Nick Lampson

Mr. LAMPSON

Mr. LAMPSON. Am I within my 1 minute, Madam Chairman? Have I used up my minute yet, and how much time do I have left before I say that I will yield?

Mr. LAMPSON. They remain in effect, but this just clarifies what the intent of the legislation was and is. It's going to allow blends of those fuels to be used by NASA until we can do the research that shows that emissions are going to be reduced below the amount of emissions from traditional fuels.

Mr. LAMPSON. I would yield for a few seconds, yes.

Mr. LAMPSON. I yield myself 1 minute, Madam Chairman. I agree with much of what Mr. Gingrey has said. I want to point out that the intent of the law, as passed, the Energy Independence and Security Act, specifies that the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions, which are higher, oftentimes, in these oil sales, is what was intended to be prohibited. If we were using, or NASA were purchasing all of their fuel for their operation, then it would not fall within the bounds of this act. But NASA can purchase generally available fuels that may include a blend of fuel from oil sands refined in existing commercial processes. The purpose of the contract can't be to obtain fuels from nonconventional petroleum sources or otherwise promote the expansion of nonconventional fuels with high life-cycle carbon emissions. We believe that the refiners within my district that are making many of the fuels that are actually being purchased by NASA will use some of these nonconventional sources of energy. As it's blended, it can still be used by NASA so that there is some benefit to them.

Mr. LAMPSON. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LAMPSON. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I might consume. Today I rise in support of my amendment to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2008. This amendment would clarify section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act, which addresses the procurement of fuels by a Federal agency. This amendment seeks to provide guidance for implementation of the provision by establishing conditions by which NASA would be allowed to enter into a contract to purchase a generally available fuel, so long as it is not predominantly an alternative or synthetic fuel. Because section 526 doesn't define alternative or synthetic fuel or nonconventional petroleum sources, many stakeholders, including refiners in southeast Texas, believe that section 526 could have unintended consequences, preventing refiners from mixing fuel received from nonconventional sources such as oil sands with conventionally derived oil. Oil sands account for about 5 percent of the total U.S. oil supply, and it's common practice to mix it with fuel that is derived from other sources. It's very difficult for an end user and consumer to determine whether a fuel contains petroleum from oil sands or other nonconventional sources. With half of Canadian crude produced from these sources, this could have an adverse effect on the relationship that we enjoy with our largest supplier of oil. Additionally, most diesel fuel is mixed with some biodiesel, which could also mean that its procurement could be prohibited under this section. While the intention of this language may not have been to prohibit the purchase of fuel, the small amounts from tar sands or oil shale, section 526 is written so broadly, with no definition provided, that it could be interpreted either way. That's why a clarification is needed. I know that our colleague, Congressman Gingrey, made a proposal the other day in committee. I viewed the proposal that we have come up with here as a compromise to that suggestion. Adoption of this amendment will allow NASA to contract for generally available fuels, as it always, has as long as the fuel is not predominantly comprised of petroleum from nonconventional sources such as Canadian oil sands with a greenhouse gas footprint that is higher than conventional oils and fuels. This allows some wiggle room and recognizes the complexities of the refining process while supporting the original intent of not extending or exceeding current emission levels. Finally, I would like to note that when the House passed the FY09 defense authorization act last month, a similar amendment was approved by this committee and accepted by voice vote on the floor. While that amendment had a government-wide application, this seeks to clarify section 526 in order to allow NASA to meet present and future energy needs. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LAMPSON. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. LAMPSON. Madam Chairman, I am honored to join my colleagues from the Science Committee to support H.R. 6063. I particularly want to commend Chairman Gordon and Chairman Udall, and Ranking Members Hall and Feeney, the committee staff, for all of their hard work and their effort to make this an inclusive process. This legislation enjoys broad support, and I believe that it provides the stability and direction necessary to sustain NASA through this transition period. I am proud that we will be able to provide a much needed 11 percent increase in the funding over FY08 that will help NASA get back on track. This inflationary increase will allow NASA to operate the shuttle program, accelerate the development of Constellation, and refocus its efforts on science and research without having to rob Peter to pay Paul. I'm also pleased that this legislation directs NASA to fly the ``contingency flights'' and to take all necessary steps to deliver the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer that we just heard about from our colleague, Mr. Weldon to the International Space Station. This will ensure the space station's viability and use for its intended purpose as a national lab well into the next decade. In addition to being one of the most valuable foreign policy tools that we have, there is no doubt in my mind that research conducted on the space station will yield great discoveries that will benefit all Americans and all of mankind. I would especially like to thank the chairmen and ranking members for adopting language on issues that I have particularly championed and believe will also help secure NASA's future. This includes the Small Business Alliance Outreach and Technology Assistance Program (SATOP). Building on the partnership between NASA centers, institutions of higher learning, and industry partners, this initiative will further the agency's mission of technology transfer in a unique way by providing free technical assistance to small businesses who cannot afford to have an engineer or a rocket scientist on their staff. Solving technical problems will mean these businesses will help grow our economy and create and retain jobs. I have also worked to make sure that, as we face the space flight gap and the loss of a highly skilled workforce, that we are cognizant of the fact that we risk losing the imagination of the next generation of scientists and engineers and diminishing their desire to serve our Nation's space program. Well, the fact that we are already falling behind when it comes to awarding advanced degrees in math, science and engineering means that we must focus on K-12 education now more than ever so that we don't lose our technological edge. This bill provides an 11 percent increase over FY08 funding, including NASA's educational programs. I believe that some of this increase should go toward continuing the EarthKAM program and expanding NASA's participation in robotics competition. Bringing NASA directly into classrooms across the country and encouraging hands-on learning is a great way to spark a hopefully life-long interest in math and science. So as we continue with this transition from shuttle to Constellation and a new administration in about 6 months, we must be mindful of providing stability and support for our Nation's space program at this critical juncture. I believe this bill provides both, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. LAMPSON. Then I will reserve my time and let the gentleman proceed.

Mr. LAMPSON

Mr. LAMPSON. Madam Speaker, it is truly a pleasure to rise today to acknowledge the achievements of Descubriendo la Lectura and Reading Recovery in teaching struggling first grade students to read and write in the 22nd House district of Texas. In April I visited Fort Bend Independent School District to observe an early reading intervention for bilingual children whose initial literacy learning is in Spanish. It is called Descubriendo la Lectura-- DLL for short. The goal of DLL is to reduce the number first-grade children who have extreme difficulty learning to read and write and to reduce the cost of those learners to educational systems. DLL is a reconstruction of Reading Recovery for Spanish-speaking children and provides short-term, one-to-one tutoring with a specially trained teacher. The results in my district are impressive, beginning with the student I met the day of my visit. Jose began his DLL lessons in January reading on a text level of 1, which means he could read a simple book with a single line, supported by single illustrations. He could recognize his own name and write very few other words. On the day of my visit he was reading at a text level of 12, which means he could read a book with 4-8 lines of text per page. He is able to read books with more challenging ideas, vocabulary and longer sentences. He is able to interpret and understand ideas and characters through discussions with the DLL teacher. In the Fort Bend Independent School District, 70 percent of the students receiving a full series of DLL lessons were reading on or above grade level by the end of first grade last year. Throughout Texas, the U.S., and Department of Defense schools around the world, three-quarters of children receiving a full series of DLL or Reading Recovery lessons are reading and writing at grade level standard by the end of first grade. These results are remarkable, considering these children began at the bottom of their class for reading and writing-- usually the lowest 10-20 percent. I commend the teachers, administrators, and students of Fort Bend ISD for their commitment to assuring literacy for all children.

Mr. LAMPSON

Mr. LAMPSON. If the gentleman would yield for just a very short quick 30 second story or point to make, off of the coast of Florida we are saying that we should not be drilling. But let's look at the other way around. We won't get permission to drill within 200 miles of the Florida coast or any of the coast in the United States. However, Cuba is drilling within 45 miles of Florida's coast. So there is another country that is drilling within our boundaries that we are prohibiting our own people from being able to drill in. It does not make sense. Clearly we have plenty of work to do, and I think it is wonderful if we have the opportunity to work across this magic aisles of ours and get it done for the American people.

Mr. LAMPSON. Absolutely. If the gentleman would yield, that is precisely what I have been working on since November to get Members to join us with on this. We have taken any number of suggestions to change this legislation to accommodate different Members and different Members' thoughts about how we go about making this bipartisan, and the successful way to greatly expand the diversity of what we are using for energy this country.

Mr. LAMPSON. Most of what you just mentioned is in this legislation.

Mr. LAMPSON. I say everything needs to be on the table for discussion, yes.

Mr. LAMPSON. I would say that everything we can think of is a part of the solution. We shouldn't take anything off of the table. We are in an energy crisis and we must be considering every opportunity that we possibly have facing us.

Mr. LAMPSON. I personally am not opposed to drilling. I think that drilling is only one of many solutions to our problem. What I am trying to concentrate on is a whole host of research projects that have already been passed by the Congress.

Mr. LAMPSON. I absolutely would.

Mr. LAMPSON

Mr. LAMPSON. Beautifully stated and I totally agree. You made the comment that you would hope that the President would sign into law the work that we would do whether it's wind or some of the other alternative energies, and I truly believe that he will when he sees that this Congress is choosing to work together. When we start putting aside the blame from one to the other and that we know that we are all in one boat in this country right now and our boat has a hole in it, if we don't all start bailing water together, we are going to sink and we will sink together. But we clearly have the knowledge. We have the intellect. We have the future with our children who are doing excellent things in their educational programs. We have to present them with the dreams and the wherewithal to make those dreams come true. It's exactly what we did following Sputnik in 1957. We responded with a resounding response to the challenge of President John Kennedy at the time. And I have to agree with you. Our technological leadership will be there. If we will but make these things available to our young people, they'll solve our problems for us, and this bill certainly does that. China and India are examples as well as Japan and a number of other places are, in my opinion, the beeps of Sputnik of today. Japan put a satellite not too long ago in orbit around the moon. China has set its goals to have a colony on the moon before the United States even returns to the moon. And we are going into a period soon where we won't even have the ability to launch a human into space because we're going to have a gap of 5 years from the time that we end the use of space shuttle in 2010 to the time that we have the constellation project up and running in 2015. That is a question of national security, in my estimation, no different than the question of energy security for our country. So we have got to maintain our technological advantage. That's what's going to help us maintain the standard of living. It's what's going to help us continue to encourage young people to stay in school to learn the math and the science and the engineering kinds of courses that will maintain the path that America traveled to its greatness and will make sure that we have that same greatness well into our future. And I see that the gentlewoman from Houston, Texas, has joined us, Sheila Jackson-Lee, and I yield to her.

Mr. LAMPSON. Reclaiming my time, on that point, I know there is other research that is presently going on specifically to facilitate our military activities that would involve a number of alternative fuels. I know of a specific project that is being tested right now with the use of Air Force turbine generators to use biofuels, specifically animal fats as well as some of the oils that come from some of the nonedible plants that are growing. These are the kinds of things that are going to make our country continue to be great. We need to encourage those activities as much as we possibly can. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. LAMPSON. I yield.

Mr. LAMPSON. Well, you're so very right. And the ideas are not necessarily Democratic and they're not necessarily Republican ideas, they are American ideas. We've got the knowledge. We've got the wherewithal. It's a matter of making sure that they have the opportunity to put that together. Too often, of late, we seem to have been pushing too many of our solutions to the political extremes, and we've got to find our way back toward the middle. And we think that this is a piece of legislation that does that. It recognizes that fossil fuels, much of what our colleagues earlier this evening were talking about as far as drilling activities, is not something that needs to be taken off the table. But at the same time, they can't tell us that the ideas that we're coming forward with are ideas that need to be taken off the table. We must look for diversity. We must look for balance. We must look to encourage those kids who built that solar car and had the great success no differently than the college student that I spent some time with today, and I drove his hybrid vehicle. It was a group of universities who competed against each other to see if they could take regular vehicles and convert them into significantly greater, increased energy-efficient vehicles. The one that I saw today happened to have been a hybrid diesel engine that was placed into a General Motors SUV. I drove the car. It gets in the mid-30 range of miles per gallon of fuel. It meets all of the standards for emissions in our country. So clearly, again, if college students can do it, if high school students can do it, the minds that have made the United States of America great are clearly here; they need the assistance to make sure that their ideas come to fruition and that we get to put them into the market. There is a company that I'm working with in my congressional district in Texas who had the idea that they could make an external combustion engine. They're capturing it by creating a fire box that they attach to the outside of this engine. They are capturing the energy that is released in the combustion process and piping it into an engine, causing the compression activity to continue to the point where it causes the engine to move. There is great interest in this because it is twice as efficient as an internal combustion engine. Again, a good idea, one that was not a partisan idea, it was one that was developed by some guys that I have no idea what their political affiliations or interests are, but they're concerned about the United States of America and concerned about what we're going to be able to do to solve the energy crisis that we face. This bill is intended to try to give them the encouragement, to give them the resources to make sure that we are doing everything that we possibly can to expand our opportunities to give greater sources of energy to all of us for our coming decades because we're clearly going to need them. If we choose to spend all of our time--and I am certainly not the least bit concerned about drilling, I think that we must be continuing to produce fossil fuels and to use them as we have been, hopefully much cleaner than what we have been doing, but clearly that is only one part of this big picture that we have to address. I want to talk for a minute about the renewable energy funding and just to make a point or two about the important strides in funding clean, renewable and, most importantly, domestic energy sources without impacting the Federal budget. The Invest in Energy Independence Act, which is what we are talking about here tonight, provides $110 million for renewable energy research and development projects that include wind, solar, wave, geothermal, and hydrogen projects. The legislation pays for these projects. Clearly, this is something we're concerned about. We have PAYGO rules, pay-as-you-go. If we're going to put something new into our budget, then we must come up with the money to do it. This is a good way to do it. So this legislation pays for these projects--and many other domestic research and development projects as well--through the modernization of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and use of available funds from prior sales of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The legislation modernizes the Strategic Petroleum Reserve by exchanging about 70 million barrels of more expensive light crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for an equivalent amount of less expensive heavy crude oil, a cost differential that ranges from about $12 a barrel up to about $18; most recently it's been about $15 per barrel. This exchange of light crude for heavy crude is necessary to have our petroleum reserve more accurately reflect the capabilities of our domestic refineries. The Invest in Energy Independence Act is crucial to help move us away from our dependence on petroleum and shift our use to affordable and reliable renewable energy sources that are available right here in the United States. For instance, the legislation will invest an additional $15 million in wind energy, helping us to develop the next generation of wind turbines that can generate clean energy in virtually every corner of the country, even in those areas where there is relatively low wind speeds. The bill also provides an additional $30 million through the Department of Energy for solar energy programs to conduct research, development, demonstration, and deployment of solar energy technologies. Funding these will also be available for our public education campaign on the virtues of clean domestic solar energy. Well, for those of us who are fortunate enough to live in coastal areas, the bill invests $30 million in marine and hydrokinetic energy. The majority of Americans live in close proximity to oceans, and this legislation will help fund the next generation of clean wave energy to power our homes and our businesses. The Invest in Energy Independence Act also provides funding for geothermal energy projects. The legislation funds $30 million in geothermal research and development activities at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. And, finally, the bill advances hydrogen research and development by funding the Department of Energy's H-Prize program to reward researchers who are working to make our hydrogen economy a reality. The H-Prize program was authorized in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, but Congress hasn't funded it yet. Through this bill the program will receive $5 million that can be used to administer the program and reward successful researchers. So, again, we're looking for our colleagues to come join us in the Invest in Energy Independence Act. It's these kinds of things that I believe will provide us with the funds necessary for clean, domestic, and renewable energy sources. That's what's going to give us the balance, the diversity, clearly broadening our whole range of sources of energy that we have available to us. And that's what's going to be the real solution to the energy crisis in the United States, making sure that we do the kinds of things that have always made this Nation great, developing the technology, encouraging our people to dream big dreams, and then make those dreams become reality. But we're not going to do it if we continue to cut the research budgets of the Department of Energy or to discourage companies from putting money into research on their own. We need to find ways that we can extend the incentives that we are giving to many of these companies and have for a long time to try to jump-start new industries. I hope that we can find the wherewithal to make sure that we can look for all of these aspects. At the same time, we're going to give consumers a short-term benefit because we believe it will change the price of oil and consequently the price of gasoline at the pump who are feeling that pain. And, secondly, it gives us the longer-term benefit of increasing our access to alternative sources of energy.

Mr. LAMPSON. Reclaiming my time, so your point is very well made. You can't ignore the fact that we need to continue to rely on fossil fuels as we transition. And we must actually do what the United States Army told us to do in 1945, in a book they published on May 1, 1945, when they told us that it was necessary for this Nation to diversify away from our use of fossil fuels. And they told us how. And much of what they said then and much of what I believe our committees have said and what I believe this country is doing, and even the businesses, certainly like the smart people like T. Boone Pickens, who are looking at these diverse activities that we should be involved with that will give us new sources of energy. We include in the legislation that we're talking about tonight significant funding for ARPA-E, which is advance research projects. And we talk about wind, solar, weatherization efficiencies, marine/ hydrokinetic energy research, industrial energy efficiency. We have already passed many of these pieces of legislation as authorizing, and now we're looking for funding for it. Building energy efficiency, energy storage, batteries. We must find new ways to hold much of the energy that we are creating regardless of the manner in which we are creating the electricity to do it. Geothermal, carbon capture and storage, clearly it's a must if we're going to use some of the coal resources in this country. Natural gas, clean burning fuel, all of these are included in this legislation to be funded with the kinds of projects that will give us a much greater, diverse energy background. More energy storage, Smart Grid, and advanced vehicles research. So I'm proud of the fact that we have so many people come together to bring us these kinds of projects that have already gone through, passed by this Congress. And I would like to know about the things that you have been specifically involved with, perhaps things that have been done in the State of New York, where you represent, very ably, the people in your congressional district. I know that, for example, Texas has spent a great deal of time on wind energy. Arizona has spent a great deal of time on solar energy. Are there things that the State of New York is contributing to this mix of how we diversify our energy sources?

Mr. LAMPSON. I thank the gentlelady for joining us and for her thoughtful comments. A couple of the things that you said, one particularly comes to mind, on weatherization. Mayor Bill White in Houston Texas tried a pilot project that was an overwhelming success by helping those people who could make small change, couldn't afford to make them but the city chose to make them on their own, and got back several times the value that was invested in those homes to bring them up to currency. Those are the kinds of things that we need and want to do with this legislation. The wind energy about which you spoke, we need also not just to have the better technology with the stronger, lighter materials to have the blades of the windmills, but we also need the materials that will give us the batteries to store the energy that is created when those turbines are turned. Dow Chemical. Unfortunately, we could have seen a significant increase in the facility of Dow Chemical right there in our backyard in southeast Texas. Yet, they chose to go to another country because it was access to alternative sources of materials that they could use. In that case, they were trying to continue to make plastics, and they are making plastics from biomass. Those are the kind of things that are addressed in this legislation. It's a matter of using, strategically using, the strategic petroleum reserve effectively, and strategically, if I can repeat that word yet again, to include our overall energy supply. We truly are. We are reaching an emergency situation. Leaving the strategic petroleum reserve alone exactly the way it is now, if we had to turn to it if we lost our sources of oil coming into the country and going into those refineries, we would see an 11 percent decline of gasoline production immediately and we would see a 35 decline in diesel fuel immediately just because of a lack of modernization. So if we act and allow some part of this reserve to contain heavy crude, as opposed to light, we would see a lesser change in conversion of being able to rely on those strategically placed oil reserves. This is a good piece of legislation. It's one that has been thoughtful to draw in Members from different places in the country, to pull in Members from both parties, Democrat and Republican. We think that there are significant opportunities for us to do a couple of things. One, as I said earlier, we would have a short-term benefit because we would very likely see a decline in the price of oil, the price of gasoline because of dumping significant quantities of oil into the market in a strategic way. Once we have the resources generated from the differential in light crude and heavy crude, we will be able to invest those very sources very effectively in already authorized research projects that have passed this Congress already. So Members, Democrat and Republican, want these projects to be funded and to be put into place. This is the way to make that happen. I am proud of this legislation. I am proud of Mr. Hall from New York for joining us and Ms. Jackson-Lee from Houston, Texas, for joining us tonight to talk about it. I look forward to working with our colleagues to make it yet stronger and achieve the real balance that we want to achieve for energy for the security of the United States of America. I thank you for joining me.

Mr. LAMPSON. I would yield.

Mr. LAMPSON. Before you leave, let me just ask a question. Surely, you heard some of the presentations made by our colleagues earlier talking about the need to increase drilling. What are your feelings about what these needs for our Nation are? Clearly, we must produce everything that we can produce, but isn't there more to the picture than just drilling as a solution?