-3 In summary, 1) the report concludes that: The potential for electric energy conservation in the reduce the need for energy in an amount equal to 11 thermal plants by 1995. 2) The effectiveness of conservation depends on the implementation program that is used. The savings potential is greatest under programs that establish energy conservation standards for buildings and industry. 3) Energy savings can be realized using existing technology and conservation techniques. 4) Conservation would result in no significant changes in lifestyle. 5) The energy made available through conservation is 6 times less expensive than energy delivered by investment in new thermal plants. 6) Conservation results in no reduction of jobs. The report is based on detailed research and technical work. We stand behind its conclusions, and admonish all its readers against the obvious dangers in quoting or excerpting from the report out of context. DAP: gmc David A. Pugh SEATTLE Power Plants Far Behind Schedule Associated Press A dozen thermal power plants now under construction throughout the Pacific Northwest and Rocky Mountain states are far behind schedule. at Eonneville Power Administration official said yesterday. Don Hodel. BPA administrator. said the delays. ranging from three to 25 months, are due largely to environmentalist pressure. That pressure, he said. means it takes utilities and companies power much longer to get the necessary licenses and permits. As a result of the construction delays. Hodel and other top BPA officials said, the region faces a huge potential power deficit in the late 1970s and early 1980s. "The power situation is pretty grim." said Ray Foleen. BPA deputy administrator. However the estimates of potential power shortages in the coming years were based on what the BPA calls "critical wa power shortages throughout the region. The potential shortage would be cut at least in half if the flow on the Northwest rivers was equal to the average over the years. however, Foleen said. Hodel and Foleen spoke at the annual meeting ot the BPA's regional advi sory council. The power plant construction delays could mean power shortages in the region averaging two million kilowatts by 1980-81. Hodel said. That amounts to the same amount of power produced by Grand Coulee Dam at its peak capacity. Hodel said the estimates. grim as he was painting them, are based on the assumption that coal-fired plants are able to get coal totally from strip-mining operations. If strip mining should be suggested. abolished. he the deficit would be even greater. And while consumer conservation of power is helpful. it is not a substitut for additional plunts.“ In addition, he said. the EPA thinks many industrial predictions of power needs in coming last year's resuited "may be underestimated." ter." Critical water is in years The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. I appreciate your summarizing some portions of it. Mr. Sklar. STATEMENT OF SCOTT SKLAR, POLITICAL DIRECTOR, SOLAR LOBBY, WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. SKLAR. Thank you, Senator. I will be much briefer. The Solar Lobby is the Nation's largest consumer organization supporting conservation and renewable energy. We generally do not oppose technologies but rather support a balanced approach to energy development for use of a diverse set of renewable energy technology. Our organization believes that a vote for Mr. Hodel is a vote to continue the Reagan energy policies which has been antithetical to a sane and balanced national energy policy supported by most Americans and most of this Committee. I will just summarize parts of my testimony. Mr. Hodel has consistently advocated a centralized energy development approach to the exclusion of other promising technologies. He has stated that solar and other renewable energy technologies are exotic and not feasible until the 21st century. In a speech in the mid 1970's he said: With the possible exception of the fast breeder reactor, the exotic resources, i.e. solar, geothermal, wind, coal deriatives, almost certainly will not be commercially feasible on any scale until the 21st century. In the meantime we must look to conventional energy sources and to nuclear fission to bridge the widening gap. We in the renewable energy field know his view is not true. I would like to point out that total renewable energy sales in 1982 were over $5.2 billion. That is not exotic. That is not no growth. Renewable energy sources are already contributing substantially to the Nation's energy mix, more in fact than nuclear power is. Even more promising applications are being developed and can be moved into the marketplace both with and without the assistance of the Federal Government. One of the points that I feel I must bring out to you, Mr. Chairman, is an example of Mr. Hodel's personal energy policies under Secretary of Interior, Jim Watt. Part of Mr. Hodel's job at the Department of Interior was to oversee the Department's conservation program. Before his arrival, the Interior Department had made impressive progress in cutting down on energy use in its buildings, which remember that the taxpayers must pay, when he assumed his position as Under Secretary, the Department's program began to deteriorate. According to a report done by the Subcommittee on Oversight Investigations of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce: In early 1982, the Interior Department's energy program stood on the verge of collapse. Throughout 1981, top level Interior Department officials failed to provide any discernible support for energy conservation. In fact, in a response to a January 4, 1982 letter to Secretary Watt requesting copies of memoranda concerning energy conservation issued to bureau heads by Secretary Watt, Under Secretary Donald P. Hodel or Assistant Secretary Robinson West, departmental representatives, conceded that none have been issued. If Mr. Hodel was in a position to vigorously promote conservation, if he chose to, but he obviously did not, instead he has treated the agency's conservation program with benign neglect. Therefore, it should be understandable when I express grave doubts as to Mr. Hodel's earnest claims of support for conservation. His often repeated commitment for energy saving programs has been a little more than pleasant sounding rhetoric. The Solar Lobby believes that the Government needs to begin diverting more of its resources towards promoting the use of renewable energy but apparently Mr. Hodel does not share this concern. At a recent meeting hosted by Senator Mark Hatfield, I asked Mr. Hodel his views on the extension of the renewable energy business tax credits and on the reauthorization of the Solar Energy and Energy Conservation Bank. He replied that he knew nothing about either of these programs, programs that are essential to development of renewable energy systems. I would also like to point out that at this meeting which Mr. Hatfield was nice enough to set up with Mr. Hodel to create an honest and open dialog, we asked Mr. Hodel on his view on the Clinch River breeder reactor and at that time he said he didn't know and 9 days later he happens to nicely admit to you and the Committee that he had made up his mind for it. The CHAIRMAN. He better. Mr. SKLAR. It is about time. The meeting between Mark Hatfield, designate Hodel and renewable energy, conservation and environmental leaders brought no commitments to support our key programs. Senator Hatfield advised us that if we were not able to get firm answers from Mr. Hodel, we should prepare questions for this Committee in order to get some specific answers in sufficient detail before he is confirmed. I hope that members of the Senate Energy Committee will ask for a written reply to these questions compiled by The Solar Lobby and the Sierra Club before his confirmation is brought to the Senate floor. Even the proponents for Mr. Hodel's nomination should support a complete and thorough review of his views before this man is selected to manage our Nation's energy policy. I do realize Mr. Hodel will in all likelihood, and despite his faults, be confirmed by the Senate. The Solar Lobby urges the Senate not to confirm this man. Such a vote would be an important signal to the Reagan Administration that this body does not support an unbalanced approach to energy development as he has strongly advocated in the past. I would like to also point out three things that were mentioned in Mr. Hodel's testimony that were not quite true. First of all he has said he wants a reasonably confidently managed department without political rhetoric. The firing or the request that Dr. Maxine Savitz move to Colorado was clearly a political move. As you know, she was reinstated by Civil Service. Second, he wanted to move DOE to a professional and technical department and thus move the weatherization programs to HHS or HUD. That is again a belief that weatherization and conservation |