders are struggling to pay their utility bills and having their power shut off. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to submit the article from Newsday into the
▶ 2:01:24So ordered.
▶ 2:01:25So I think it's a mistake that the budget request proposes zeroing out funding for the weatherization assistance program, which is a program that helps low-income householders households lower their energy costs and save them 20% a year in New York. Secretary, how does the Department of Energy plan to bring down utility bills and help families save on household energy costs?
▶ 2:01:48Yes, again, lots of mechanism. One of the things we're working on, you mentioned the NESE pipeline. We're also very passionate about bringing the Constitution pipeline, another pipeline that would go into upstate New York and ultimately supply gas to New England. The largest source of electricity in New York by far is natural gas.
▶ 2:02:08And if you can bring more gas and cheaper gas, and as you probably also know that that the local oversight board in New York has rated its its the the the capacity as critical, meaning very close to blackouts, and it which also limits job opportunities and growth in New York. So we want to bring more energy into New York. We want to see nuclear power get going in New York. I'd love to restart the Indian Point nuclear facility that was closed not too far from your district.
▶ 2:02:39That should come back on if we can build the Constitution pipeline and add generating capacity to the state of New York, you can drive down energy prices. The last thing I'll say is there's a movement in New York and elsewhere to drive heating to electrify heating. You can't burn natural gas, you've got to electrify your heating. That electricity's coming from natural gas at a power plant. It's much more expensive to do heating electrically than it is straight combustion, particularly if low-cost natural gas.
▶ 2:03:08So, if you can stand in the way or push back against electrifying heating, that will lower costs as well. Many ways to do it and let's let's continue that
▶ 2:03:17Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 2:03:19Gentle lady yields. I'd like to recognize Mr. Fong from California.
▶ 2:03:25Uh thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here today. I'm I'm encouraged by your work to strengthen America's scientific leadership, energy security, and technological competitiveness. I also want to thank you for for coming to California last week to meet with our local leaders and energy producers. Your visit underscores the importance of ensuring America and California has reliable, affordable, domestically produced energy. And as you know, you started your career in Kern County. The Central Valley is over 70% of California's in-state oil and gas production. We are the energy production capital of California.
▶ 2:03:55Unfortunately, our state is facing a self-inflicted energy crisis. Bureaucracy has hampered hampered new oil and gas permits. California has lost significant refining capacity with additional refineries and critical pipeline infrastructure now at risk of closure. California once produced 40% of America's oil. Today, it produces 2% and imports 60% of its oil from overseas.
▶ 2:04:17During your visit, you clearly saw firsthand how state policies have discouraged domestic energy production while increasing reliance on imported foreign sources of oil, creating serious energy and national security concerns for our state that is home to 30 military installations and serves as our nation's gateway to the Pacific. Two questions. From DOE's perspective, what are the national security risks associated with increased increased reliance on imported oil uh, with California's declining domestic production?
▶ 2:04:45And beyond your direct authorities, what coordination mechanisms are in place or what could be strengthened between uh, Department of Energy, Department of War, Department of Interior, and EPA to identify and accelerate opportunities to increase reliable energy production as well as oil and gas production in California?
▶ 2:05:01Thank you, Representative Fong. As a pro-energy and an energy-knowledgeable um, in a in a state that sort of lost its way in energy policy, you play a valuable role, a very valuable role in the United States' most populous state. Not only is California the most populous state, but we have more military installations in California than anywhere else. Something like 30 military installations, of course, served by great Californians that are there to defend our country.
▶ 2:05:29But yet the energy that comes to those military bases, as you said, over 60% of it is oil imported from overseas. Again, only a tiny percent is from California. California has resisted pipeline interconnection with the rest of the country. It's other supply of oil is oil coming down from Alaska. That's American oil and coming down our own coastline. I feel much better about that. But the oil that's coming from the Middle East, that's coming from Asia, I mean, who's our greatest geopolitical foe these days? Right?
▶ 2:05:59I God bless we never go to war or never have conflict with China, but that's our greatest risk, our greatest threat. And and the supply chain for California and our military bases comes from Asia. That that is clearly risky. And then, of course, think of our forward bases in Hawaii and Guam um, and throughout the South Pacific. We supply those right now directly from Asia, from from foreign suppliers.
▶ 2:06:24California has incredible energy resources underground and incredibly uh, energy-savvy people, capital. It was an energy powerhouse. If we can restore that, not only can we supply secure energy to our 30 bases in California, we can supply Hawaii and Guam and our forward bases in Asia from California. That's the way it should be done. That's the way it should be done. If you believe in American security, American affordability, and and and higher standards of livings for the Americans living in California.
▶ 2:06:55So, as you and Secretary Burgett work through the National Energy Dominance Council to advance policies and projects that increase domestic oil and gas production and expand reliable base load power generation, what steps is the Department of Energy taking today or to ensure the necessary support infrastructure is in place?
▶ 2:07:11Specifically, how is DOE addressing grid capacity, transmission pipelines, refining capacity, and other critical energy infrastructure so that future energy production can be brought online efficiently, reliably, and securely, particularly in states like California, where infrastructure constraints are increasingly limiting energy production, investment, and development?
▶ 2:07:31Yeah, so we we are in dialogue with many businesses in California. Our Energy Dominance Financing Office, a loan program, it is there to provide capital for people that are going to build energy infrastructure, that are going to increase supply and lower prices, and increase security. So, again, that's a all 50 states. We'll do that anywhere and everywhere. Unfortunately, as you know, the business climate to build real infrastructure in California is very is very difficult.
▶ 2:07:57And boy, I I I from what the net result of that thing I I lived in 19 years in the state of California, just spectacular state, great people, great everything, but it has the highest adjusted poverty rate of any state in the nation. To me, that's how you can see the ruinous, expensive energy policies. They just flow downhill, and they export businesses, they raise costs for consumers, but they reduce jobs, particularly for low-to-moderate income workers.
▶ 2:08:25So, getting your energy system right is just essential to your economy, particularly for the lower half of the economic spectrum in your state. Thank you for fighting tirelessly for that. We're partners forever on that.
▶ 2:08:37Thank you. Well, I thank you for your leadership. I look forward to the continued partnership to help California solve our state's energy crisis. Um and with that, I yield back.
▶ 2:08:45Gentlemen, yields like to recognize Mr. Whitesides from California for 5 minutes. Thank you.
▶ 2:08:50Thank you, uh Mr. Chairman. Secretary Wright, let's start with some common ground. I'm over here. Sorry. Hi. Um as electricity demand surges, the fastest way to expand capacity is getting more out of the transmission system that we've already built. Uh reconductoring existing lines with advanced conductors increases capacity, improves reliability, and in wildfire-prone districts like mine, reduces fire risk.
▶ 2:09:15While these projects make long-term economic sense, upfront costs remain a barrier for utilities. Would you support additional tax incentives for advanced conductor technologies to help utilities move these projects forward faster? And what does Congress need to do to clear the remaining obstacles?
▶ 2:09:33Um so, I I get devil's in the details on the policy, so I probably should be cautious on that, but I I love in principle what you're saying. I absolutely believe reconductoring is a great way where you've already got right away, you've already got lines to increase throughput and capacity on that. It is one of the larger things we are lending money from our energy dominant financing office to do reconductoring. So, I agree with you 100%. That's That's That's a good investment in energy infrastructure.
▶ 2:09:59Okay, I want to turn to Great. And I We've got a bill on that. Look forward to working with you on that. Um turning to hydrogen, I'm disappointed by the decision to cancel the Arch Hydrogen Hub, despite independent technical reviews ranking it as the highest-scoring proposal nationwide. Walking away from hydrogen, I believe has severe national security implications. China, Japan, Europe are all investing many tens of billions of dollars because they see hydrogen as a strategic industrial technology.
▶ 2:10:27In my politically diverse district, uh California's 27th, local leaders from both parties enthusiastically support hydrogen as one of the industries and fuel sources of the future. It's not unusual for new energy technologies to take investment at the front end to yield results at scale. For example, you're investing in early stage geothermal and new forms of nuclear, which I both which I support.
▶ 2:10:48What could be done to make hydrogen an important part of our energy future, and does the administration support working with Congress to preserve a financeable pathway for electrolytic hydrogen
▶ 2:10:59So, look, I as a career energy guy, I've I've been in and around the hydrogen space for for some time. And one one correction, so hydrogen isn't an energy source, it's a store of energy. It takes more energy to create hydrogen that is liberated when you when you use hydrogen. So, it's essentially it's a bigger battery.
▶ 2:11:21Okay. You got 30 seconds for your answer, so just like whatever whatever the highlight is is is the key part for the problem of of hydrogen hubs in California is expensive electricity to go into them. The proposal was to use renewable electricity on the grid to create hydrogen.
▶ 2:11:37the cheapest form of energy now, technically. Sunshine daylight sunshine is the cheapest form of energy available to humans, a word that you like using a lot today. And that is an incontrovertible fact, Mr. Secretary.
▶ 2:11:50I I It is not
▶ 2:11:51fact? Is it true?
▶ 2:11:52It It is It is not a fact.
▶ 2:11:54The truth is that the cheapest form on a per unit basis right now is daytime solar. Is that not true?
▶ 2:12:01It depends how you do it.
▶ 2:12:02depend. It is true.
▶ 2:12:03It It is not.
▶ 2:12:05the Secretary of
▶ 2:12:07for it. You can't deploy capital and only have 24% utilization.
▶ 2:12:11You are amazingly misleading the American public. The cheapest form of energy right now is daytime solar on a per unit basis.
▶ 2:12:19It all depends how you measure it.
▶ 2:12:21does not depend on any rational way to measure it. The answer is no.
▶ 2:12:24Mr. Secretary
▶ 2:12:24let's look at the structural reality of the current conflict in Iran. And I'm really disappointed with your answer because that is not true. And I I depend on you for facts and you are a factual
▶ 2:12:33You have to define the question.
▶ 2:12:35time. It is a The war in Iran has achieved two devastating own goals against American interests. Number one, it's weaponized global energy prices against American citizens driving up inflation to 4.2% as of this morning and costing Americans somewhere between 50 and 150 billion dollars. But second, equally important, it's handed China strategic advantage. This crisis has proved China can aggressively reduce its reliance on foreign petroleum cutting imports by 3 to 4 million barrels a day. Here's the point I want to make.
▶ 2:13:05If our strategy traps us in the energy system of the last century while it accelerates our competitors transition to the energy system of the future, then we are making a grand strategic error which the American public and our children will rightly condemn. With that, I yield
▶ 2:13:23Gentleman yields, I'd like to recognize gentleman from Florida, Mr.
▶ 2:13:28Thank you.
▶ 2:13:28Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Secretary, for being here today. And I'm always interested in the politics of this place. Uh Playing politics with energy is never the smart thing to do because as we would call during the Biden years, they actually took 40% of our strategic oil reserves uh in an attempt to lower prices because their policies were failing. And I'll just remind people some of the failed policies. LNG delay, Keystone pipeline destroyed. They They were against fracking until they're trying to win Pennsylvania.
▶ 2:13:58Um oil leases delayed. And the great news is that with your leadership, we're actually expanding our potential energy footprint so that we have more supply because the way you reduce prices is actually increase supply. And the semantics that are being played today are typical Washington, D.C. games, and it's frustrating because our goal is to reduce the cost of energy. And as you know, throughout 2025, gas prices were coming down. That was the good news.
▶ 2:14:24The only reason they're up right now is because we have a global threat where a group of crazy people are willing to kill their own citizens to show you how crazy they are and have no respect whatsoever for freedom of the seas. And so, again, the politics here are vast. But, um let me just say this, as a Floridian, uh we know how important um reliable energy is, especially during hurricanes, let alone tropical storms. So, when severe weather hits, we want to make sure the electricity actually comes on, and it's reliable.
▶ 2:14:55Um so, with that, what is the Department of Energy ensuring doing to ensure that we have dependable 24/7, not just daylight energy generation and and sources like natural gas and nuclear to keep up with demands on the energy grid?
▶ 2:15:10Yes, thank you, Representative Heropoulos, uh for those intro remarks, which I agree with entirely. So, one of the things it started in the Obama administration, the Biden administration, they made it very hard, raising capital and because of rules from their EPA to build reliable dispatchable energy sources. Um not impossible, but very hard. Florida, I will say, is a state that led the way.
▶ 2:15:36Florida and California had similar electricity prices 15 years ago. Today, California's electricity prices are more than twice as high as Florida's electricity prices. And another fact people don't know, Florida produces 20% more electricity than California does. Just common sense. Okay, good. Florida gets 75% of its electricity from natural gas. If you're going to build from scratch today, this that is by far the cheapest way to build dispatchable, affordable electricity.
▶ 2:16:06Florida also has nuclear power, also has solar power, which can play a role. I'm like I worked in solar technology. I'm not anti-solar. I'm just pro-math. And so, Florida in general has done pretty good math and on a relative basis. But of course, it's had recent price rises that we want to stop and reverse.
▶ 2:16:25I I I think your point. I mean, what we have taken is the is not one one it's all-in energy solutions work. And and depending of course what part of the country. Second of course, I represent Kennedy Space Center. Congressman Yoho and I actually worked a lot together on space issues. And that said, what are the most important projects underway currently with DOE and NASA so we can strengthen our position as we have this significant challenge from the Chinese?
▶ 2:16:49Yes, I think that the projects with NASA are exciting. This this effort to, you know, go to the moon, ultimately build a base on the moon, and we are working with NASA there for energy sources for that. You know, fuel for ultimately for reactors that'll be operating in space. And for you know, americium to get, you know, short-term uh my god, I'm blanking on the term. I'll be sort of nuclear batteries before we go to reactors.
▶ 2:17:16But you're right, exploring being a leader in space, being a leader on not just in Earth orbit, but in far space, it's not only great for American science innovation and American spirit, but it'll matter for national defense as well. Na- Na- NASA i- is like our national labs is a national treasure. And getting NASA as a partner now with private business to drive space forward, I think it'll bring huge benefits not just to Florida, but to our
▶ 2:17:44Well, I I couldn't agree with you more, Mr. Secretary, and I appreciate your candor and your willingness to work with us so we we win this new space race. And of course, some of the new technology you speak of right now are going to be things that power us on the moon. And we'll be there in just a few short years. Uh Mr. Chairman, I do have a couple of additions I'm going to add uh for the secretary can answer a little bit later for on the record uh talking about some issues that are important to our community and I'll just also mention that again this is politics there's always interesting. I I I brought up on our last meeting Mr.
▶ 2:18:10Chairman 27 billion dollars to the quote greenhouse gas reduction fund and if you look through who got the money that's a pretty political situation. I hope people can look more closely at that so we can get some of those dollars back to actually transform our grid in a positive way and with that Mr. Chairman I yield back.
▶ 2:18:30Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Gentleman yields like to recognize Mr. Manchin from
▶ 2:18:36Thank you very much Mr. Chairman and thank you Mr. Secretary for being here today. I'm holding today an article from last year when you testified before the House Committee on Appropriations saying the DOE secretary lied to Congress House Dems alleged. I know that you've accused multiple members of this committee of being untruthful so I want to make sure today that we're dealing in facts when we have this conversation.
▶ 2:18:57Do you remember in 2025 making a statement saying you hear all the time in the news that tornadoes are getting worse and hurricanes are worse and floods and droughts and storms they're more frequent and larger in magnitude but that is simply untrue. Did you say that Mr. Secretary?
▶ 2:19:11I I'm sure I did.
▶ 2:19:13Okay and so it's your argument that hurricanes and floods in this country and across the globe are not getting
▶ 2:19:19That's correct. That's what the data
▶ 2:19:22But study after study has shown that human caused ocean warming has intensified all 11 Atlantic hurricanes in 2024. Climate change made Hurricane Milton hit as a category three instead of a category two. I'm from Houston, Texas and I can walk you through where we've had 500 year storm after storm after storm in the past seven years. As the secretary of energy are you telling me today that you don't believe that hurricanes and floods are getting worse in this country?
▶ 2:19:45They they they just simply aren't. I published that data in stuff written by me. It's in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports. Look at the US hurricane data. We have 125 years of data, no increase in hurricanes, no increase in the average intensity of hurricanes. What you're talking about is these attribution studies, which are just non-scientific. The These are things that could happen. Yes, the scientific
▶ 2:20:10a personal invite to you to come down to Houston, Texas, and to tell the families of the folks who are victims of Hurricane Harvey and the other major storms where flooding hit Houston in a way they had never hit it before that these floods and hurricanes are not getting worse. Uh Mr. Secretary, I believe you said before, you testified earlier this year that one of the things I do not want to shrink is the investment in basic science because only governments can do that kind of work. Do you remember saying that?
▶ 2:20:36Houston has flooded catastrophically, repeatedly. Hurricane Harvey in 2017 killed 36 people in Harris County, my county, but more than 100 across the Gulf Coast, and it caused $125 billion in damage. That would make it one of the most expensive storms in American history. The research that helps us understand why storms like Harvey are getting worse and how communities can prepare lives at the DOE in the Office of Biological and Environmental Research, known as BER.
▶ 2:21:04Those that funds the science that models how storm systems intensify and develop actionable predictions of extreme weather, which is how a city like Houston knows where to build its flood barriers and how to harden its infrastructure. Your requested fiscal year 2027 budget cuts that department by 54% from 854 million to 396 million. That's about $450 million gone.
▶ 2:21:30So, you believe and you have stated publicly and testified that you want to fund this research and we should not be cutting this research because only governments can do that, but BER is exactly that kind of long-term investment. So, how does cutting it by more than half align with that commitment?
▶ 2:21:45Our proposed science budget for this year is actually up slightly from what we proposed last year. So, we're not cutting our research on science, but of course you move where dollars get the greatest bang for the buck. With AI, a big thing is of ours, Genesis mission, we're going to get massively improved ability to track further ahead where hurricanes are going, where weather systems are going. We have enormous money and research going in to get better at understanding these disasters.
▶ 2:22:13Mr. Secretary, that may have been the answer to some question, but it was not the answer to my question. I'm asking you specifically, does your proposed budget that you sent to House Appropriations cut BER funding by 54%?
▶ 2:22:26It does. I mentioned that. I said our total investment in science we you you have to prioritize where to allocate
▶ 2:22:33I I'd like to invite you to Houston and explain to people in the Houston area how supercomputer um can ensure that a family in Houston is protected from the next Hurricane Harvey. Let's move on. this is not abstract. The House Appropriations Committee already rejected your BER cut, and they funded it at $800 million. So, that's $404 million more than what your agency requested. So, Congress is telling you that this cut is wrong. You said you want to work with Congress on these budget levels.
▶ 2:23:00Will you commit today to supporting the House Appropriations level for BER?
▶ 2:23:06Fantastic. I want to talk a little bit about grid security. Uh we have a distinct history with that in the state of Texas because Texans understand what grid failure can mean better than almost anyone. In February 2021, Winter Storm Uri killed at least 245 people in Texas and caused an estimated $195 billion in damage. Now, I know that ERCOT is a a separate grid system uh than the rest of the nation, but there is research that is shared that is important.
▶ 2:23:31That grid failure drove those deaths and was a direct result of infrastructure that was not prepared for the stress that it faced. Your own testimony that you provided to us here today says the national grid is experiencing increased strain because of retirements of existing generation, data centers, and advanced manufacturing. Those are your words, Secretary. And yet, your fiscal year 2027 budget cuts the Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response, CESER, by $30 million.
▶ 2:24:00The House Appropriations Committee again rejected your cut and said CESER should stay flat at $190
▶ 2:24:07The gentleman's time has expired.
▶ 2:24:09Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield back.
▶ 2:24:13Uh I'd like to recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Harrigan.
▶ 2:24:16Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh Mr. Secretary, thanks for being here today. Thanks for your testimony, and thank you for the tireless work that you have been doing to create more electrons across our country at a more affordable rate for American families. Uh I truly appreciate it. My constituents appreciate it. And along those lines of effort, I have a couple quick questions for you.
▶ 2:24:36The first is, how important are investment tax credits and qualified process expenditures, ITCs and QPEs, how important are those for the development of new nuclear power?
▶ 2:24:48I I think they will be very important for the development of new nuclear power. I've been I've been a lifelong fan of nuclear, came out of the gates in the 1950s strong. We built a lot of nuclear in the United States at good economics, you know, and then we just didn't build any reactors for several decades. The supply chain is atrophied. Um we've made it slow and expensive to build nuclear in the United States. Fundamentally, it should not be slow and expensive, but that's where we stand today.
▶ 2:25:18So, as a guy who's a capitalist and doesn't like energy subsidies, um I do think that these helpful things in the legislation to get the nuclear ball rolling again, I think they're important and I think they'll be very helpful, and then you'll get a nuclear industry that'll run on itself. I don't believe it'll live on subsidies for 34 years like wind power has done. We need We need 5 to 10 years to get that nuclear the rolling.
▶ 2:25:40Absolutely. I totally agree you. And uh know, when utilities construct these new nuclear power plants of whatever variation or generation they might be, how important is it to actually minimize the rate impacts on consumers while still bringing the reliable new energy
▶ 2:25:59It's very important. And this is one of the And I haven't talked too much about it, but data centers, the the investments in them are are helpful for a lot of reasons. Scientific advancement and all that. They're also going to help us with nuclear, for example. The data center builders will sign long-term off-take agreements at prices that make the nuclear economic, even these early reactors that are built. They carry that They carry disproportionately that cost burden of that reactor.
▶ 2:26:27That extra power that'll come out of that reactor, which will last for 100 years, will benefit consumers and ratepayers everywhere. But it can be structured to do just what you
▶ 2:26:37I very much appreciate both of those answers and I I agree. I think both facets of that as it relates to nuclear power are absolutely critical. I mean, we have to do what we need to do on the financing side in order to bring affordable nuclear new nuclear power to ratepayers. It's absolutely mission critical for our country, the future of our market economy, the future of our nation's defense. And I'm I'm very glad to hear you say that today.
▶ 2:27:01And just taking a moment of kind of personal explanation, this is exactly why I introduced the nuclear rate stabilization act. And it's bipartisan that provides new nuclear projects with the same ITC normalization opt-out currently available to other types of projects like battery storage projects. And it allows for the QPE credits to actually be sold and transferred to third parties.
▶ 2:27:29I think if you take all of these things together, we can lower the costs for consumers. And I think we can also encourage investment and accelerate the deployment of this next generation of nuclear reactors. We have received some very strong support from utilities on this bill, certainly developers and other energy stakeholders who recognize the need for new nuclear in the next market economy.
▶ 2:27:56But my final question to you is this, would enactment of the nuclear rate stabilization act with the characteristics that we've described today, would that help you in the Department of Energy achieve its goal of ushering in a new era of American nuclear dominance?
▶ 2:28:13Look, from my understanding, yes. Yes. Yes. We we we we we need help to launch this renaissance. In the long term, we will not need help, but to get the ball moving and the specific provisions you mentioned, very helpful in launching nuclear renaissance.
▶ 2:28:30Well, myself and my office very much look forward to working with you on making this piece of legislation a reality. Thank you for all of your leadership efforts as it comes to new nuclear [clears throat] across our great nation. And with that, uh Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank
▶ 2:28:47Gentleman yields and I'd like to recognize the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Foster.
▶ 2:28:51Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman and to our witness. Um let's I just like to try to clear a few things up. Um earlier you expressed the enthusiasm for the concept of repurposing naval reactors past their end of life for the purpose of commercial power generation. Uh this sort of startles me because these things are not designed to be refueled. They're, you know, some reactors are in the range of 50 MW, which is not a huge amount of power. It seems like as a businessman, this is something you should be able to immediately dismiss.
▶ 2:29:21So, my question is, could you provide a rough estimate, for the record, provide a rough estimate of the dollars per kilowatt-hour levelized cost of electricity for reusing reactors? You don't have to respond. Just yes, would you commit to doing that? You don't have to put a
▶ 2:29:35I've I've never looked at the issue before, but sure.
▶ 2:29:38a lot of work into it, but I rapidly you would rapidly you could rapidly conclude this is not a sensible concept. Um let's see. You've also eliminated a large fraction of your scientific advisory committees. So, how do you how do you um decide, for example, how to split your investment between say inertial confinement fusion and magnetic confinement fusion without that um expertise? People who've spent their careers doing this, uh getting together in committees and actually looking at the hard issues for each of these technologies.
▶ 2:30:07Um how do you sensibly spend the taxpayers' money after having eliminated that expertise from your advisory councils?
▶ 2:30:15Um I'm I'm I'm not I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to there. We we engage with the fusion expertise in our administration right now.
▶ 2:30:23HEAPAP, you know, all of the advisory councils are some of them that were eliminated, you know, as a part of a general um rejection of expertise among across the administration, frankly. So, how do you operate and make these crucial decisions? Because, you know, if you put a bunch of money into things that are not going to work, either commercially or even scientifically, you're wasting taxpayer money. And and what source of expertise do you go different than the advisory committees that used to exist?
▶ 2:30:50We get input on fusion energy from the fusion scientists across our labs and academia and the commercial world within the Department of Energy. I don't I don't think we've had any reduction of input. In fact, our engagement and interest in fusion, I would say we probably have more voices, more active dialogue about fusion in the DOE than
▶ 2:31:09So, you have you have no process that I perceive. I just seems like it's all, you know, you got you announce a bunch of projects without um the sort of uh independent set of eyes on this. Uh related to that, you know, it's my understanding that one of the core tenants of gold standard science is scientific peer review. Is that Am I correct in that?
▶ 2:31:28Yep, okay. So, do you intend to submit your uh climate working group report to independent peer review?
▶ 2:31:35Absolutely. We we did. You know, we published the report. We had We had peer
▶ 2:31:39Which journal which journal group?
▶ 2:31:41Yeah, which journal did you submit it
▶ 2:31:42We we we got we got a suit from an environmental group that didn't want to have this dialogue. So, that process
▶ 2:31:49No no, which I you said yes. What what
▶ 2:31:52not submitted to a journal yet. That's what I was just explaining.
▶ 2:31:55intend to
▶ 2:31:55We we we put it out publicly. It's gotten 10,000
▶ 2:31:58not That is not independent peer review. You know, you would submit an article for peer review, it gets rejected cuz it's nonsense, or it it gets accepted because it's scientifically valid. So, I really I think it's significant that you do not intend to submit that to a
▶ 2:32:12I did not say I we did not intend. We have not done it yet. It's five outstanding scientists. We'd love to submit that and will eventually submit that. It's out there.
▶ 2:32:20Yeah, meanwhile meanwhile you're using it for, you know, it's my you you were you were in your conversations with Representative Foshee. Yeah, you said you didn't remember uh that you had conversations on this report with uh Zeldin in in April 2025. Now, are you telling us that you did not coordinate the preparation and release of this with the EPA?
▶ 2:32:41I answered the question. I said we coordinated and we're open about what we were doing across the government including EPA. I said I didn't remember some specific date he might have mentioned in April, some specific conversation. Very open about what we did on that coordinating, communicating across it. Proud of what we've done and if And if you've got disagreements with with the paper, I'd love to hear them.
▶ 2:33:01Oh yeah, large number of them, but but you know, the first line of defense is don't even discuss it, don't use it for policy until it is passed independent scientific peer review. And it's distressing that you've decided to bypass that for the purposes of at least attempting to use it for policy. Um okay, let's see the another thing that, you know, when the Genesis program was rolled out, uh it was you know, labs and others were assured that there would not be a tax on the rest of the program for Genesis. And I've heard repeatedly that there is in fact a Genesis tax.
▶ 2:33:32You look at the budget, you look at the allocations and the sub allocations all the way down that the Genesis tax is real. Do you still maintain that there isn't you're not taxing the rest of the research program for Genesis?
▶ 2:33:43No, we're not taxing the rest This is a tool that we're using across the fields, across the research program. It's those monies are still in those departments. They're just called out as as being used for AI. Those are from the depart from these departments themselves.
▶ 2:33:59But that that that sort of dodges the question. You know, if you have a research program that has an independent merit and then all of a sudden you give it a new unfunded mandate called the Genesis thing, that is not a that is a tax on that program. That you you know, I I hear all the time from my Republican colleagues that about unfunded mandates and it seems this is a
▶ 2:34:19Gentleman, your time has expired.
▶ 2:34:20All right, thank you. Yield back.
▶ 2:34:22Gentleman, Yields. I'd like to recognize Mr. Hurd from Colorado.
▶ 2:34:27Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Secretary Wright. As you know, I am privileged to represent about half of the geographic footprint of our home state. And I want to thank you for your commitment to grid reliability, resource adequacy in the Rocky Mountain region, particularly with respect to the base load coal-fired power plants in Colorado and beyond with respect to the 202 C orders. And I appreciate that that commitment to keeping energy costs low and keeping that grid reliable in the Rocky Mountain region.
▶ 2:34:57Big picture question for you. We're seeing forecasts for electricity demands increases that would have been implausible years ago. What do you see, Mr. Secretary, as the the greatest risk going forward? Is it under-building generation? Is it under-building transmission? Is it underestimating demand or something
▶ 2:35:17I mean it's it's the whole system that matters. One of the one of the first things, the greatest risk when we came in, we did a study of the electricity grid and projected out what we thought was demand, just one guess of what demand from reshoring manufacturing and AI was, and extrapolated ahead the policies of the Biden administration. They left behind resource plans around the country of where it was going, and it it was showing a hundred times increase in blackout risk by 2030.
▶ 2:35:47In other words, train wreck. First thing we did was stop the closure of coal plants. We stopped 17 gigawatts of coal plants from being closed last year. Um if we had not done that, hundreds of Americans would have died in that last week of January, that winter storm fern that came down, where we were on the ragged edge of the grid with those assets on and running full things. So, you know, we want to build a mountain, the first thing to do is stop digging a hole.
▶ 2:36:15Now we need to build new generation, but that takes years. So we've also got activities, you know, to restart nuclear power plants. The first one will be restarted this summer in Michigan. We'll have another one in Pennsylvania next year and another one in in Iowa. We're uprating coal plants, uprating natural gas plants, uprating nuclear plants, stopping the closure of hydro plants that the Democrats also wanted to tear down dams. So basically restoring common sense and allowing capital to flow in and build new assets.
▶ 2:36:45So it is a race. Things in the electricity grid move slower than I like, but um we need to build quickly if we're going to reshore manufacturing and lead in artificial intelligence, and I think both of those are critical.
▶ 2:36:57I I agree, Mr. Secretary. Can you talk about uh geothermal as well? And and we're not going to talk about heat pumps, we're talking about utility scale geothermal. I think this is one of the areas that we see agreement on both sides of the aisle. It's reliable, it's dispatchable. Um it has a relatively small uh surface footprint for What do you see as the biggest and we just passed the great uh geothermal energy permitting reform bill uh out of the house earlier uh this month. Mr.
▶ 2:37:24Secretary, what do you see as the greatest uh constraint from uh advancing utility scale geothermal? Is it the drilling economics? Is it permitting? Is it transmission? Is it financing? What is it that's keeping geothermal from really moving forward as as a resource that will keep our grid stable in the decades to come?
▶ 2:37:43Historically, permitting has been hard. Permitting is always wildly harder on federal lands than on private lands or state lands and geothermal resources are dominated out west, so there's so much of them are on federal lands. That held back geothermal in the past. It In my endeavors in geothermal right before taking this job, that was also an issue. But, if you've got state land or or or or reasonable permitting forms, um you know, there's 500 MW plant under construction right now in western Utah.
▶ 2:38:13Could that happen in western Colorado? Absolutely. If you can get permitting from the state of Colorado um to build these plants on you know, somewhere in the western slope out in Colorado. But, you know, is the technology viable? Can it happen? Absolutely.
▶ 2:38:27Great. So, permitting. That's that's uh I appreciate you flagging that bottleneck. One of the arguments for advanced geothermal is that we can leverage technology that was developed in the oil and gas industry. What specific indicators would tell you tell us as Congress that geothermal is experiencing the same learning curve improvements uh that transformed the shale revolution?
▶ 2:38:49Yeah, I mean, just the you know, we look at the total cost per megawatt of installed capacity. And and and Representative Hurd, you said right off dispatchable. That's just a wild difference. There is no buyer, not a single buyer for electricity some of the time. I don't know when, but most of the time, no. That just has no value. But if you can what we to to for a grid, the most important thing is you have to meet demand at peak demand time.
▶ 2:39:16And as we saw in this tropical storm I mean winter storm Fern that came in, solar was nowhere to be seen cuz it was in the winter, and wind output plunged cuz a high pressure system sat there. So it doesn't matter to me how much electricity wind and solar produce, I care how much they produce at peak demand time whenever it's arrived. If they could deliver a lot there, they would be valuable members of the grid, but to date the record is not good. Geothermal can not only be there rain or shine, but it can increase its output when you're at peak demand time.
▶ 2:39:46You can draw you can withdraw basically water that's in this large underground reservoir. You can increase output when you need it. That's very valuable
▶ 2:39:55Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and thank you also for your commitment to bettering human lives. I think that's what we're talking about here. With that, Mr. Chairman, my time is expired.
▶ 2:40:01Gentleman yields.
▶ 2:40:02Thank you, sir.
▶ 2:40:04I'd like to recognize the uh gentle lady from California, Ms. Roybal-Allard.
▶ 2:40:07Thank you, Mr. Chair, for recognizing me. Um Secretary Wright, I'm an engineer by training and have spent much of my career encouraging young people uh to pursue careers in STEM. As co-chair of the STEM Education Caucus, I lead my colleagues in ensuring that America continues to lead in STEM education and research opportunities.
▶ 2:40:30However, those opportunities that are available to students depend on whether America continues investing in scientific research and innovation. And that is why I'm deeply concerned by the Trump administration's DOE budget proposal. Uh the President's fiscal year 2017 budget proposal proposes more than $1 billion in cuts to the Department of Energy's Office of Science.
▶ 2:40:54The cuts reflected in this budget pave the way for this administration's continued war on Uh the Office of science supports cutting-edge research, national laboratories, university partnerships, and the development of the next generation of American scientists and engineers. Uh, specifically, I'm extremely concerned about the proposed elimination of minority serving institutions being eligible for the Reaching a New Energies Science Workforce Initiative.
▶ 2:41:24This initiative is a lifeline to securing the nation's scientific pipelines and the STEM workforce. These cuts will eliminate one of the very programs designed to help build the next generation of STEM and energy researchers.
▶ 2:41:39Uh, my district in Los Angeles and the San Fernando Valley is home to thousands of students pursuing STEM careers, as well as two minority serving Our country can only continue to lead in science if there are resources available to students of all backgrounds, bringing diverse perspectives to our world-class research institutions.
▶ 2:42:00Secretary Wright, if America needs more AI researchers, more engineers, more energy innovators, and more scientific talent, why is the administration eliminating the Office of um, MSI Reaching a New Energies Science Workforce Initiative, which was one of the programs designed to expand the STEM
▶ 2:42:21So, I share your passion for STEM and for the next generation of STEM leaders. So, first a clarification, we didn't propose a cut in the budget for science. It's just broken into two components. One component is Genesis, which is the AI tools used for science. The other component is science. If you add those two together, we actually proposed a small increase in the scientific budget. And I agree with you entirely, that is a central role of the federal government. We need to support basic science. We need to support the next generation as well.
▶ 2:42:51I've spent my life on bringing educational opportunities to disadvantaged kids.
▶ 2:42:57this program, the MSI program that I mentioned, is not being cut because that's not what it says in the budget.
▶ 2:43:02That we we are also passionate about taking gender and race and all that out of science. It's a meritocracy. It's for everyone everywhere and always, but we don't believe in judging people by gender or immutable genetics.
▶ 2:43:17You don't you know you don't you're not you don't have to be a minority to attend an MSI. And you're saying that these programs are being cut from these institutions, large state schools. Uh and it's any student that attends that school that will not be able to participate in this program.
▶ 2:43:32We will support all sorts of institutions, just not based on gender or race.
▶ 2:43:38Uh well, I think you know that you know you're you're definitely uh eliminating pathways to recruit and train students from underrepresented communities into these fields. We need um possible to enter STEM. We have a shortage of STEM uh researchers and and we need everyone that is an American um to be trained. Otherwise, they're going to go to other countries. Uh and that's that's what's happening right now.
▶ 2:44:08Lots of our scientific talent have nowhere to go here because of the cuts that are being made by the federal government, they're being recruited by other countries. We're training people and they're moving to other countries instead. But has the DOE conducted any analysis of how harmful cutting these programs will be to our workforce?
▶ 2:44:29Again, our funding of science is is proposed but budget of science is roughly flat. We're not we're not
▶ 2:44:37STEM workforce programs. Not you know what the programs that are being cut that are designed to encourage the next generation of STEM scientists.
▶ 2:44:48There may be changes in specific programs or the criterion. We're just just merit-based, but our our desire to encourage young kids from all backgrounds to go into science and pursue careers in there is is unchanged and is unwavering.
▶ 2:45:04I believe that these choices will have rippling consequences for the energy sector, for science in our country. We've been a leader all of these years and in the next few years we're going to see the consequences of cutting these programs.
▶ 2:45:17General woman's time is expired.
▶ 2:45:19Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 2:45:20I'd like to recognize gentle lady from New York, Ms. Tenney.
▶ 2:45:24Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Secretary Wright. This has been a interesting to hear this whole meeting. I just want to ask I I you've done a fantastic job and and thank you for your work. Uh I come from probably the uh the the most ill-guided state when it comes to energy, New York State, and uh can I just I know you've answered all these questions. I just want to ask you, so can we can you answer uh this cuz I think you've said it, but I want to give you a chance to clarify. You support an all-of-the-above smart energy policy.
▶ 2:45:55You just don't support extended subsidies on certain industries.
▶ 2:45:59Yes, and and and I support just doing the math. Doing the math.
▶ 2:46:05Well, we I really appreciate you saying that because this is what we need in New York is common sense and uh I I could cite all kinds of craziness. I've seen listen to some some sadly some Democrats on the other side of the aisle are going to go down the wrong path when they see how catastrophic it can be when your energy grid has been warned by the New York Independent System Operator, uh NYSERDA, our own government agencies, Democratic-run agencies in the state of New York have warned New York over and over and over again about the catastrophic dangerous state
▶ 2:46:35of our energy grid because of policies put in place in 2019, particularly the Community Leadership or Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, which actually over time bans fossil fuels and all of the above strategy. Yet New York State today, New York City specifically is over 90% dependent on fossil fuels, specifically natural gas. While the rest of us in Upstate New York are only about 30% and the entire energy grid in New York State is only about 47% fossil fuels.
▶ 2:47:04And yet here we are in Upstate New York, you know, making up for New York City because they oppose pipelines, they oppose transmission lines, they use the utility companies to actually collect what they call delivery fees against and and so when they talk I hear everyone complaining about the cost of energy. If you look at the change in our energy bills, it's delivery costs that have been imposed by the state of New York, our governor, on the utility companies to collect those to use for Democrat purposes, not necessarily to bring down the cost of energy.
▶ 2:47:34So I think you cited earlier the change in energy prices and I I don't know if you could quote that again. How much energy prices have gone up in the state of New York specifically or generally, if you know that.
▶ 2:47:45Yeah, New York is one of the faster rising states together with California, Maryland and Delaware, I think have had the fastest rise. And and one of the common things is they all produce less electricity today than they did five years ago.
▶ 2:48:00Right. And yet the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act mandated that we use less fossil fuels today than we were to than we were to use in 2019. Yet our demand and use of fossil fuels is even greater and New York City uses even more than we do in Upstate New York. Um I wanted to say, what could you tell New York State if you were to be able to talk to our governor and our legislators? What could we do? What would you tell New York State to do to support our energy grid in an in an in an all of the above strategy with less subsidies and and lower pricing?
▶ 2:48:30Yeah, I mean, just dive into the math and get out of the the grandstanding. You know, New York saying it's fighting climate change. New York is completely irrelevant for global greenhouse gas emissions, nothing it could do will move that needle. That needle will only be moved by new energy technologies competing economically and going into global scale. Nuclear is going to play a role in that. Fusion can play a role in that. Geothermal can play a role in that.
▶ 2:48:56But New York policies, all they do is make energy more expensive for New Yorkers today. These efforts to push electrification of heating, that is a guaranteed way to increase heating costs at least double and maybe be three or four times increase the cost of heating for citizens of New York. Why would you do that? You sit right next to Pennsylvania, the mother of all shale gases, incredibly cheap energy.
▶ 2:49:21Wait, we are the mother of all shale gases, but we're the only state in the country that can't touch our abundant rich natural resources.
▶ 2:49:27Exactly, right underneath the state of New York. Wealth, jobs, biggest source of decarbonization. If New York really wanted to champion greenhouse gas emissions reductions, natural gas by far the biggest needle mover there. You have a resource right under your feet. So New York could do so many They shouldn't have closed Indian Point regulator. They shouldn't make up these stupid goals or objectives. I was glad to see the governor of New York back up on the next one. But these are just arbitrary things made up by activists.
▶ 2:49:55They're not made up by people that do math and care about the citizens of New York. Thank you for fighting for what you're doing. The New Yorkers need you.
▶ 2:50:02No, thank you and I appreciate you talking about the nuclear and also the some helping us get this nuclear back on track. All of the nuclear power plants that are operational in the entire state of New York are in my district near 24 and we are doing everything we can to get them upgraded. We creep appreciate the work you've done. Uh the work uh that uh obviously Lee Zeldin who we wish he was our governor, but boy am I glad he is where he is. He's doing a phenomenal job as our EPA administrator. Thank you so much for it. You have run out of time, but uh appreciate your work. Thanks so much. I yield back.
▶ 2:50:29Thank you, Representative.
▶ 2:50:30Gentlewoman uh yields and I'd like to recognize the uh gentlewoman from California, Ms. Mr.
▶ 2:50:36Thank you, Chair Babin. Um Secretary Wright, you had mentioned that last Friday you traveled to Santa Barbara to defend your order to overturn the will of the people of California and restart the Sable Offshore Corporation Santa Ynez uh unit offshore oil project in invoking the Defense Production Act on national security grounds. Uh this project has not been operated for nearly a decade because of serious safety shortcomings and concerns.
▶ 2:51:04So, I have a question for you that I would really like a yes or no answer to so that we get the out you know the straight truth from you. Are you familiar with the fact that the facility you visited in Santa Barbara was shut down after the very same pipeline caused a catastrophic uh oil spill in 2015, the uh Refugio State Beach oil spill, which leaked 143,000 gallons of crude oil and devastated coastal communities, marine ecosystems, and local economies.
▶ 2:51:34Yes, you must You must maintain and monitor pipelines.
▶ 2:51:37Okay, got it. So, this raises a serious question. And by the way, they've had as you know, Santa Barbara's had hundreds of oil wells over the years and are still dealing with the impacts of all of those pipelines on the beaches of Santa Barbara. This is something that happens all the time and this particular spill was absolutely catastrophic for that area which relies on tourism, fisheries, and everything else.
▶ 2:51:59So, this raises a serious question whether your action's actually about national security or about advancing a project that has a an documented history of catastrophic failure and is still facing unresolved safety concerns and which is hugely unpopular to the people who are impacted by that project in Santa Barbara.
▶ 2:52:19So, just to be clear, Secretary, you decided to restart a pipeline shut down after a major spill which California regulators have determined is not ready to restart because President Trump started a war of choice that's already cost Americans $750 per household. How much more will it cost Californians if you spill another 143,000 gallons or more of oil on our beaches?
▶ 2:52:43And how much more are you willing to cost the American public in pursuit of this war of choice, a war which appears to have no end in sight, and which is directly putting pressure on these kinds of actions and pushing the administration to make the people of Santa Barbara pay for Trump's choice to start this war and drive up worldwide oil prices.
▶ 2:53:05yes, it's unfortunate that California prevented the repair of that pipeline until we used authorities to get the pipeline repaired so it could safely
▶ 2:53:15there've been hundreds of pipelines off the coast of California, and we have had hundreds of oil spills and spills that continue. So, it's not that there's one bad actor, but that the people of California know that this offline drilling has led to oil spills the same way as it has in Texas. There you have yet to create any situation where these pipelines are immune to spills and other accidents. It happens constantly. We keep hearing promises that it's not going to happen again, and yet it happens over and over.
▶ 2:53:44So, clearly this is risky, and you're willing to risk the beaches and livelihood of Californians and a precious precious ecosystem to to make sure that we have some balance with Trump's war of choice, and that's what this is really about. So,
▶ 2:54:00Can I Can I make a quick point on that?
▶ 2:54:01not whether or not we need energy security. We know we need energy security. The question is whether restarting a pipeline with a record of catastrophic failure actually advances that energy security and will actually save Californians money. What would save us money is not to have started this war of choice, and not to have it spiral out of control when the president promised initially that it will be over in a matter of weeks, and here we are months later with an escalation as of this week, and absolutely no end in sight.
▶ 2:54:27Bringing Sable particularly back to market is not going to meaningfully offset global supply disruptions of this war. It's a drop in the bucket, as you know, but it what it does do is it risks California and other taxpayer money having to be spent on another costly cleanup. Not to mention the irrep- irreplaceable dam- the beaches and the damage that these spills do. This isn't like you just pick this up off the road.
▶ 2:54:54When these spills happen, they lead to catastrophic um costs for years. I grew up in South Florida. When I was a kid, we had pristine beaches, and now there's oil all over those beaches to the point where people think it's natural that you have to wash your feet off uh to wash the gasoline and the tar off your feet. When I was a kid, there was actually fish off the coast of Fort Lauderdale. I remember swimming with fish. There's no almost no fish anymore. That's because of these kinds of policies.
▶ 2:55:20Instead of being forward-looking, they're they're about making communities bear the risks, and in this case, it's completely because of what Donald Trump has done. With that, I thank you, and I yield back.
▶ 2:55:31The gentlewoman yields. I'd like to recognize gentleman from California, Mr.
▶ 2:55:35Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't know about Fort Lauderdale, but I do know that if you went to the University of California, Santa Barbara in the '60s and '50s, you or if for that matter, if you're a Native American hundreds of years ago, you had to figure out how to clean your feet for the natural outflow that comes out of the oil just offshore in Santa
▶ 2:55:577,000 gallons a day is the rate of the seep from that's right offshore Santa Barbara. That the vast majority of all the oil that's ever been on the Santa Barbara or that Southern California coastline, the vast vast majority is all underground seepage that's been going on for thousands of years.
▶ 2:56:13Thank you, Mr. Secretary. You're exactly right, and uh uh I have 21 Indian tribes in my district, and they all traded in their with their their ancestors all traded for that outflow to to use the tar and uh and the oil. Um but look, they're entitled to their opinions, just not their facts. And I want to get into a couple of it.
▶ 2:56:32Earlier on, they you were berated by another Californian because somehow you you said that the total cost of solar wasn't uh just the quote ticket cost of what how much it produces per hour when the sun's shining.
▶ 2:56:47If you had to look at the 24-hour cost at shifting, storing, and putting it back, if you had to look at the production cost, the lost of lost of land, and the uh the price of dealing with the uh solar collectors in uh at the end of a life, does it compare favorably to all other forms of energy?
▶ 2:57:09Several times more expensive. So, not 20% more expensive, it's like two, three, 400% more expensive to deliver firm electricity from solar.
▶ 2:57:20Okay. So, one of the things about solar, and I just want to make this point for everyone, I know you can do it better. If in fact solar is part of a program recognizing that nighttime production comes from a different source than is solar a reasonable part of the grid
▶ 2:57:41Yeah, I I think I think in the long run solar will unsubsidized solar will play a role in electricity grids and in in places like with great resources like California, it should play some role.
▶ 2:57:52Well, I agree. And uh as as geothermal, a 24-hour energy, and others uh all are being supported by you. I have one small area that may have fallen through the cracks early in the administration. Um under the Biden administration, as you know, they wanted to kill anything that supported fossil fuels.
▶ 2:58:12Um and they tried to kill uh the uh uh the the uh EIF, the energy forum, uh, international, I'm sorry, international energy forum. They failed because one person at State cared enough about, uh, blanket of fuels including natural gas. And so, they moved it over to State and they hid it there.
▶ 2:58:41Now that State consolidated away from duplication of you, that entity has no longer been funded. We're one of the founding members of the International Energy Forum. Would you mind looking into whether or not we should and could, uh, rejoin. It's a relatively de minimus amount, but there's over 70 countries, uh, I'm a big fan of their bringing all of you together.
▶ 2:59:05We are going to rejoin. Thank you for reminding me of that. I heard from some, you know, overseas friends, international, hey, you should rejoin this forum. I wasn't aware of it, but we will rejoin that forum. Representative Spicer thanks for the reminder.
▶ 2:59:16And as often happens, something is damaged by your predecessor and it but the tree falls during your time. So, thank you for picking that back up. the, uh, Look, you've been accused. I want to give you an opportunity to get back on this. You've been accused of uh, basically race and gender discrimination because you want to promote merit-based solutions. Do you want to, uh, finish your comment on on why merit-based makes more sense regardless of who happens to get those allotment and training?
▶ 2:59:46Exactly. Like Martin Luther King was a long time hero of mine and I love his words that he dreamed of a day where his children would be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. I believe passionately in that. Gender, sexual preference, color, race, background, those shouldn't matter. America is about a meritocracy. I have spent a lot of my personal efforts in low-income areas independent of, you know, gender, race, whatever.
▶ 3:00:15Of course, we should help people low income that grew up in places with schools not as good and not quite as good of an effort.
▶ 3:00:21And you may have
▶ 3:00:21a meritocracy.
▶ 3:00:22Thank you. You may have to answer some of this for the record, but briefly, if you could tell us with the abundance of natural gas, but much of it located in places that don't necessarily need all of the electricity, as you're balancing or asking us to balance pipelines leading to a liquefaction in the future and other uses versus power lines, is there in fact for data centers and others a reason to locate where the natural gas is naturally there with little or no distribution cost?
▶ 3:00:53Sure. I mean, if you if you locate in West Texas or Southeast New Mexico, you can get natural gas for free. But the cost of natural gas is only one component of the cost of electricity. So, even natural gas delivered a pipeline a long ways away, it's still so cheap. It's still two, three cents a kilowatt hour for the cost of the gas. So, it's a little cheaper somewhere else, but almost anywhere if you've got a power plant, natural gas electricity within the United States is very cheap.
▶ 3:01:22Thank you. Thank you for your indulgence, Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 3:01:24Gentleman's time has expired. Thank you very much. And I'd like to recognize Ms. Sykes from Ohio.
▶ 3:01:29Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the witness for being here. I I will say your expertise is energy and I would hope that you would not invoke the words of Dr. Martin Luther King without adequate context because quite frankly, that is not your expertise. But since you want to talk about people unqualified in meritocracies, let's talk about President Trump. Do you feel like your positions and policy statements are in line with President Trump?
▶ 3:02:00Yes, I hope so.
▶ 3:02:02Do you love inflation? I love ending Iran's ability to have a nuclear weapon. I think that's existential for us.
▶ 3:02:14my question. Do you love inflation, yes or no?
▶ 3:02:18I love ending Iran's
▶ 3:02:20That is not my question. Do you love inflation, yes or no?
▶ 3:02:22No, I would prefer lower inflation.
▶ 3:02:24You would prefer lower inflation. Do you know uh that your boss, essentially President Trump, just stated that he loved inflation?
▶ 3:02:34He's a entertaining hyperbolic guy who's done tremendous leadership, and on balance he's driving inflation down.
▶ 3:02:41unaware that President Trump just mentioned that he loved on inflation, and I certainly don't want to get you in trouble with your boss, but it sounds like you don't love inflation, but he does. But, let me ask you this other question. Are you aware that the United States was taking millions of barrels of ga- uh gasoline uh from Iran in the Strait of Hormuz?
▶ 3:03:02Uh we are preventing the flow of Iranian oil through the Strait of
▶ 3:03:05That is not the question that I just asked you. Were you aware that the United States has been taking millions of gallons of oil from the Strait of Hormuz?
▶ 3:03:15I'm just not sure taking's the right word. We're preventing the flow of it.
▶ 3:03:18thank you. Um Mr. Chair, if I may, can I play some audio from some comments that President Trump made in the Oval Office?
▶ 3:03:28No, I love it. The numbers went right
▶ 3:03:30I don't think we we've heard this.
▶ 3:03:31I love the inflation. You know why? Because as soon as this war is over, you know, I can say it now. Something you didn't know. Did you know we've been taking out
▶ 3:03:40Let's suspend uh let's suspend that, knows it. You know who doesn't know about it? Iran, until right now.
▶ 3:03:49Uh Mr. Secretary, it seems like you didn't know about this, either. So, why would the United States be taking out millions of barrels of oil from Iran?
▶ 3:03:57Well, it's essential that we prevent oil sales from generating revenue for Iran to to spend to develop nuclear weapons and oppress people.
▶ 3:04:06I understand this might be an uncomfortable line of questioning and you don't want to do it, but you are not answering my question. So, I'm going to ask you again and I'm going to hope that you will enter answer it honestly. Did you know that the United States was taking millions of gallons of oil from
▶ 3:04:21Um I'm unaware.
▶ 3:04:23So, do you think that the president is lying based on the audio that you just heard? And I will send it to you in case you say you didn't hear it.
▶ 3:04:29Oh, no, I do not think the president's lying. I think the president's talking casually about our efforts to stop the flow of Iranian oil and we're stopping those tankers from
▶ 3:04:38it is appropriate to talk casual casually about war?
▶ 3:04:42I think you talk to all different audiences and you talk in all different styles. But I I I don't I don't have any serious objection to what he said.
▶ 3:04:49You don't have any serious objection for someone talking about war casually. Do you have that objection? There are 13 service people who are dead. There are hundreds more that are injured, but you we should be talking about war casually.
▶ 3:05:02He treats this war deadly serious and he has worked tirelessly on this war monitoring and caring for
▶ 3:05:09that he was a he was speaking casually about this. He was It is a context of
▶ 3:05:13a day. He speaks 20 hours a day in different styles for different
▶ 3:05:17the president of the United States of America. He is the commander of chief who is responsible for 13 service members who have died and hundreds more who are injured. So, you mean to say to me testifying in front of this committee in the United States House of Representatives that it is appropriate for the commander of chief to talk about war casually.
▶ 3:05:36He speaks candidly, openly, and honestly. I think all of America benefits from that.
▶ 3:05:40Well, I appreciate your attempt to protect your boss and to keep your job, but let me be very clear with you. It is not appropriate to talk about war casually. He is clearly keeping you in the dark about what he is doing in Iran, and now you are sitting here in this committee unaware that the president just made an announcement about millions of barrels that they have taken from Iran and stated in that very very clearly.
▶ 3:06:09People don't know, but now we get to know it, but unfortunately, he sent you here and you didn't know it. What is your response to that?
▶ 3:06:16I'm very proud to serve with President Trump. He's been tremendous leadership in a time of great stress right now. I'm proud of what he's doing. Proud to be part of the team.
▶ 3:06:23Well, I I would not be proud if my boss sent me up uh shit's creek and left me here in a committee without adequate information and speaking casually about war. That is a horrible place to be and I'm so sorry that you have to defend that. That is beneath your honor.
▶ 3:06:38The woman's time has expired. I'd also uh remind the gentlewoman that uh uh there was 13 exactly 13 US service members killed at Abbey Gate in the disgraceful withdrawal from Afghanistan. Who's next? I'd like to uh recognize Mr. Baird from
▶ 3:06:58Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to say to you add to your comments uh one of those individuals, 13 individuals from our district in So, we have strong feelings about that. Mr. Secretary, we really appreciate you being here. I want to compliment you and uh the the EPA administrator for coming to the Indiana. You did a great job. The people that you visited with talked about some of the rules and regulations affecting the trucking industry.
▶ 3:07:28Uh we appreciated that very much and they appreciated you being there.
▶ 3:07:32It was my honor.
▶ 3:07:34You know, uh I guess I guess I want to with uh the fact that Purdue University is a national leader in nuclear science and engineering and as you know houses the nation's first and and only fully digital instrument in uh nuclear reactor. It's a fully digital digitally Jeez, I can't pronounce that. I can't. Anyway, let's go on. Purdue is also a leader in advanced manufacturing.
▶ 3:08:04One of the gaps in the US nuclear supply chain is manufacturing medium to large-scale components such as reactor vessels. So, last year, Congress encouraged DOE to establish a university-led advanced nuclear manufacturing consortium to address this critical gap. So, do you I just I just want to get a sense from you. Do you feel this initiative is a a warranted and necessary? And can you describe how this would benefit uh United States?
▶ 3:08:33It's very warranted and necessary. The United States was the manufacturing powerhouse of the globe for a century. And then the last 20 years, we we admitted China to to the World Trade Organization and gave them most-favored-nation status. We made regulations difficult in the United States, and we stopped building big things here except in the except in the Gulf Coast. And we exported so much of our industry, our nuclear industry's been stagnant for decades.
▶ 3:09:02It is an enormous source of energy, not just electricity, but process heat. It's going to be a huge part of our future. We need to get the nuclear industry out of neutral and in in a powerful gear. And we need to be able to build those large-scale components uh components and industrial processes back here in the United States. Indiana was a heartland of American industry, heavy industry, and I believe it will be again. Purdue's a tremendous university.
▶ 3:09:30There's great engineering talent in in Indiana, great technical talent in Indiana, and an industrial legacy. That industrial legacy needs to come back. America needs to be once again an in large-scale industrial powerhouse. We can and we shall do it again, and Indiana will be central to that effort.
▶ 3:09:51I thank you for those comments. I really appreciate it. You know, I'm going to change over to another little area just to get your opinion on. Uh you know, this Congress introduced HR 2813, the Small Modular Reactor Commercialization Act, which would establish a federal working group focused on commercialization and industrialization of SMRs.
▶ 3:10:11So, would would you um feel that a a coordinated effort among DOE, NRC, the industry, and other stakeholders would help accelerate deployment and strengthen America's position against our competitors like China and Russia?
▶ 3:10:27Absolutely. Absolutely. One of the key things of the Trump administration is all the departments work together. We we don't have petty guy territorial politics or fighting among it. The NRC has performed tremendously under Chairman Honie. They they are focused on safety, but they're innovating, they're moving fast.
▶ 3:10:47And yes, between the Department of Energy, our technical capabilities and commercial focus, NRC's safety focus, we should be working with companies and industries about how how quickly we can stand up the industrial supply chain for nuclear in our country again. Yes.
▶ 3:11:03I really I really appreciate your comments in that area because I think it's it's extremely important with AI and some of the new technologies coming along that we utilize that to to stay ahead of China and Russia and some of our adversaries. So, I thank you, sir, for being here, and I yield back.
▶ 3:11:19Gentleman yields back. I'd like to recognize Ms. McClain Delaney from
▶ 3:11:26Uh thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Secretary Wright, for joining us today. Um I want to dial down the drama and just pragmatically address some issues. I represent the 6th District of Maryland, and my home state is proud to be one of the most educated, skilled, and dedicated workforces in the nation, and our federal employees and researchers are at its core. They are our scientists, engineers, and public servants who make America innovation possible.
▶ 3:11:54And I do have to lift up our agencies like NIST, NIH, National Institute of Cancer, Fort Detrick, and some of the DOE centers. And any conversation about the Department of Energy's budget must become begin with re- really recognizing their indispensable role and the investment in research. But as you know, electricity demand is ever-growing. AI data centers, advanced manufacturing, and industrial facilities increasingly want reliable power.
▶ 3:12:23At the same time, China is aggressively deploying advanced nuclear technologies and positioning itself to lead the global market for next-gen reactors. Maryland, my state, is leading by example. In addition to obtaining 38% of our state's power from nuclear technologies, Gaithersburg and Frederick in my district are home to X-energy, a next-generation nuclear energy company, a national leader in advanced nuclear technology.
▶ 3:12:50I toured their facility recently and met their leadership and was very impressed by the innovation. X-energy didn't come to Maryland by accident. They became because of our world-class innovation companies. They came because of a world-class, highly skilled workforce, anchored by exceptional researchers and scientists, and also, I have to say, by some of our greatest agencies.
▶ 3:13:13Many nuclear advanced reactor designs offer capabilities beyond electricity generation, including high-temperature process heat for industrial applications, and more flexible string sitting options because they require significantly less water than traditional nuclear plants. So, Secretary Wright, I have two questions for you. As we look towards the future, what role do you believe advanced nuclear technologies will play in meeting America's growing energy industrial needs? You spoke a little bit about it before.
▶ 3:13:44But can you again clarify the actions necessary to ensure that the US and not China leads in the deployment and export of these
▶ 3:13:54So thank you. Love all of those words. You talked about the growth of electricity demand in the United States and you listed all the main drivers of it. Absolutely. We got to bring more electricity to the game. China's been rapidly growing their electricity production over the last 20 years and we have not. Um we can and is nuclear a great technology for that? Absolutely. And one other thing I'd love to say is that you mentioned industrial. And we were talking about reindustrializing our country. The biggest use of energy is industry.
▶ 3:14:24Is building things. And the biggest source of energy for heavy industry is high temperature process heat. That's like nobody talks about it. This is the most important energy source on the planet. Today all of the nuclear energy is just in the electricity grid. But what's so great about nuclear? It can also provide high temperature process heat.
▶ 3:14:43And your very own X-energy, I believe, will be the first ever nuclear supply of process heat in a plant in Texas and I couldn't be more excited about it. It's a great company.
▶ 3:14:56But it is headquartered in Maryland,
▶ 3:14:58Fantastic. And you deserve credit for
▶ 3:15:00that issue though, I understand that OMB has yet to allocate more than the 3 billion appropriated for your department's advanced reactor demonstration. And I believe the government should be a reliable partner to the private sector. And I have to say in all aspects, whether it's for our farmers with solar and or geothermal as Mr. Heard, um you know, raised up. And I appreciate that the Department of Energy has advocated for this funding, but it seems that OMB has been the bottleneck.
▶ 3:15:29Where is the 3 billion that Congress appropriated for the ADRP in fiscal 2026 and will you commit to pushing OMB to release those
▶ 3:15:42Yes, it's coming. It's coming. I I thought that was the case. I had to check with my smarter team behind me. Thank you for raising that issue. Very passionate about that program. Very passionate about the company based in your state. You have a lot to be proud
▶ 3:15:54Thank you. I do have a quick one on solar and wind technologies and I probably won't get to it, but I just want to say that I am an all of the above supporter when it comes to energy energy production and I really think that in all ways we need to look for a reliable affordable power. And so I will be um submitting for the record on uh some of the solar and wind uh technologies and how we need to support them.
▶ 3:16:21Um building on what I was in the Biden administration building on that, but going forward together because they're very important and in all of the above strategy. Thank you.
▶ 3:16:30yield back.
▶ 3:16:30Thank you, Representative. General Lady yields, like to recognize uh gentleman from New York, Mr. Riley.
▶ 3:16:36Uh thank you, Chairman and uh thank you, Secretary. Uh I represent 11 counties across rural Upstate New York. Uh and when I'm out in the community, I always ask folks about the conversations they're having at their kitchen table. Um and I know around here this idea of kitchen table issues, it's become kind of a political uh cliché. Uh for me it actually it means something real. Uh when I was growing up, um my parents would literally sit at the kitchen table every week to balance the budget.
▶ 3:17:05And the way they would do it is they had these envelopes uh and they would write on the envelope uh you know, mortgage or utilities or school clothes. Uh if there was something left over, there was my favorite envelope was for the Binghamton Whalers uh tickets. And uh I remember those conversations getting a lot harder uh when the factory was closing down where my dad worked and uh there's a bunch of big corporations and out-of-touch politicians from both political parties uh got us into terrible trade deals that shipped jobs overseas.
▶ 3:17:34And you could literally see with those envelopes at the kitchen table the sacrifices that my family was making every week to make sure my sister and me could go to school. Uh, so I ask folks at home about those conversations cuz I want to hear what they're talking about at the kitchen table. And you know what they tell me now over and over again? They can't afford the utility bills. They cannot afford the utility bills. They're stretched past the breaking point making impossible choices between groceries and and and medicine and rent.
▶ 3:18:03And then the utility bill hits the And now today they're making tough decisions about whether they can even go on the summer vacation they had planned with gas prices as high as they are. So when I got here uh last year, uh first thing I did was launched an investigation into the utility companies to try to get to the bottom of why these bills are so high. And there's a lot of reasons for it and I know you've discussed some of those today.
▶ 3:18:27But one of the most alarming things I found is that each of the three major utility companies serving Upstate New York is owned by a foreign corporation. And so my question for you is why in the world is the United States federal government allowing foreign corporations to own American utility companies?
▶ 3:18:50Yeah, it's certainly not my area of expertise or regulation there. We do like to see, you know, free flow of capital at least among our allies and friends. I don't know which
▶ 3:18:59just sounds like the same old tired arguments we've had for 30 years about the benefits of globalization that I know the elite economists and the out-of-touch politicians and big corporations want to shove down our throats because it makes them more profitable. And communities like Upstate New York, that has hurt with the working Uh, and when we see our utility bills hit the table every week and then see a bunch of that money being shipped overseas. It's the same old story of greed and corruption that we've dealt with for decades.
▶ 3:19:28We should not Upstate New Yorkers should not be forced to shell out money every month to the utility company and see it shipped to a foreign corporation overseas. Central Hudson is one of the utility companies in our district. They're owned by Fortis, a foreign corporation. Last year, Fortis reported $331 million in quarterly profits. And you know what they did the very next day? They turned around and demanded another rate hike of 20 to 30 bucks a month for Upstate New Yorkers.
▶ 3:19:57Nice egg owned by Iberdrola, a Spanish corporation. Last February, Nice egg shipped a $450 million dividend to Spain, turned around 6 months later and asked us for a $500 rate hike to foot the bill for it. These are These are seniors on fixed incomes who are literally cutting their medicine in half, public school teachers I've talked to who are picking up second jobs because of the Nice egg bill.
▶ 3:20:26There was a There was a Never forget this conversation. A woman in the union whose husband had worked her entire his entire finally got to retirement. And wanted nothing else but to spend his time with his grandkids. He worked his whole life to earn that time with his grandkids. And you know what he's doing right now? He had to go get another job to pay the Nice egg bill. And that money he's putting out every month is going to a corporate boardroom in Spain.
▶ 3:20:51To a bunch of people sitting in a boardroom in Madrid, taking money out of the pockets of folks in Oneonta and Whitney Point. This has got to stop. This This This This corporate greed and money going out of my community to these boardrooms halfway around the world, it's got to stop. You actually do have uh authority over this. Uh you oversee FERC, correct?
▶ 3:21:14Uh it's an independent regulatory body.
▶ 3:21:16regulatory body, but you have multiple times during your tenure used your authority under the DOE Organization Act to require FERC to propose new rules,
▶ 3:21:27Correct. That's right.
▶ 3:21:27Okay, you have that authority and you can use it to get FERC to issue regulations to stop foreign corporations from owning American utility companies. My time's expiring, but my question for you is this, will you commit to look into this issue and using your authority to get foreign corporations to stop owning American utility companies?
▶ 3:21:47I will look into that issue.
▶ 3:21:48Okay, thank you.
▶ 3:21:51Gentlemen, yields back. I thank [clears throat] the witness for your very, very valuable testimony and the members of this committee for their [clears throat] questions. The record will remain open for 10 days for additional comments and written questions from the members will be will be entertained. This hearing is now adjourned. Thank you.
▶ 3:22:13Thank you.