Hearing of Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the Future of Coal
Hearing of Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the Future of Coal
Senator Alexander. I would like to say the same. I regret my absence because we were voting. No subject interests me more
right now. I know the same is true with other Senators here because we have talked about it in trying to understand how the
Federal Government can properly encourage clean coal technologies, especially coal gasification and eventual carbon
capture in an appropriate way. So I will read this and I intend to listen, and I thank you for being here.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Senator Alexander. I want to follow up Mr. Habicht's comment. I am interested specifically in what we ought to do
here. What can Congress appropriately do that is based on good science and making the minimum interference with the
marketplace to encourage these objectives which there is a broad consensus about. We are all tantalized really by these
prospects, but we do not want to be clumsy about it.
You suggested if I understand, 10 gigawatts of IGCC and then whatever was spent on that, spend about the same on carbon recapture. That is 10,000 megawatts. That is four or five, six plants. Was that what that would be? And to do what? To provide some sort of floor or safety valve? Exactly what would we do to encourage the creation of 10 gigawatts worth of IGCC?
Mr. Habicht. It is a great question, Senator. And to Senator Bunning's point, what we see--and the challenge in
policy making, when you have a technology like IGCC--and we are not saying that IGCC is the only way to get to clean coal, but it certainly is one that has progressed to the point where we see its promise. We see that there are some costs and other
issues that are keeping it kind of in the starting blocks. So we looked at what kind of legislative clarity through
policy plus some Federal participation in getting demonstration plants going would break the logjam and open the door to this
kind of investment. We thought the signals that would be sent through--so it is a combined recommendation of some clarity
with regard to carbon in the economy and a trading system for carbon, plus this demonstration program.
Senator Alexander. But you do not want the Government to build plants.
Mr. Habicht. The Government would just provide loan guarantees or some kind of investment----
Senator Alexander. Well, that is what I am getting to. How much loan guarantee?
Mr. Habicht. Well, as little as possible, frankly, to move it forward. The best way to do these programs is through a
competitive process where the private sector comes in and the organization that has the best proposal for the least Federal
investment would move forward. The idea is just for enough Federal investment to move some demonstration projects onto the
ground, into operation, have them carbon capture and sequestration ready, and then also invest in the sequestration
side.
Senator Alexander. But the proper question for us is what amount of Federal investment would it take to get 10,000
megawatts, 10 gigawatts, of IGCC up and going.
Mr. Habicht. Our estimate was that would be about $4 billion and $3 billion or so would be for the sequestration
research. This was based on a lot of analysis that we can provide to the committee that we think would move the process
forward. There is always a question of how heavy a government hand needs to be imposed on the marketplace to take a new
technology and get it through what is sometimes called the valley of death into the marketplace. And we do not think that
very much is needed, as long as there is a clear set of signals that really sort of show what the path forward over the next 15
years or so is with regard to policy and investment.
Senator Alexander. Thank you.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_senate_hearings&docid=21604.wais