Remarks by
Robert S. Kripowicz
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy
U.S. Department of Energy
at the
International Test Network for CO2 Capture Workshop
Gaithersburg, Maryland
October 11, 2000

I appreciate the work that has gone into planning this conference and want to thank the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, ABB Lummus Global, and all the individuals within the Department of Energy for their cooperation. It takes quite an effort to organize a workshop like this, and I sincerely appreciate those who have worked hard behind the scenes to make this meeting a success.

To set the backdrop for our discussions over the next two days, let me repeat a phrase we've heard a lot these last few years - "You can grow the economy and protect the environment at the same time." It's a true statement. We have seen remarkable economic growth in recent years - growth that, in large part, has been due to affordable energy.

Economic expansion has led to increasing demands for energy - especially electric power - and fossil fuels have supplied much of that demand. And yet, even though we have more than doubled the use of coal in this country since 1970, we have reduced emissions of sulfur pollutants by 70 percent and nitrogen oxide pollutants by 45 percent. Our air is cleaner, our water is cleaner, and our economy is stronger - largely because we have developed and deployed new and cleaner technology.

Technology has served us well in the last 30 years. Now we must look to the NEXT 30 years, and quite likely beyond that - and call on technology again to address the new environmental issues we face.

Just over one year ago, the President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology underscored the importance of carbon sequestration research in its report Federal Energy Research and Development for the Challenges of the Twenty First Century. The Committee recommended increasing DOE's research and development program for the capture and long-term storage of greenhouse gases.

Subsequently, the DOE Office of Fossil Energy and Office of Science issued a final report on Carbon Sequestration Research and Development last December that assessed (quoting from the report) "...the key areas for research and development that could lead to an understanding of the potential for future use of carbon sequestration as a major tool for managing carbon emissions."

Many of you have seen this report. If you have not, I encourage you to obtain a copy. It's available from our web site and also from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory's web site.

I want to give a great measure of credit to the DOE Office of Science and its former director Martha Krebs. Although Martha has now left the Department, her office proved instrumental in helping to chart a road map for conducting research on various carbon sequestration options.

Global climate change IS a long-term issue. And so too will be its solution. Changing the energy system that has largely been responsible for our economic growth and prosperity - especially changing it overnight - is neither economically feasible nor socially responsible. Premature retirement of our existing infrastructure would be prohibitively expensive and economically unwise. There are better approaches.

Someone once said that the hallmark of a progressive society is that it has the wisdom to confront its challenges using ALL of its options.

We can take great steps in addressing the challenge of global climate change by infusing greater energy efficiencies into our existing infrastructure - both at the front end where the energy is produced, and at the back end where energy is consumed. But efficiency alone will not get us to our desired goal.

We can - and we must - also turn to greater use of renewable resources. We must continue the dramatic progress that has been made recently in reducing the costs of wind and solar power. But renewable resources also are not the sole answer.

We can make greater use of natural gas - and that is largely happening. In this country, it is likely that of the next 1000 power plants to be built, 900 will be fueled by natural gas. But natural gas, by itself, is not the magic solution to the climate change issue.

It will take a combination of all of these options - and even then, the progress toward stabilizing greenhouse gases in our atmosphere may not be sufficient. That is why carbon sequestration is important.

The challenge of global climate change also requires that we look out beyond our borders. Electricity is the fastest growing segment of the global energy market. Some have predicted that by 2050, the forces of population growth, urbanization, expanding global commerce, and simple human aspirations could result in the global consumption of electric power that is 4 times greater than today.

If we were to set a goal of bringing electricity in some form to every inhabitant of the world in the next half century, it would mean providing power to at least 100 million more people in the world every year for the next 50 years.

Some people believe that is the direction we are heading - and I hope they are right. But that rate of power demand is triple the rate of electrification over the past quarter century. It means that the world would have to add the equivalent of a 1000 megawatt power plant every one or two days for at least the next 50 years. And if that is to happen, most of those plants will likely burn fossil fuels.

This is a staggering challenge within ANY environmental framework. But within the context of greenhouse gas emissions and global climate change, the challenge is even greater. That is why carbon sequestration may be so critical to our global future.

Each generation faces its challenges - and I strongly believe that the dominating challenge we will face in 21^st century will be a global environmental challenge, and it, in turn, will be dominated by climate change.

When Secretary Richardson spoke to a conference of the world's coal experts in June 1999, he emphasized that carbon sequestration must become the third leg of our climate change strategy - joining energy efficiency and the greater use of low- or no-carbon fuels. From what I have seen and heard since the Secretary made his remarks, more and more people - in research laboratories, in corporate boardrooms and importantly, in the halls of Congress - now agree.

Three years ago, we were scraping together funds to support a few $50,000 feasibility studies to see if carbon sequestration research made any sense. This past week, the House and Senate finished action on our fiscal year 2001 appropriations and approved nearly $19 million for sequestration research.

Three years ago, skepticism abounded. Today, that has changed. Now a sense of momentum exists. There is a growing belief among scientists and policymakers that we are on the right path. One of the important reasons for this new optimism has been the response of industry. The private sector has come forward -- not just with good ideas but with a commitment of resources.

This summer we completed our first round of major industry competition. When we started the competition, we thought we would be lucky if the private sector met our cost-sharing threshold of 20 percent. This past July, we announced the first 13 winners of the competition - and the average private sector cost-sharing was more than 40 percent.

Secretary Richardson called the competition "our strongest commitment to date for carbon sequestration research." But it was ALSO industry's strongest commitment to date. And that has sent a very clear - and very positive - message to the scientific community AND to the decisionmakers on Capitol Hill.

A second round of proposals came in at the end of August, and there will be more project announcements in the near future.

We have also seen our national laboratories step up to the challenge of carbon sequestration in much the same way they have taken on challenges in the past - putting their best minds and creative ideas together in cooperative efforts with industry.

We now have a solid technical foundation - across all fronts....from capture and separation to geologic, terrestrial, and ocean storage. We now have several advanced concepts in the incubation stage - from exploratory research into light-enhanced bioreactors to studies of cryogenic clathrate formation.

We now have an active modeling and assessment program underway, using state-of-the-art computing technology to model state-of-the-art options.

All of this in a program a little more than 3 years old.

Due largely to many of you in this audience, we have made a remarkable start. But we cannot let our rapid start cloud our judgments or rush us to conclusions. We cannot cut corners. Carbon sequestration is an area of science and technology that must be approached in a careful, methodical manner. It is a whole new area of research - although much of it clearly borrows from a wealth of other disciplines.

Yet, there are still major uncertainties. Cost, practicality, environmental safety...all of these are unanswered questions that must be addressed. We should not get discouraged if there are false starts....if there are some apparently good ideas that don't pan out.

Progress breeds expectations. But this is an area of research that is so fundamental to our future well-being, we must do it right. Some want overnight solutions. Some want a silver bullet. But these are expectations we must temper. The technical foundation we are building today must be scientifically strong....the concepts technically, economically, and environmentally valid. The stakes are too high for anything less.

When Secretary Richardson elevated carbon sequestration to a climate change priority in 1999, he called for the best minds in the business to join the effort. I believe the most significant accomplishment of all during the last three years is that the research community has responded to the Secretary's call. The best minds ARE now in the business of carbon sequestration research.

Now our challenge is to channel the effort - identify the most productive avenues of research...develop and test the most promising concepts...build brick-by-brick, a solid scientific and technical foundation - and all the while, not be afraid to encourage new thinking and, if necessary, head in new directions.

And we must be in it for the long haul. This is a very long-term problem that requires long-term solutions.

That is why meetings like this are important. Here today and tomorrow, we can assess where we have been and where we must go. We can catch our breadth, develop our strategies, and then gather our resources and continue to move forward.

Speaking for all of us at the Department of Energy, we are pleased that you have joined us today in Gaithersburg. You recognize the important challenge ahead...and your presence here today tells us that you have come prepared to face it.

Let's use the next two days to make sure, to the best of our ability, that our steps are in the right direction. This is a very important journey.

Thank you and best wishes for productive discussions.