Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2007
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007 -- (House of Representatives - May 24, 2006)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple. It would restore funding to the State Energy Program which the underlying bill eliminates, and it would happen by reducing the administrative funding for the Department of Energy to last year's levels. That means that the Department's administrative funds would amount to about $278 million.
The administration thought this program worthy enough to propose an increase to $49.5 million from approximately $35 million last year. Essentially I am saying this amendment would simply fund this program at $25 million.
The State Energy Program, it provides grants to States and directs funding to State energy offices. The States use these grants to address their energy priorities, program funding to adopt emerging renewable energy and energy-efficient technologies.
States have implemented countless initiatives funded by this program that have reduced energy costs and have increased efficiency.
Let me give you two or three examples. The Texas Energy Office's Loan Star Program has reduced building energy consumption and taxpayers' energy costs through the efficient operation of public buildings, saving taxpayers more than $172 million through energy efficiency projects.
New Mexico, the State energy office is supporting an expandable renewable energy usage, tax incentives for hybrid vehicles, school energy-efficiency programs, technical assistance to the wind industry and expansion of geothermal resources. With the funding, New Mexico has been able to meet approximately 40 energy performance goals with an annual energy savings in millions, including an expansion in the use of ethanol and biofuels.
My own State of Connecticut, the program supports 31 municipalities to help them make their schools and public buildings more energy efficient.
The value of this program speaks for itself. It enables energy offices to design and implement programs according to the needs of their economies, the potential of their natural resources and the participation of their local industries. For every dollar we spend on this public-private partnership, we save $7.23, while almost $11 is leveraged in the State, local and private funds.
That means by funding the program at $25 million this year, we could help save as much as $180 million just in fiscal year 2007.
Mr. Chairman, helping States to carry out their own energy efficiency and renewable energy programs is an effort in which the Federal Government not only has a stake, it has an obligation. This is something we should be encouraging, not eliminating. I am asking my colleagues to support this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
On the IG report, and I quote: ``Nothing came to our attention during our visits to six States to indicate that they were not spending the funds for their intended purpose.''
If anyone wants to know, I have a list of all of the States and the amount of money they receive in grants every year from this program, and they will get nothing next year if we do not restore some funding.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. DeLAURO. I thank the gentleman and applaud his leadership.
Remote areas, 11 miles off the coast of Connecticut, 9 miles off the coast of New York. The LNG Broadwater facility, actually, the proposal, is a vessel roughly the size of the Queen Mary. One week after passing the interior bill which dedicated $1.8 million to cleaning up the Long Island Sound, we are now going to place this vessel in the Long Island Sound. Also, a 25-mile pipeline through the middle of what is prime ground for lobstering and for fishing. Further, the entrance to the sound might need to be temporarily closed when the LNG shipments arrive every few days, disrupting all other commerce that uses that passage.
We are going to ask the Coast Guard to enforce the zone. They are already stretched thin, but they are going to have to patrol the LNG site, which will pose a new security risk.
I will conclude by saying to you that we voted to protect the Long Island Sound and, without this amendment, who knows what other estuaries of national significance will be at risk of becoming our next industrial zone.
Support the Bishop amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov/