Hide Notes 

Slide 1: Making Sense of President Bush’s New Advanced Energy Initiative Kelly Sims Gallagher, Ph.D. Energy Technology Innovation Project February 23, 2006 (updated 2/28/06)
Slide 2: Outline Introduction  The announcement  The actual budget numbers in charts  Assessing the budget  Conclusion 
Slide 3: State of the Union 2006 Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. And here we have a serious problem: America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world. The best way to break this addiction is through technology. Since 2001, we have spent nearly $10 billion to develop cleaner, cheaper and more reliable alternative energy sources. And we are on the threshold of incredible advances. So tonight I announce the Advanced Energy Initiative -- a 22 percent increase in clean-energy research at the Department of Energy to push for breakthroughs in two vital areas. To change how we power our homes and offices, we will invest more in zero-emission coal-fired plants; revolutionary solar and wind technologies; and clean, safe nuclear energy. We must also change how we power our automobiles. We will increase our research in better batteries for hybrid and electric cars and in pollution-free cars that run on hydrogen. We will also fund additional research in cuttingedge methods of producing ethanol, not just from corn but from wood chips and stalks or switch grass. Our goal is to make this new kind of ethanol practical and competitive within six years. Breakthroughs on this and other new technologies will help us reach another great goal: to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025.
Slide 4: Notes About the Data      What is measured: U.S. DOE energy RD&D What is not measured: deployment (fuzzy boundaries), non-energy fission and fusion nuclear, ERD&D in other government agencies All subsequent charts are in constant 2000 dollars Problems with program direction estimates Data source is fiscal year Statistical Table of Appropriations, two years after the fiscal year, where possible
Slide 5: The measurement of ETI What is an energy technology?  Government investments in ETI are a commonly used metric  Relatively poor understanding of U.S. private sector spending  Other input metrics  Output metrics  Outcome metrics 
Slide 6: million 2000$ 1000.0 2000.0 3000.0 4000.0 5000.0 6000.0 7000.0 19 7 0.0 Total DOE Energy RD&D Investments FY1978-FY07 Administration Request 8 19 79 19 80 19 81 19 82 19 83 19 84 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 07 20 R 06 eq ue st
Slide 7: U.S. DOE Energy RD&D Spending FY1978-FY2007 Admin. Request 7000.0 6000.0 5000.0 million 2000$ 4000.0 3000.0 2000.0 1000.0 0.0 8 19 79 19 80 19 81 19 82 19 83 19 84 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 07 20 R 06 eq ue st 19 7 Fission Renewables Fusion Fossil (including CCT demo) Efficiency Electricty T&D
Slide 8: U.S. DOE Energy RD&D FY2000-FY2007 Request 600.0 500.0 400.0 million 2000$ 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Request Fission Fusion Efficiency Renewables Fossil (including CCT demo) Electricity T&D
Slide 9: U.S. DOE Energy RD&D 1978-FY2007 Admin. Request 7000.0 6000.0 Electricity T&D Fossil (including CCT demo) Renewables Efficiency Fusion Fission 5000.0 million 2000$ 4000.0 3000.0 2000.0 1000.0 0.0 19 78 19 79 19 80 19 81 19 82 19 83 19 84 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 07 20 R 06 eq ue st
Slide 10: Separating out Hydrogen Reduces Efficiency U.S. DOE Energy RD&D 1978-FY2007 Admin. Request 7000.0 6000.0 Hydrogen Efficiency (No Hydrogen) Electricity T&D Fossil (including CCT demo) Renewables Fusion Fission 5000.0 million 2000$ 4000.0 3000.0 2000.0 1000.0 0.0 Note: Fossil contains hydrogen funding as well. 20 R 06 eq ue st 83 19 84 19 80 19 81 19 82 19 85 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 19 78 19 79 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 20 03 20 04 20 05 19 20 07
Slide 11: U.S. DOE Energy RD&D FY1978-FY2006 7000.0 Electricity T&D 6000.0 5000.0 Basic Energy Sciences Fossil including CCT demo Renewables Efficiency Fusion million 2000$ 4000.0 3000.0 Fission 2000.0 1000.0 0.0 19 78 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 90 19 92 19 94 6 19 98 0 20 02 20 04 19 80 19 88 20 06 19 9 20 0
Slide 12: U.S. Non-Nuclear DOE Energy RD&D Spending 4000.0 3500.0 3000.0 2500.0 million 2000$ 2000.0 1500.0 1000.0 500.0 0.0 19 78 19 79 19 80 19 81 19 82 19 83 19 84 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 07 20 R 06 eq ue st Efficiency Renewables Fossil (including CCT demo) Electricity T&D
Slide 13: U.S. DOE Energy RD&D Spending by Category (FY1985-FY2007 Admin. Request) 1400.0 1200.0 1000.0 Fission million 2000$ 800.0 Fusion Efficiency Renewables 600.0 Fossil Electricity T&D 400.0 200.0 0.0 eq ue st 19 85 19 86 19 89 19 92 95 19 98 20 01 20 04 20 05 19 87 19 88 19 90 19 91 19 93 19 94 19 96 19 97 19 99 20 00 20 02 20 03 20 06 19 20 07 R
Slide 14: Cumulative Spending on U.S. DOE Energy RD&D (FY1985-FY2006) (million 2000$) 5013; 13% 12439; 31% 7329; 18% 6349; 16% 8782; 22% Fission Fusion Efficiency Renewables Fossil (including CCT demo)
Slide 15: U.S. Non-Nuclear DOE Energy RD&D With Events 1800.0 1600.0 1400.0 1200.0 million 2000$ 1000.0 800.0 600.0 400.0 200.0 0.0 19 93 19 94 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 02 3 20 04 20 05 20 06 19 92 19 95 20 01 eq ue s R 20 0 t W.J. Clinton takes office NRC Report 2001 PCAST Report 1997 G. W. Bush Takes Office 2001 NCEP Report 2004 Fiscal Year Efficiency Renewables Fossil (including CCT demo) Electricity T&D 20 07
Slide 16: U.S. DOE Energy RD&D With Events 2500.0 W.J. Clinton takes office 2000.0 PCAST Report 1997 NRC Report 2001 G.W. Bush Takes Office NCEP Report 2004 million 2000$ 1500.0 1000.0 500.0 0.0 3 19 94 19 95 19 96 8 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 19 92 19 97 20 02 eq ue st R 19 9 19 9 Efficiency Renewables Fossil (including CCT demo) Fission Fusion Electricity T&D 20 07
Slide 17: Composition of DOE Efficiency ERD&D (FY1978-FY2007 Admin. Request) 700.0 600.0 500.0 400.0 300.0 200.0 Biomass (FY02-04) Distributed (FY03-on) Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Policy & Mgmt Facilities Multi Sector Buildings Industry Utilities Transportation Million 2000$ 100.0 Note: FY05-on, biomass included in renewables 0.0 0 19 82 19 84 8 19 92 19 96 20 00 20 02 20 04 19 78 19 86 19 90 19 94 19 98 19 8 19 8 20 0 6
Slide 18: Composition of DOE Fossil Energy RD&D Spending (FY1978-FY2007 Admin. Request) 2000.0 1500.0 million 2000$ 1000.0 500.0 FutureGen Clean Coal Tech Feasibility Studies Alaska Gas Pipeline Cooperative R&D Plant & Capital Equip. Program Dir. & Mgmt. Fuel Cells Gas Petroleum Coal R&D 0.0 19 78 0 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 19 90 2 4 19 96 20 00 20 02 20 04 19 98 19 8 19 9 19 9 20 0 6 Note: Fuel cells from FY05-on are included under the efficiency category -500.0
Slide 19: Composition of Renewable Energy DOE ERD&D Spending (FY1998-FY2007 Admin. Request) 400.0 350.0 Policy & Management Storage 300.0 Indian Renewables 250.0 million 2000$ Electrical and Storage Hydropower Geothermal Wind Biomass and Biorefinery Systems Solar 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0 0.0 1998.0 1999.0 2000.0 2001.0 2002.0 2003.0 2004.0 2005.0 2006.0 2007.0 Note:Hydrogen is included in the Efficiency category
Slide 20: Overall. . . $99 million increase in total ERD&D in constant 2000 dollars (5.6% increase)  President Bush claimed he was increasing funding by 22 percent for “clean-energy research at the Department of Energy” for “zero-emission coal-fired plants; revolutionary solar and wind technologies; and clean, safe nuclear energy” but. . . 
Slide 21: Where Does the 22% Increase Come From? 2006 Coal R&D FutureGen Coal Combined (R&D and FutureGen) Solar Wind Fission Total (using Coal Combined) Percent Increase using Coal Combined Percent Increase using FutureGen only *Constant 2000$ 2007 Request 235.4 46.0 281.5 126.5 37.3 331.7 777.1 312.3 15.5 327.8 72.4 33.9 241.9 676.1 14.9% 48.9%
Slide 22: Change from FY06 to FY07: Administration Request in Broad Categories (million 2000$) Category Renewable energy Fission Efficiency Fusion Non-hydrogen efficiency Fossil Electricity T&D FY06 228.2 241.9 533.6 253.2 398.0 505.6 130.4 FY07 Request 319.4 331.7 500.2 247.7 333.2 391.7 70.9 % change +40% +37% -6% -2% -16% -23% -46%
Slide 23: Change from FY06 to FY07: Administration Request for Specific Line-Items (million 2000$) Category Solar Biomass and biorefinery systems Hydrogen and fuel cells Wind Coal R&D and FutureGen (including sequestration) Vehicle efficiency Industrial efficiency FY06 72.4 79.0 135.6 33.9 327.8 158.7 49.6 FY07 % change Request 126.5 127.7 167.0 37.3 281.4 141.6 38.9 +75% +62% +23% +10% -5% -11% -22%
Slide 24: Will the Initiative Help End America’s “Addiction to Oil?”   The FY07 budget actually cuts vehicle efficiency funding overall. This category encompasses the FreedomCar and Fuel partnership and the 21st Century Truck partnership. In FY07, the Administration is increasing research by an unspecified amount for plug-in hybrids, however. The increase in funding for coal, solar, wind, and nuclear is unlikely to affect U.S. oil consumption any time soon because oil is not used in the U.S. electricity sector.
Slide 25: Other Important Notes Geothermal, hydropower, petroleum, and natural gas RD&D are all cancelled in the FY07 request  Weatherization funding (deployment) is cut by $91 million current dollars. Weatherization activities help the poor install energy-efficient technologies 
Slide 26: Relation to Energy Policy Act of 2005 DOE RD&D programs Renewable Energy Hydrogen Energy Efficiency Nuclear Energy Electricity T&D Fossil Energy Weatherization Program (million current dollars) FY 2006 Level 238.6 155.7 308.9 496.4 161.9 454 242.6 EPACT Level for FY 2007 632 560 783 590 240 911 600 President’s Request for FY 2007 341.9 195.8 288.9 568.1 124.9 330.1 164.2
Slide 27: Conclusions: Specifics    Carbon sequestration funding at $73 million is ridiculously low. Do we want to completely zero out petroleum and natural gas funding? Cancel geothermal? Although the percentage increases in solar, wind, and biomass investments seem impressive, their total budgets are relatively small.
Slide 28: Conclusions: Broader     Overall amount of U.S. government investments in ERD&D seems rather small in relation to the looming energy-related challenges These government investments have had big payoffs in the past Congressional earmarking is a big problem Need for better understanding of ETI in general and deployment programs in particular
Slide 29: Acknowledgements • • • • • Data from 1978-1996 from spreadsheet by Paul de Sa and John Holdren dated May 2, 1997 Updated by Kelly Gallagher, Ambuj Sagar, and Diane Segal, July 2004 Updated by Kelly Gallagher in February 2005 and February 2006 Comments from Ambuj Sagar on the database Funding from U.S. Energy Foundation
Slide 30: Database is available at http://bcsia.ksg.harvard.edu/energy