File size: 108,426 Bytes
8ca9a67 |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 1701 1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1714 1715 1716 1717 1718 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 |
<html>
<title> - BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES RESEARCH FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE</title>
<body><pre>
[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES RESEARCH
FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE,
AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MARCH 25, 2021
__________
Serial No. 117-7
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
43-798PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas, Chairwoman
ZOE LOFGREN, California FRANK LUCAS, Oklahoma,
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon Ranking Member
AMI BERA, California MO BROOKS, Alabama
HALEY STEVENS, Michigan, BILL POSEY, Florida
Vice Chair RANDY WEBER, Texas
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey BRIAN BABIN, Texas
JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
BRAD SHERMAN, California MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
JERRY McNERNEY, California PETE SESSIONS, Texas
PAUL TONKO, New York DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida
BILL FOSTER, Illinois MIKE GARCIA, California
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
DON BEYER, Virginia YOUNG KIM, California
CHARLIE CRIST, Florida RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois JAKE LaTURNER, Kansas
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida
DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina JAY OBERNOLTE, California
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin PETER MEIJER, Michigan
DAN KILDEE, Michigan VACANCY
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
VACANCY
------
Subcommittee on Energy
HON. JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York, Chairman
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon RANDY WEBER, Texas,
HALEY STEVENS, Michigan Ranking Member
JERRY McNERNEY, California JIM BAIRD, Indiana
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey MIKE GARCIA, California
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida
DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina PETER MEIJER, Michigan
C O N T E N T S
March 25, 2021
Page
Hearing Charter.................................................. 2
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Jamaal Bowman, Chairman, Subcommittee
on Energy, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives....................................... 5
Written Statement............................................ 6
Statement by Representative Randy Weber, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 7
Written Statement............................................ 8
Written statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson,
Chairwoman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives....................................... 10
Witnesses:
Dr. Nora Esram, Senior Director for Research at American Council
for an Energy-Efficient Economy
Oral Statement............................................... 11
Written Statement............................................ 13
Dr. Roderick Jackson, Laboratory Program Manager for Buildings
Research at National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Oral Statement............................................... 24
Written Statement............................................ 26
Dr. James Tour, T.T. and W. F. Chao Professor of Chemistry at
Rice University
Oral Statement............................................... 40
Written Statement............................................ 42
Ms. Jacqueline Patterson, Director of Environmental and Climate
Justice Program, NAACP
Oral Statement............................................... 47
Written Statement............................................ 49
Mr. Joseph Hagerman, Group Leader for Building Integration and
Controls at Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oral Statement............................................... 53
Written Statement............................................ 55
Discussion....................................................... 70
BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES RESEARCH
FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 25, 2021
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Energy,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:04 p.m.,
via Webex, Hon. Jamaal Bowman [Chairman of the Subcommittee]
presiding.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bowman. Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to our
hearing entitled ``Building Technologies Research for a
Sustainable Future.'' This hearing will come to order. Without
objection, the Chairman is authorized to declare recess at any
time.
Before I deliver my opening remarks, I wanted to note
that, today, the Committee is meeting today virtually. I want
to announce a couple of reminders to the Members about the
conduct of this hearing. First, Members should keep their video
feed on as long as they are present in the hearing. Members are
responsible for their own microphones. Please also keep your
microphones muted unless you are speaking. Finally, if Members
have documents they wish to submit for the record, please email
them to the Committee Clerk, whose email address was circulated
prior to the hearing.
I now recognize myself for an opening statement.
Good afternoon, and thank you to all of our witnesses who
are joining us virtually today to discuss the importance of
sustainable buildings research. This is a critical component of
fighting the climate crisis.
In my State of New York, we have some of the most densely
populated cities in the country. We also have some of the most
aggressive climate goals in the world. Thanks to a broad
coalition of social movements, New York State passed the
Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act in 2019. Part
of this law was the inspiration for President Biden's Justice40
Initiative, which will channel 40 percent of the Federal
Government's climate investments into marginalized communities.
Also in 2019, New York City passed a first-of-its-kind law to
cut greenhouse gas emissions from buildings. Now, we need to
come together as a nation and build on these victories at the
Federal level.
When we think of reducing emissions, we often think of
renewable power or electrifying our transportation sector. But
another large source of emissions, especially in New York, is
buildings. Currently, about 40 percent of our country's carbon
dioxide emissions comes from the structures that we live, work,
and sleep in, and that we depend on for life-sustaining care.
This goes to the heart of why we need to address climate
change, inequality, and racism together.
As we have been discussing on this Committee, when climate
disasters strike, redlined communities of color and low-income
people are hit hardest. They're the first to lose power when
the electricity grid is strained, as we saw in Texas. And these
are the same communities that struggle with housing and utility
costs. They face health risks from toxic materials in
buildings, including in public housing that we have allowed to
fall into a state of disrepair. In my district and around the
country, the people who live in these buildings have been dying
at higher rates from COVID, partly because of co-morbidities
caused by the fossil fuel economy. We need sustainable
buildings now, and we need to rebuild our communities from the
ground up.
The Department of Energy (DOE) invests millions of dollars
every year in improving building technologies in a variety of
ways. DOE, along with other Federal science agencies, plays a
role in making buildings more resilient to extreme weather. DOE
also researches energy efficiency and increased electrification
in buildings, with an emphasis on ensuring the equitable
distribution of the effects of this clean energy research.
Let's also think about how Federal research can become
more interdisciplinary. Social scientists, for example, have
started exploring how green investments in neighborhoods can
lead to gentrification. This process is not only unjust but can
undermine climate goals. Instead of cutting emissions for
everyone, this can create a low-carbon economy for people with
privilege, while displacing communities of color and other low-
income people out of dense, walkable neighborhoods. We need a
combination of natural science, engineering, and social science
to guide equitable and effective green investments for
everyone.
And research alone won't be enough. The other work that
DOE must continue to focus on is how to get the results of this
research into the hands of the communities that need it most. A
week ago, I released a proposal to heal our K-12 school system
from the impacts of climate change and the pandemic, and from
decades of disinvestment. A huge part of this plan is focused
on retrofitting public school buildings and removing toxic
materials, beginning in the highest-need districts. Schools can
become living laboratories for the energy transition, putting
students and young people at the center of the Green New Deal,
and launching STEM (science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics) careers across the country.
Big problems require big solutions, and that is exactly
what we will be pursuing together on this Committee. I am
excited to chair the Energy Subcommittee this Congress and to
hold this first Subcommittee hearing on such an important
topic. Investing in building technologies means investing in a
safe, healthy future for our country and for the entire world.
I want to thank our excellent panel of witnesses assembled
today, and I look forward to hearing your testimony. With that,
I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Bowman follows:]
Good afternoon, and thank you to all of our witnesses who
are joining us virtually today to discuss the importance of
sustainable buildings research. This is a critical component of
fighting the climate crisis.
In my state of New York, we have some of the most densely
populated cities in the country. We also have some of the most
aggressive climate goals in the world. Thanks to a broad
coalition of social movements, New York State passed the
Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act in 2019. Part
of this law was the inspiration for President Biden's Justice40
Initiative, which will channel 40% of the federal government's
climate investments into marginalized communities.
Also in 2019, New York City passed a first-of-its-kind law
to cut greenhouse gas emissions from buildings. Now, we need to
come together as a nation and build on these victories at the
federal level.
When we think of reducing emissions, we often think of
renewable power, or electrifying our transportation sector. But
another large source of emissions, especially in New York, is
buildings. Currently, about 40% of our country's carbon dioxide
emissions comes from the structures that we live, work, and
sleep in, and that we depend on for life-sustaining care.
This goes to the heart of why we need to address climate
change, inequality, and racism together. As we have been
discussing on this Committee, when climate disasters strike,
redlined communities of color and low-income people are hit
hardest. They're the first to lose power when the electricity
grid is strained, as we saw in Texas. And these are the same
communities that struggle with housing and utility costs. They
face health risks from toxic materials in buildings, including
in the public housing that we have allowed to fall into a state
of disrepair. In my district and around the country, the people
who live in these buildings have been dying at higher rates
from COVID--partly because of co-morbidities caused by the
fossil fuel economy. We need sustainable buildings now, and we
need to rebuild our communities from the ground up.
The Department of Energy invests millions of dollars every
year in improving building technologies in a variety of ways.
DOE, along with other federal science agencies, plays a role in
making buildings more resilient to extreme weather. DOE also
researches energy efficiency and increased electrification in
buildings, with an emphasis on ensuring the equitable
distribution of the effects of this clean energy research.
Let's also think about how federal research can become more
interdisciplinary. Social scientists, for example, have started
exploring how green investments in neighborhoods can lead to
gentrification. This process is not only unjust, but can
undermine climate goals. Instead of cutting emissions for
everyone, this can create a low-carbon economy for people with
privilege, while displacing communities of color and other low-
income people out of dense, walkable neighborhoods. We need a
combination of natural science, engineering, and social science
to guide equitable and effective green investments for
everyone.
And research alone won't be enough. The other work that DOE
must continue to focus on is how to get the results of this
research into the hands of the communities that need it most. A
week ago, I released a proposal to heal our K-12 school system
from the impacts of climate change and the pandemic, and from
decades of disinvestment. A huge part of this plan is focused
on retrofitting public school buildings and removing toxic
materials, beginning in the highest-need districts. Schools can
become living laboratories for the energy transition--putting
students and young people at the center of the Green New Deal,
and launching STEM careers across the country.
Big problems require big solutions, and that is exactly
what we will be pursuing together on this Committee. I am
excited to Chair the Energy Subcommittee this Congress, and to
hold this first subcommittee hearing on such an important
topic. Investing in building technologies means investing in a
safe, healthy future for our country, and for the entire world.
I want to again thank our excellent panel of witnesses
assembled today, and I look forward to hearing your testimony.
With that, I yield back.
Chairman Bowman. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Weber for an
opening statement.
Mr. Weber. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome to
the Committee. We're going to have a little fun. We're going to
be a lighthearted Committee, and we're going to be very serious
about our work, serious about what we do with energy and for
our country, so I appreciate you being here Chairman Bowman.
All of my thanks I want to add to all the witnesses for being
with us here virtually this afternoon.
I will tell you that, today, we're going to discuss
building technology research and development (R&D) needs. And
while I'm excited to hear about the critical work being
performed by the Department of Energy's Building Technologies
Office and, quite frankly, all across DOE, I want us all to be
mindful of the role that industry can and should play in this
area, especially where there is a clear incentive and an
ability to take up mature technologies.
I say this as someone who knows the building industry
firsthand. In the 1970's, I couldn't even spell air
conditioning or what we call AC in Texas, but by the mid-'90's
I was actually running my own AC company. And I can tell you
this: Whether it's through regulation, taxation, mandates,
businesses suffer when the government gets heavy handed and
intervenes, so we have to take a very careful approach.
Today, we must also remember that we have limited Federal
research and development dollars. The Department of Energy
mainly supports building technology research and development
through their Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy,
which I am inclined to mention is the highest funded applied
energy office at the Department with a budget this past year
alone of $2.8 billion with a B. That's why I have long
prioritized investment in basic and early stage research that
will drive innovation into the next century and not just for
building technologies but across our entire energy and
efficiency portfolio.
DOE's world-leading national laboratories support that
type of cutting-edge research that we're talking about here
today. National labs around the country, from Oak Ridge and
NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) to Argonne and
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, are leveraging DOE's unique
capabilities and user facilities to support critical
discoveries in innovative material science, data analytics, and
advanced sensors and controls. And private-public partnerships
with these labs are exactly how we get the most bang for our
taxpayers' buck when investing taxpayers' dollars in this
research. DOE partnerships with industry and academia enable
the development of new technologies that can increase the
energy efficiency of building envelopes, improve construction
practices, and meet the demand for greater energy generation
capacity.
Today, we will hear from Dr. Jim Tour of Rice University
in my home State of Texas, who will give us his perspective as
one of those partners. As a professor of chemistry along with
materials science and nanoengineering, Dr. Tour's research
focuses on advanced building materials like, for example,
lighter, stronger concrete that is a result of turning waste
into a manufacturing additive called graphene. I look forward
to hearing his testimony on how fundamental materials research
can transform building technologies and at the same time how
successful public-private partnerships have supported these
innovations.
And just like Dr. Tour's example of turning trash into
treasure, we can support a future that protects our environment
for the next generation and is affordable for all Americans.
But we won't necessarily accomplish this by doing what we call
in Texas, just throwing in the kitchen sink and billions of
dollars at a broad, unspecified portfolio. Instead, we should
make our clean technology affordable through significant
investment in fundamental research paired with targeted and
responsible investments in applied energy R&D.
That is why, this week, I was proud to sign on as one of
the original cosponsors of Ranking Member Lucas' Securing
American Leadership in Science and Technology Act. This
legislation supports a diverse, all-of-the-above clean energy
strategy and prioritizes critical research to establish U.S.
leadership in industries of the future, like advanced materials
and manufacturing. This long-term strategy for investment in
basic research and infrastructure is how we in Congress should
support innovative building technologies. It creates a pipeline
from lab to market and is the most direct and efficient path to
a more sustainable future for both new and current buildings.
Thanks to the witnesses. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield
back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Weber follows:]
Thank you, Chairman Bowman, for hosting this hearing, and
thank you to all our witnesses for being with us virtually this
afternoon. Today is the first Energy Subcommittee hearing of
the 117th Congress and I'm looking forward to continuing the
bipartisan successes that have marked my time here.
Today, we will discuss building technology research and
development needs. And while I am excited to hear about the
critical work being performed by the Department of Energy's
Building Technologies Office and across all of DOE, I want us
all to be mindful of the role industry can and should play in
this area, especially where there is a clear incentive and
ability to take up mature technologies.
I say this as someone who knows the building industry
firsthand. In the 70s, I couldn't even spell air conditioning,
but by the mid-90s I was running my own HVAC company. And I can
tell you this: whether it's through regulation, taxation, or
mandates, businesses suffer when the government gets a heavy
hand and intervenes.
Today, we must also remember that we have limited federal
R&D dollars. The Department of Energy mainly supports building
technology research and development through their Office of
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), which I am
inclined to mention is the highest funded applied energy office
at the Department with a budget of $2.8 billion this past year
alone. That's why I have long prioritized investment in basic
and early stage research that will drive innovation into the
next century. Not just for buildings technologies--but across
our entire energy and efficiency portfolio.
DOE's world-leading national laboratories support the type
of cutting-edge research I'm talking about. National labs
around the country--from Oak Ridge and NREL to Argonne and
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab--are leveraging DOE's unique
capabilities and user facilities to support critical
discoveries in innovative material science, data analytics, and
advanced sensors and controls.
And public-private partnerships with these labs are exactly
how we get the most bang for our buck when investing the
taxpayers' dollars in this research. DOE partnerships with
industry and academia enable the development of new
technologies that can increase the energy efficiency of
building envelopes, improve construction practices, and meet
the demand for greater energy generation capacity.
Today, we will hear from Dr. Jim Tour from Rice University
in my home state of Texas, who will give us his perspective as
one of those partners. As a professor of chemistry along with
materials science and nanoengineering, Dr. Tour's research
focuses on advanced building materials like lighter, stronger
concrete that is a result of turning waste into a manufacturing
additive called graphene. I look forward to hearing his
testimony on how fundamental materials research can transform
building technologies and how successful public-private
partnerships have supported these innovations.
Just like Dr. Tour's example of turning trash into
treasure, we can support a future that protects our environment
for the next generation and is affordable for all Americans.
But we won't accomplish this by throwing the kitchen sink and
billions of dollars at a broad, unspecified portfolio. Instead
we should make our clean technology affordable through
significant investment in fundamental research paired with
targeted and responsible investments in applied energy R&D.
That is why, this week, I was proud to sign on as an
original cosponsor of Ranking Member Lucas' Securing American
Leadership in Science and Technology Act. This legislation
supports a diverse, all-of-the-above clean energy strategy and
prioritizes critical research to establish U.S. leadership in
industries of the future, like advanced materials and
manufacturing.
This long-term strategy for investment in basic research
and infrastructure is how we in Congress should support
innovative building technologies. It creates a pipeline from
lab to market and is the most direct and efficient path to a
more sustainable future for both new and current buildings.
I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here and I
look forward to a productive discussion, Mr. Chair. Thank you
and I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Bowman. Thank you, Mr. Weber.
The Chair now recognizes the Chairwoman of the Full
Committee, Ms. Johnson, for an opening statement.
If Ms. Johnson is not present at this time, the Chair is
going to move forward.
If there are Members who wish to submit additional opening
statements, your statements will be added to the record at this
point.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Johnson follows:]
Good Afternoon and thank you Chairman Bowman for holding
this hearing today, as well as to all of our witnesses for
being here.
The sustainability of our buildings is a topic that touches
on every American across the country.
Buildings make up almost 40% percent of the total energy
consumption in the United States, and reducing that consumption
can not only decrease our electric bills, but also
significantly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.
My own city of Dallas, Texas is the fastest growing
metropolitan area in the U.S. Our growing population supports a
growing economy, but we must ensure that new infrastructure to
meet these needs is built with the most up-to-date technologies
to provide efficiency, comfort, and resilience.
Existing buildings are another key component of federal
research, development, and demonstration activities. Many of
the advancements that have been made on improving heating,
cooling, windows, and lighting can be more easily applied to
new construction projects, but our existing buildings are not
going away any time soon. Retrofit technologies can help to
equitably distribute local and federal resources, as some of
the communities that could most use healthier, cleaner, and
more resilient buildings have aging infrastructure.
As we have seen with recent, devasting events in my home
state of Texas, ensuring the resilience of our grid is
paramount. When constructing new buildings, grid connectivity
could be a key element in alleviating energy demand and
improving reliability through next-generation sensors,
controls, and communication technologies. I look forward to
hearing how our national labs and the Building Technologies
Office within the Department of Energy can help us achieve
these goals.
Buildings affect all aspects of our daily lives, and we
should be doing everything we can to ensure that we are laying
a foundation for these technologies to improve our
infrastructure for decades to come.
Thank you again to our witnesses for being here, and with
that I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Bowman. At this time I would like to introduce
our witnesses. Dr. Nora Esram is the Senior Director for
Research of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy (ACEEE). Dr. Esram overseas ACEEE's research programs
on buildings, transportation, industry, and behavior. Dr. Esram
holds a Ph.D. in architecture from the University of Illinois
Urbana-Champaign and is a licensed architect.
Dr. Roderick Jackson is a Laboratory Program Manager for
Buildings Research at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
His portfolio includes a broad range of research, development,
and market implementation activities that aim to improve the
energy efficiency of buildings materials and practices. He
holds a bachelor's, master's, and Ph.D. in mechanical
engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology.
Dr. James Tour is a T.T. and W.F. Chao professor of
chemistry, professor of computer science, and professor of
materials science in nanoengineering at Rice University. He
received his bachelor's degree from Syracuse University and his
Ph.D. in chemistry from Purdue University.
Ms. Jacqueline Patterson is the Director of the NAACP
Environmental and Climate Justice Program. She has worked as a
researcher, program manager, coordinator, advocate, and
activist working on women's rights, violence against women, HIV
and AIDS, racial justice, economic justice, and environmental
and climate justice. She received her master's degree in social
work from the University of Maryland and a master's degree in
public health from Johns Hopkins University.
Last but certainly not least, Mr. Joseph Hagerman is a
Section Head for buildings technology research at Oak Ridge
National Laboratory. He leads the lab's research in building
envelope materials and equipment, as well as in integrated
building performance and multifunctional equipment integration.
He holds a master's in civil engineering from the Fu Foundation
School of Engineering and Applied Science at Columbia
University and earned his bachelor's in architecture from
Mississippi State University.
Thank you all for joining us today. As our witnesses
should know, you will each have 5 minutes for your spoken
testimony. Your written testimony will be included in the
record for the hearing. When you all have completed your spoken
testimony, we will begin with questions. Each Member will have
5 minutes to question the panel.
We will start with Dr. Esram. Dr. Esram, please begin.
TESTIMONY OF DR. NORA ESRAM, SENIOR DIRECTOR
FOR RESEARCH AT AMERICAN COUNCIL
FOR AN ENERGY-EFFICIENT ECONOMY
Dr. Esram. Thank you. Chairman Bowman, Ranking Member
Weber, and Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me
to testify on the topic of building technologies research and
development. I bring with me today my 20 years of knowledge and
experience as an architect, an educator, a lab scientist, and
now as a Research Director at American Council for an Energy-
Efficient Economy.
Building efficient technologies are known to lower energy
costs and create local jobs, but the biggest opportunities are
still ahead. Improving efficiency of buildings has the
potential to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 20
percent. The industry needs help from the Federal Government
and science community to develop integrated solutions and
productive processes to upgrade existing buildings faster.
Building retrofits also improve occupants' health,
comfort, productivity, and community resilience. Today, many of
our buildings don't serve us well. For instance, when COVID-19
hit, public health experts suggested increasing indoor
ventilation and filtration to lower this ease of transmission
risk, but many legacy building systems can't handle that. When
offices were sitting empty during the lockdown, they still
consumed 40 to 100 percent of their usual energy. That's a huge
waste. When the power went out across much of Texas, many
poorly insulated homes quickly dropped to near freezing
temperature. Imagine if these houses could have been kept warm
with a heating device as small as a hairdryer. That's not a
dream. That's efficiency building technologies.
Thanks to decades of Federal investment in research, we
have many technologies to make buildings efficient, healthier,
and resilient for everyone. But we don't know yet how to
expeditiously deliver these technologies to existing buildings.
Improving construction productivity offers a path. If
construction labor productivity were to catch up with the
progress made by other sectors, we will gain $1.6 trillion
economic growth globally. A third of that is in the United
States.
Many countries are moving onsite construction toward a
manufacturing inspired mass production platform. We'll lose our
competitive edge if we don't take bold actions. Transforming
the building industry would also provide an opportune time to
reduce embodied carbon in building materials and products.
I also believe a strong and a creative workforce is key to
success. We need to equip the building contractors and
specialized trades with knowledge and skills to adapt to new
technologies. We need to educate and attract a new generation
of innovators and entrepreneurs. Buildings of the future are
machines that interact with the grid and transportation
systems. Workforce development is a creative and interactive
process. Therefore, we need Federal R&D support to grow
tomorrow's building leaders outside the classroom.
I urge Congress and DOE to take bold actions to lay a
solid foundation for a successful transmission of the building
sector. First, spur modernized approaches to accelerate deep
energy retrofits and create local jobs. Second, train and
diversify our workforce and inspire a new generation of
leaders. Third, drive enduring market transformation through
integration of efficiency with health, resilience, and other
societal goals. Last but not least, collaborate with local and
State governments and community-based organizations to create
proactive, replicable solutions for all.
I truly believe that we are facing a paradigm shift.
Together, we can both create and witness history. Thank you
again for the opportunity to testify, and I look forward to
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Esram follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bowman. Thank you, Dr. Esram. Dr. Jackson, you
are now recognized.
TESTIMONY OF DR. RODERICK JACKSON,
LABORATORY PROGRAM MANAGER
FOR BUILDINGS RESEARCH
AT NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY LABORATORY
Dr. Jackson. Thank you to the Subcommittee for giving me
this opportunity today to provide a testimony on a topic of
critical national importance and deep personal passion. So my
bio is included in the written testimony for reference, so I
won't get into those details, but I wanted to provide a
personal perspective of who I am and my passion.
So my father, Louis C. Jackson, was one of 16 children,
and out of 16--and out of 11 boys, they all built houses. So
construction was a deep passion for my dad, so much so that he
first introduced it to me when I was only 3 years old. I think
my first job was to go out on the jobsite and pick up all the
straight nails.
A little after finishing my undergraduate degree, he and I
formed L&R Jackson Construction back in my hometown of Canton,
Mississippi. However, my personal passion for science and
engineering drew me back to Georgia Tech to complete my Ph.D.,
but the legacy my dad and my brothers, [inaudible] was never
far from my heart.
I have since been able to marry my love for science with
family legacy, and that brings me here today. Unfortunately, my
dad passed away on January 19th, 2021, but the opportunity to
provide testimony on the future of the industry he so--he loved
so dearly is immensely fulfilling.
So let's talk science. Because buildings consume about 3/4
of our current electricity demand, they can be a large part of
the sustainable energy solution. By leveraging energy
efficiency, greater connectivity, advanced data science and
analytics, along with next-generation materials, sensors, and
controls, buildings can be designed to synergistically interact
in real-time with the electric grid to provide demand
flexibility, all while not compromising comfort, health, or
productivity.
DOE is leading the charge in this new vision for the
pivotal role that buildings can play and has appropriately
titled this initiative Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings. In
my written testimony I highlighted how modeling, sensors, and
controls enable this future of Grid-Interactive Efficient
Buildings by providing a platform to understand, plan, and
optimize the performance of buildings in varying scenarios. I
provided ResStock as an example of an idea first cultivated by
laboratory directed R&D funds and developed by DOE funding and
support. It is now currently being used by multiple research
activities, as well as private-sector use cases.
In my written testimony I also highlighted the need for
thermal energy storage because thermal end uses like space
conditioning, water heating, and refrigeration represent
roughly half of our building energy demand. Thermal energy
could be stored as a complement as well as an alternative to
battery energy storage to balance supply and demand.
Now, I'm particularly excited about a publication--NREL
publication in this month's Nature Energy journal. It presented
an analogous adaptation of the energy/power tradeoff curve that
has been foundational in the design and advancement of battery
systems. This and others are really just some of the examples
of opportunities that we can use to further accelerate the
deployment of thermal storage as a viable energy storage
solution.
So as we continue to advance the science of--science and
engineering of individual Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings,
there are actually new possibilities that emerge to aggregate a
collection of buildings with other local distributed resources
into connected communities. So not only can we then see
optimized solutions where the total is indeed greater than the
sum of the individual parts, we can also enable innovation at
the intersection of these diverse and distinct technology
domains.
However, unfortunately, according to a recent McKinsey
study, labor productivity in the United States has remained
stagnant over the last 80 years, approximately marking the time
when the first Jacksons began to master the carpentry trade. So
this reality not only hinders U.S. competitiveness, it limits
the transition to a sustainable energy future with affordable
building construction and retrofit costs. The DOE's Advanced
Building Construction (ABC) Initiative targets this opportunity
with a vision to integrate higher levels of energy efficiency
into new construction and retrofits.
But--so as we transition to a sustainable energy future,
we have to ensure the benefits as well as the costs are more
equitably distributed. Our examples of centering equity in
energy technology innovation and energy transition are most
often focused on the deployment phase of the research,
development, demonstration, and deployment spectrum. However,
while this is important and essential, deployment is the final
stage of that technology spectrum I just described. And so as a
result, in many cases, it actually may be more difficult to
equitably deploy technology that was developed without regard
to equity. In other words, this approach could be akin to
attempting to force a square peg into a round hole. So, as an
alternative, the R&D community, the community to which I
belong, should take the additional step of centering equity
into the early stages of the technology development pipeline.
And then also due to historical under-investments, the
solutions faced by low-income communities are actually
different and actually distinctly more difficult to overcome in
many cases, hence the need for science, engineering, and
innovation are even more pressing.
So in summary, thank you for this opportunity. And to meet
our Nation's goal and continue our American leadership in
energy innovation, we should continue to prioritize the R&D
investments in building technologies. I look forward to any
other questions you may have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Jackson follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bowman. Thank you so much, Dr. Jackson. Dr. Tour,
you are now recognized.
TESTIMONY OF DR. JAMES TOUR,
T.T. AND W. F. CHAO PROFESSOR OF CHEMISTRY
AT RICE UNIVERSITY
Dr. Tour. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm a professor of
chemistry, material science, and nanoengineering at Rice
University and part of the Welch Institute for Advanced
Materials. I have 730 research publications, 234 of those on
the topic of graphene. I have over 50 U.S. patents plus 90
international patents on graphene. In the past 6 years alone,
my academic research has led to the formation of 14 companies,
eight of those in nanomaterials, and two of them now public
companies.
On March 15, 2017, I gave testimony before the Energy and
Commerce's Subcommittee on Digital Commerce and Consumer
Protection on the topic of graphene and attaining U.S.
preeminence. Four years later, I'm here to report that the
future has arrived.
What is graphene? Think of it as carbon chicken wire.
That's what it looks like, chicken wire in its atomic
arrangement but on the one-atom-thick scale. Graphene is a non-
toxic, naturally occurring carbon material, and it's a
glomerate to the natural mineral graphite. It is very slow to
enter the carbon dioxide cycle, and hence it can be considered
a terminal carbon sink with near zero contribution to
greenhouse gas emissions.
Graphene is a revolutionary material for building
construction, but until recently, affordability and access to
sufficient quantities made it only a dream for those
applications. In 2018, a graduate student in my laboratory Duy
Luong, working under funding from the Air Force Office of
Scientific Research, discovered a process that we call flash
graphene. We immediately filed patents to protect the
technology, and companies were formed 1 year later, Universal
Matter Inc. and Universal Matter Limited.
The process can take any carbon material, any carbon
material and convert it into graphene in less than 1 second
using only electricity, no water, no solvents, no additives
other than carbon itself. This new graphene manufacturing
process will lower the cost by a factor of 10, therefore making
it economically viable for use in building materials.
The majority of waste products generated by human beings
are carbon-based. If it's not rocks or water, it's probably
carbon. We can take coal, petroleum coke, unsorted plastic
waste, discarded food, mixed household waste, any other carbon
source and convert it into graphene. Our production rate is
doubling every 9 weeks, thereby projecting to hundreds-of-tons-
per-day scale within 3 years. With grants from the Department
of Energy and Department of Defense in collaborations with the
Army Corps of Engineers, ERDC (Engineer Research and
Development Center), Argonne National Laboratory, and several
large automotive, concrete, asphalt, and wood manufacturers,
we're developing graphene for concrete, asphalt, aluminum,
plastics, polymer foams, lubricants, rubber, wood, fabric, and
paint composites. By adding just .1 weight percent, that's 0.1
weight percent to cement, we get a 35 percent enhancement in
compressive strength. It means we could use 1/3 less cement for
construction. And since cement and concrete constitute 8
percent of all worldwide carbon dioxide emissions, that could
translate into a remarkable diminution of emissions.
Concrete alone is a $30 billion new market opportunity for
graphene. Zero-point-five weight percent addition of graphene
to asphalt will triple the life of the road. Zero-point-zero-
five weight percent of graphene to carbon fiber composites will
lower the weight of an aircraft by 20 percent, translating into
enormous fuel and carbon dioxide reductions, all made possible
by this U.S. invention.
Through Rice University's carbon hub, we're developing
methods to convert natural gas into hydrogen and graphene with
near zero carbon dioxide emissions. That's clean hydrogen fuel
from natural gas. The next step is developed--is to develop
entirely new classes of graphene composites that can substitute
for the energy-intensive 2,500-year-old materials that we use
today like concrete and steel while providing a non-toxic
carbon sink for most human waste products.
The takeaway from my testimony is this: First, continue to
foster basic support of basic and applied research directed
toward advancement and deployment of new materials. A few years
ago, graphene was only viewed as appropriate for ultrahigh-end
aerospace and device applications but not anymore. The
bipartisan Endless Frontier Act could embody an interesting
approach to achieve the requisite research and translational
goals.
Second, it remains challenging to go from the lab bench to
the build site with market profitability. Congress has immense
power and influence over tax policy and administrative and
regulatory burdens that can make or break our startup
companies.
Third and finally, streamlining the green card process for
scientists and engineers that have received their Ph.D.'s in
the United States so that people like Duy Luong, the Vietnamese
graduate student that discovered the flash graphene process in
my laboratory, can stay to develop their discoveries in our
Nation's companies. We just need to do it right, safeguarding
U.S. intellectual property through background checks and
security oversight. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Tour follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bowman. Thank you, Dr. Tour. Ms. Patterson, you
are now recognized.
TESTIMONY OF MS. JACQUELINE PATTERSON,
DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL
AND CLIMATE JUSTICE PROGRAM, NAACP
Ms. Patterson. Thank you so much. It's an honor to be here
with you all. And I appreciate being--having the opportunity to
share these brief remarks.
So the NAACP, when we first started doing this work,
people were surprised that we were working on energy, much less
the sustainable building sector. However, as one considers the
extreme disparities in equality, safety, and health of the
places where African American communities especially live,
learn, and work, play, and worship, for us the historic social,
political, and economic disenfranchisement has been detrimental
to generational well-being.
In 1861 and 1862 the United States Government passed the
Morrill and Homestead Acts, which were intended to give land
grants to White Americans for colleges and those seeking land
to farm. These acts were also accompanied by offers of
subsidies to facilitate the acquisition and use of the land. As
slavery was not abolished in the United States until 1865, many
enslaved and freed African Americans were unable to benefit
from these acts, and a lack of legal services meant that
African Americans who managed to acquire land couldn't even
write legally binding wills that would facilitate legalized
inheritance of property.
This is all tied to the fact that overall economic
insecurity has resulted in extreme income and wealth
differentials that persist over centuries. Even now at $171,000
in net worth of a typical White American family is nearly 10
times greater than that of a Black American family at $17,150.
And for Black American single women-headed households, the
average family net worth is only $5. At 44 percent, African
Americans are least likely to be homeowners, whereas it's 75
percent of White Americans and overall 65 percent for the
Nation.
Historic and modern-day redlining practices impact
everything from whether we own homes, where we own homes, and
the quality of the homes and other resources to which we have
access. Also impacting is the quality of the infrastructure in
our communities such as levees that protect our homes, and
property values that finance our schools are also--also affects
the quality of the buildings in which our schools are housed.
Subpar quality of the buildings and structures in our
communities means that we are inundated by energy burden, which
challenges our finances, indoor air pollution which sickens our
family, and poor housing stock, which renders us vulnerable
when disaster impacts.
African Americans have the highest energy burden, which
means that the amount of income that goes toward energy in the
buildings we occupy is the highest of any other racial and
ethnic group. African Americans are also more likely to have
our energy shut off for nonpayment, too often with fatal
impacts as we pay the price of poverty and racism with our very
lives when a candle or a space heater or carbon monoxide has
taken the lives of too many seeking to heat or light our homes
when our finances can't meet the demands of our bills.
Yet we're more likely to suffer from the pollution being
emitted from energy production as we are more likely to live
near coal-fired power plants, oil and gas refineries, waste-to-
energy incinerators, et cetera, and we pay the price with our
health. We are more likely to bear the impacts of climate
change that results from emissions from buildings.
We also know that energy improvements, whether it's
weatherization, retrofits, and clean energy like solar are tied
to homeownership and credit ratings, which are compromised by
the historic and current factors I've already described.
COVID-19 means that we are in buildings more due to remote
working and due to the need for isolation, which means we are
using more energy and also are more exposed to indoor air
pollution.
With 2020 being the hottest year on record as part of the
progression of increasingly hotter years, as well as greater
weather extremes, our ability to cool and heat our homes
reliably and affordably becomes increasingly more critical. Yet
communities and populations most impacted by these disparities
are underrepresented in the building sector and professions,
including those working on building standards in terms of
organizations, architects, and beyond. For example, just .03
percent of certified architects are Black women, while, again,
$5 is the average wealth of a single Black woman-led household,
thereby arguably rendering us as Black women as the No. 1
critical stakeholder in the future of buildings.
Key steps to right the wrong--right the historic and
present-day wrongs include campaign-finance reform so that
money interests don't have their thumb on the scale of the
change we need to have in advancing energy justice for all.
Dismantling the weapons of mass distraction, including the
formulas that tie property values with quality of
infrastructure and services at the local level, increasing
investments in BIPOC, Black, indigenous, and people of color in
education and leadership in STEM, increasing resources for job
and business opportunities for BIPOC communities, and shifting
wealth to community-led endeavors to develop sustainable,
affordable, safe, and healthy infrastructure, including
buildings.
In 2018 the NAACP launched----
Chairman Bowman. Ms. Patterson, your time is expired.
Ms. Patterson. Oh, thank you. Sorry.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Patterson follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bowman. Don't worry. We'll come back to you when
we get to questions. Thank you so much.
Mr. Hagerman, you are now recognized.
TESTIMONY OF MR. JOSEPH HAGERMAN, GROUP LEADER
FOR BUILDING INTEGRATION AND CONTROLS
AT OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY
Mr. Hagerman. Thank you. Chairman Bowman, Ranking Member
Weber, and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you
for the opportunity to virtually appear before you today. My
name is Joe Hagerman. I lead the Building Technologies Research
Section at the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National
Lab in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. I'm a building technologies
researcher by education and training.
I'm not going to take our time today to discuss how much
energy is consumed in buildings. We all pay energy bills at the
end of the month. In fact, last year, buildings used 74 percent
of all the electricity in the Nation at a cost of over $332
billion. I think we can all agree that's a big bill.
I want to focus today on the impact that Oak Ridge has
made with the support of DOE Building Technologies Office. It
is our thesis that when our Nation's buildings are cleaner and
more efficient and--the effect can be profound, improving
comfort, safety, productivity, and it will take American labor
and American jobs to realize these benefits.
So what's Oak Ridge doing? Staff at the lab are
accelerating clean energy innovation throughout the buildings'
ecosystem. Our Nation's fastest supercomputer at Oak Ridge's
speeds modeling and simulations to analyze the potential for
retrofits down to the neighborhood level for every building in
America. Our nanomaterials science leads to new building
materials with extraordinary insulation and self-healing
properties. And our engineering expertise continues to drive
breakthroughs for new energy-efficient equipment like cold
climate heat pumps, climate-friendly refrigerants, and advanced
next-generation appliances. A lot of this sounds like science
fiction, but it's not. It's science fact, and that's the
current seat of the lab, transformational science.
The cornerstone for our research is of course our
facilities, particularly the Building Technologies Research and
Integration Center or BTRIC. BTRIC is DOE's only user facility
dedicated to accelerating breakthroughs for clean energy-
efficient buildings. But the largest contributor to our work is
our partnerships. We partner with industries, universities, and
communities, and we make good partners because success to my
staff is clear: make positive, practical impact.
Let me share with you about working with the lab. The
sheer volumes of connections, interactions, and collaborations
are what make Oak Ridge a special place to work. We foster
great science because we invest in great diverse people,
expertise, and skills. And equally important we have clear
goals. Our first goal is that Oak Ridge will continue to lead
the building energy efficiency research for the Nation. One
example is how Viral Patel and his team at Oak Ridge developed
piezoelectric drying science that mechanically shakes and
vibrates fabric at a high frequency to remove moisture. They
demonstrated a faster drying time with five times less energy
that will one day reshape conventional residential dryers. To
me that's transformative.
But let's transform it again here today by recognizing
that these innovations can also provide a solution to the hard-
to-decarbonize industrial sector. This is another important
thesis to the lab's research and science. Our advancements can
apply to other processes, and it's my hope that American
companies engage with us to decarbonize all sectors.
Our second goal, Oak Ridge will continue to pioneer
connected smart communities for grid resilience, benefiting
consumers and the grid equally. Group leader Heather Buckberry
worked with Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Georgia Power
to provide and prove that homes and businesses can provide a
central stability to the grid. Heather and her team
demonstrated that more than 30 percent decreased overall energy
consumption and an approximately 35 percent lower demand during
peak winter, all with no impacts to comfort. More importantly,
residents engage with their buildings and controls in no
different way than normal, and that's Heather's thesis: Control
science can be done behind the scenes, and with Oak Ridge's
deep bench in cybersecurity, we can guard the associated data
and control actions.
Goal No. 3, Oak Ridge will help lead the Nation in meeting
our decarbonization goals. Another group leader Kashif Nawaz is
developing direct air carbon capture solutions with building
equipment technologies. Looking forward, Kashif hopes to
develop concepts and methods for net negative carbon buildings
where equipment can efficiently heat, cool, dehumidify the air
while capturing CO<INF>2</INF>, all possible by relying on
transformative science, not science fiction.
In closing, Oak Ridge is a foundational partner that can
accelerate the clean energy transition across the Nation to all
communities, and the challenges ahead to the Nation are great.
I believe they are bigger than one person, one team, or one lab
alone. It's going to take all of us, not some of us, to achieve
our goals, but from great challenges, great opportunities
emerge, opportunities for equities, collaboration, and allies
across the sciences, and opportunities to create good-paying
American jobs while we're at it.
I'm proud to work for my staff every day and honored to
work at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hagerman follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bowman. Thank you, Mr. Hagerman.
At this point we will begin our first round of questions.
The Chairman recognizes himself for 5 minutes.
Dr. Esram, thank you for your testimony. I appreciated
your emphasis on the need to align carbon reduction with other
social goals such as health and equity. I want to zero in on
the health piece. We know that redline communities and poor
people in this country face multiple health threats from
buildings. Our public school and public housing infrastructure,
for example, has major issues with mold, asbestos, and other
toxins.
What do we know about the health benefits of deep energy
retrofits at this point, and what do we still have to learn?
Can you paint a picture for us for how life could be better in
a highly efficient, zero-carbon home or workplace?
Dr. Esram. Well, thank you for the question, Chairman
Bowman. What we know, decades of scientific research have
proven the impact of a built environment on the human circadian
rhythm, immune system, cognitive function, and task
performance. There are plenty of literature. But what we don't
know is how to fully integrate these nonenergy benefits with
technology and strategy development that speaks to the
consumers and the investors. And there are no standard methods
to quantify and monetize these benefits in a trustworthy way
for consumers.
A quick example is when we buy organic food, we trust USDA
(United States Department of Agriculture) organic stamps.
There's a standard way to measure these nonenergy benefits for
organic food and procedure, but we don't have those for
buildings, for healthy buildings.
Just to--yes, that's my answer in a simple way. Thank you.
Chairman Bowman. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Ms. Patterson, thank you for being with us today. Can you
speak more to the challenges involved in bringing sustainable
building technologies to redlined and low-income communities?
I'm wondering what the CESBS (Centering Equity in the
Sustainable Building Sector) program has learned about what the
main barriers are and what we need to do to surmount those
barriers. How can we scale up weatherization, energy
efficiency, and electrification efforts in low-income and
affordable housing, for example? What do you see as some of the
research and policy needs here?
Ms. Patterson. Thank you so much. So--yes, so there are a
lot of questions in that one question. But--so first definitely
some of the barriers are really just lack of investment in
these communities both in--not only in terms of homes but also
in terms of various structures and communities. And so whether
we have--the challenge I spoke of before with housing in terms
of the historic challenges that resulted in people in the
disproportionate homeownership and so much in terms of these
kind of weatherization, retrofitting, clean energy. All of that
is tied to homeownerships and being able to be--get financing
mechanisms to--equity in one's home. And so that's definitely a
barrier.
In terms of ways that we can shift this is everything from
making sure that there are economic opportunities to bring up
the economic well-being of people so that they can make those
investments and the homeowners themselves but then also
shifting--and so that's from an individual standpoint, but also
shifting as well to communities that have been under-invested
in historically over time, shifting away from this notion that
all of the--what's available in terms of public financing
through property values, which we know just kind of continues
to have the same communities not having the types of resources
that are needed and really thinking about new and innovative
economic ways of lifting all boats because we know that there's
been attempts through--whether it's the opportunity zones or
other types of mechanisms but that have not necessarily been
successful in actually lifting the well-being and the economic
status and what's available in terms of finance for those
communities. So we're actually advancing this transformational
climate finance initiative to significantly invest in these
communities and making sure that, whether it's social impact
investing or municipal bonds or other finance mechanisms, that
they're being brought into communities in ways that aren't
extractive or that actually put communities in the driver's
seat so that these actually work for them. And the Centering
Equity in the Sustainable Building Sector Initiative is a
multi-sector initiative that pushes policies, and that's
everything from renewable portfolio standards to making sure
that building codes are also tied to the economic engine to be
able to ensure that people can be up to the standards we're
putting forward in building codes. So I don't know how much
longer I have to respond, but I'll pause there [inaudible].
Thank you.
Chairman Bowman. That was perfect. Thank you so much. I
now recognize Mr. Weber for 5 minutes.
Mr. Weber. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to go to you,
Dr. Tour. I want to make sure that what I think I heard, I
heard. Are you with us, Dr. Tour?
Dr. Tour. I am.
Mr. Weber. OK, good. You've got 730 publications, 230 of
those are on graphene, and there was how many patents and how
many companies formed as a result?
Dr. Tour. I have over 150 patent families, but 50 U.S. on
graphene and 90 international on graphene, started 14
companies, eight of those in nanomaterials.
Mr. Weber. Thank you for that. You said a decade ago your
program was supported 90 percent by Federal funds and then 10
percent by industry and that that was normal for many research
groups. Then, due to a number of factors, you started appealing
to industry and showing them how your fundamental research in
nanoscience could address some of their technical needs. And
boy, the numbers you just reiterated for us, if they don't
prove you were successful, I don't know what does.
Dr. Tour. Yes.
Mr. Weber. This might surprise some people who think
industry only wants applied research. So, Dr. Tour, can you
talk more about basic research, how it can deliver applications
for industry, and specifically in the building technology
sector, please?
Dr. Tour. Right. So thank you for that, Representative
Weber. I--so what happens is I do basic research. I'm a
scientist primarily. And--but the transition is something that
we need to look for. How do I transition this into something
that can be applied and utilized? And when we make discoveries,
right away, we need to be thinking how can I apply this? And if
we just publish a paper and just think somebody else will apply
it, it just doesn't work. We need to carry that banner several
more steps forward to show them how it might work. I don't have
to bring it all the way to the building, but I have to bring it
to a point where some company is really interested.
So for many years we would license our technology to big
companies, and for one reason or another it would stall in
those big companies. So about 6 years ago I made a categoric
decision we are going to start our own companies, and we're
going to start our own companies and build upon those because
then we can control the technology and push it forward.
And success breeds success. After we were successful with
one or two, then investors started coming and wanting to fund
more and more. And part of that, as I say, you've got to
continue to fund some of the basic work in my laboratory that
will broaden the applications of these, and that then spawns
new companies. So that's basically how we've done it.
Mr. Weber. Well, and that's a great segue because when you
talk about broadening and spawning new companies--as you know,
as a Texan, Houston is an active hub for the oil and gas
industry and also the aerospace industry, and so these large
industries have become interested in your work. And can you
explain that why many of the, quote, building technologies, end
quote, research projects have applicability actually to more
than just the skyscraper construction business? What other
applicabilities does it have?
Dr. Tour. Well, it has to do with roads, as well as
concrete for building, with paints, for wood composites.
Everything is about light-weighting and using----
Mr. Weber. Right.
Dr. Tour [continuing]. Less materials. And when we use
less materials, there's less carbon dioxide emissions, less
energy put into them, and the processes that we've come up
with--so, for example, just plastics, high density polyethylene
is $2,000 a ton. We put in $30 a ton to convert waste plastic
into graphene that can strengthen a huge amount of plastic with
that. So these innovations have great implications for the
energy industry and for lowering carbon emissions.
Mr. Weber. Sure. Well, I'm just about out of time, so I
will go ahead and yield back, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
your indulgence.
Staff. Mr. Casten is next.
Mr. Casten. Thank you so much. Always a pleasure in this
panel, Mr. Chairman and to our witnesses. This is a hugely
timely hearing not least because as we sail into thinking about
infrastructure bills, we have some real opportunities I think
to modernize our Federal building stock, public housing,
Federal buildings, the whole scope of that. It's going to be
real important to understand as we are prudent stewards of
taxpayer capital where the biggest bang for the buck is.
So I want to start, Dr. Esram, I wonder in the work you've
done or your colleagues have done at ACEEE, as you're looking
at building efficiency technologies, not the ones of the future
but the ones we can deploy today, what kind of simple payback
can owners realize on these technologies? And if you had to
pick sort of your top three absolute no-brainers that every
building owner should do, what would they be?
Dr. Esram. That's not a very easy to answer question. I
would pick lighting and water heater and probably, you know,
some HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) systems
depending on the home location, the building types. Yes, that
is usually--we have done a lot of research. For most of the new
technologies, they pay for themselves. However, they may not
pay fast enough to speak to the consumer's needs. There are
additional benefits as we discussed in the health, resilience,
and productivity. They haven't been really translated in a way
that the consumer will value more with energy efficiency. If
there were a way to quantify, monetize those, I think we can do
retrofitting much faster than we're doing now.
Mr. Casten. OK. Well, would that be a good area for
further research then to try to figure out how to monetize and
understand those benefits?
Dr. Esram. Yes, definitely.
Mr. Casten. OK.
Dr. Esram. We have a lot of pieces of technologies. We
don't know how to build efficient, affordable, healthy
resilient building at the same time. We--they haven't been put
together yet.
Mr. Casten. OK. Well, part of the reason that I started by
asking about proven technologies is that a number of years ago
I had the pleasure of touring the Bullitt Center in Seattle,
Washington, that my friend Denis Hayes has been responsible
for. Many folks on this Committee know Denis is one of the co-
founders of Earth Day. That building uses about 10,000 BTUs per
square foot in a city that averages 90,000, so almost 1/10 of
the energy use with no compromise on the--it's a beautiful
building. It's a wonderfully comfortable place to work, and
they've done it with some low-tech stuff like natural lighting,
with some high-tech stuff like continuous commissioning, and
then really interestingly with the regulatory reforms that they
actually had to work to get the local utility to pay them for
the benefit they provided the utility for reducing peak energy
demand in the city of Seattle. And that building was
commissioned in 2013. There's no reason that technology
couldn't be widely deployed other than perhaps people having
access to capital and what those returns are. Can you tell us a
little bit about the split incentive problem in buildings? Are
you familiar with that term?
Dr. Esram. Yeah, of course. The split incentive meaning if
the landlord is paying for the retrofits and the saving will be
from the tenants because, you know, they are getting the saving
on their utility bills.
Mr. Casten. So when you say that the analysis of some of
the benefits is--some of the--and I'm going to misquote you
here, but some of them have a good payback, some of them don't.
How much would that move if we solve the split incentive? So if
we took a holistic approach, how many of these problems you--or
the challenges you described would go away if we said what is
the total societal savings that would come from these
investments? If we frame it that way, what are--do you have--
does it change your answer at all?
Dr. Esram. Yeah, absolutely. You know, in the commercial
real estate there's like a 3, 30, 300 rules that on average you
pay $3 dollars per square foot for utilities, $30 for rent, and
$300 for your personnel, your salaries. So if we're able to
quantify all the non-energy benefits and pick a package and the
investors, the building owners, the business owners, the
tenants all have more incentives to work together to upgrade
the buildings.
Mr. Casten. Well, thank you. And I see I'm about out of
time, but perhaps we can follow up afterwards because I think,
again, as we think about making significant investments in our
Federal building stock, we've got a real incentive to save a
lot of money for future generations. But as we think about how
much money we're willing to spend and how to finance that, it's
going to be important that we quantify those things as much as
we can and would welcome the opportunity to work with you and
your colleagues to quantify that as we move forward. Thank you,
and I yield back.
Staff. Ranking Member Lucas is next.
Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you
and the Ranking Member. This is a fascinating hearing, and some
really impressive witnesses today.
With that, Dr. Tour, I'd like to turn to you and note that
the Securing American Leadership in Science and Technology Act,
SALSTA as a lot of us like to refer to it, creates a long-term
strategy for investment in basic research and infrastructure to
ensure American competitiveness in industries of the future.
So with that, I turn to you. In your testimony you noted
that you or your companies have received grants from both the
Department of Energy and the Department of Defense and you've
also collaborated with the Army Corps of Engineers. Having
worked with different agencies, do you think a more coherent,
governmentwide strategy on Federal science and research efforts
could assist Federal agencies and the national laboratories in
being a more effective partner to researchers?
Dr. Tour. Yes, absolutely. Anything that can be done to
assist these interactions were we can work across because the
national labs have tremendous facilities, facilities that we at
universities would love to be able to access. And working with
the national labs has been terrific. I mean, we have
representatives here today from Oak Ridge. We've published
papers just recently with Oak Ridge, and we're doing more. And
so to facilitate this and then it's not just--then it goes from
me to then the companies. The companies are able to work, and
so we have both me at Rice University and the companies working
with the Army Corps of Engineers, the companies doing much
bigger projects. We're doing the nano-sized projects, they're
doing the macroscopic projects, but all working toward the same
direction. So whatever Congress could do to streamline that
would be terrific.
Mr. Lucas. And how do you think such a strategy would
impact international competitiveness in next-generation
technologies like building efficiency?
Dr. Tour. Yes, so one of the things that we have done in
the past because we didn't have access in the university to
certain equipment is we've established collaborations with
overseas universities, and that's a shame. I mean, if we could
keep it all here in the United States, that would be much
better. And this has to do with the nanomaterials that are
going to go into making building materials with a lot less
footprint of energy. Like I said, concrete and cement, 8
percent of all CO<INF>2</INF> emissions. If we could lower
that, it is tremendous. And then the jobs then it all effects
right here. So it would be very good if we could streamline
that and have to be less dependent on the excellent access to
equipment, particularly in Asia.
Mr. Lucas. Dr. Tour, our legislation I mentioned, SALSTA,
also aims to expand our American STEM workforce pipeline and
its investment in infrastructure needed to maintain domestic
research facilities. So I'd ask you the following. What role
does infrastructure--and by that I mean world-class
laboratories, top-notch instruments, collaboration,
collaborative user facilities--have in attracting and keeping
researchers here in the United States?
Dr. Tour. This is a very big deal. We have a brain drain
going on right now because students are going back to their
home countries rather than becoming professors in the United
States, which they have traditionally done, because of the lack
of equipment and the lack of deep support from government
agencies toward academic research. And they are going home
because the packages they can get are much better. I've
testified to Congress before on this same issue, that the brain
drain that is currently happening in the United States is
frightening. Many of these people would have stayed in the
United States had the packages been here, had the equipment
been here. So if we want to keep the first-class people here,
we've got to have the infrastructure to maintain this.
Mr. Lucas. Let me conclude by saying, Ms. Patterson, I
very much appreciate your comments about the Morrill Act of
1862. Hopefully, with time and generational societal change we
are overcoming those deficiencies.
I'm very proud of the efforts made by Congress in 1890 to
create the 1890 land-grant universities and the 1994s. At some
point this is not the right venue we should discuss how we
address the proper funding of the 1890's. I have one of those
in my district, Langston University, an outstanding facility,
but making sure the necessary resources are there so that they
can be fully utilized by people.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Chair.
Staff. Ms. Stevens is next.
Ms. Stevens. OK, great. Well, thank you all so much, and
thanks to our Chairman. And congratulations to him on his first
hearing on a critical topic with some great witnesses.
So our energy efficiency sector employees, you know, just
shy of 2.5 million people according to the latest data that we
have from 2019, and it's projected to grow at about, you know,
3.4 percent year-over-year, and that's according to the
National Association of State Energy Officials and Energy--our
Energy Futures Initiative, yet 91 percent of construction
employers in energy efficiency reported difficulty in hiring
experienced, trained workers. And we certainly hear from our
construction and building trade stakeholders here in Michigan
about our critical workforce shortage, which has been obviously
exacerbated by COVID-19.
And energy efficiency in buildings, as we've been talking
about, has an enormous potential to be a job creator, and we
want to have equity, we want to have inclusion, we want to
target the needs, as our Chairman was discussing.
So, Mr. Hagerman, you discussed the need for workforce
development and training in the energy efficiency sector. You
touched on that. Can we shed some light on the role that the
Federal Government can maintain to help fill this gap, and
could you also comment on programs at Oak Ridge National Lab
that are working to address this need?
Mr. Hagerman. Absolutely. So, first, thank you for that
wonderful question. And as I said in my--with my written and my
oral testimony, jobs are--American jobs are so critical as we
start to decarbonize all the sectors and we actually achieve
energy efficiency savings for the Nation particularly because
these are jobs that are--should be un-outsourceable, right? We
need real people to go in buildings and make them more
efficient.
So let me first to speak to what Oak Ridge is doing. And
of course I think we need to do more. We always need to do more
to train the available workforce that are actually going to
make good on the retrofits and all the other activities that
American companies want to pursue. But we do three main things.
One, we have the Oak Ridge Institute, which is a collaboration
with University of Tennessee, where we're trying to grow the
talent population and pool, pipeline to actually train and
educate the workforce of the future. In one example, a
colleague of mine works in the power electronic space. That's a
space where I think that we need to spend a little bit more
time and focus on actually making sure that Americans lead the
intellectual pursuits in power electronics and advanced power
electronics. It was a little concerning in the renewable space
we saw Huawei as the No. 1 seller of solar----
Ms. Stevens. Right.
Mr. Hagerman [continuing]. At one point in time, right? So
we need to----
Ms. Stevens. Yes, we need this to be American jobs. No,
and, Ms. Patterson, thank you so much for your testimony. I
wanted to give you back some of your time because I know 5
minutes goes quick. But you say the lack of representation in
certain energy efficiency fields specifically that only .3
percent of architects are Black women. So let's talk about this
a little bit more. What are some ways--and, you know, I've been
working on this in my career before I got to Congress, very
focused on this now, but what are ways in which we can target
and train workers particularly in communities of color in an
appropriate and significant way?
Ms. Patterson. Thank you so much for that question. Yes,
so we have been working with Department of Energy specifically
and through the Solar in Your Community Initiative and also
through their Solar Energy Technology Office around how do we
start to deploy both kind of the skills and resources to
support kind of skills building, as well as providing resources
for entrepreneurs and vendors so they can be competitive in
this market.
So one of the--so everything from policymaking like local-
hire provisions and disadvantaged business enterprise
provisions that are tied directly to these contracts I think is
critical so that [inaudible]--and then also ways that we can
look at the investments in--I think, as we talked before, in
terms of the HBCUs (Historically Black Colleges and
Universities) and other educational institutions to ensure that
we have a pipeline, the good kind of pipeline in terms of
pathways for folks to enter into these professions are critical
as well and really working closely with those institutions to
help to build. And then also the skills training in terms of
vocational training but it's not necessarily through the
university, but those--making pathways like we--we're working--
we're starting a Solar Vets Initiative to help to train--that's
just--that's tied to the solar that's resources that are
available that we'd love to see--I think they've cut back on
their funding. We'd love to see that reignited and fully funded
in terms of the Solar Vets Initiative, as well as really some
funding that would target women. We did a project that was
doing----
Chairman Bowman. Ms. Patterson, just finish up your last
thoughts. Sorry about that.
Ms. Patterson. Yes, it's no problem. So working with
things like grid alternatives [inaudible] and others that were
specifically trying to train women and making sure that we have
funding [inaudible]--thank you.
Ms. Stevens. Thanks. I yield back, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Staff. Mr. Baird is next if he's available.
Mr. Baird. I am.
Staff. OK. You may proceed.
Mr. Baird. Thank you, sir. You know, I really appreciate
your having this hearing, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Weber. Now, I see our Ranking Member Lucas is on here, too, and
he's always got an interesting perspective.
But the thing that I was very interested in, Dr. Tour, I'm
going to start with you because I found this carbon sink and
the materials you mentioned kind of fascinating. And you know
we have a tremendous capability at DOE with the computer
capacity that we have to be able to advance this kind of
technology. So I hope we can see a strong future partnership
between the industry and our national labs and all this kind of
research. But I would just like for you to elaborate on using
the material to make cement, airplanes, building materials, and
how we get that to our rural communities and some of our more
remote situations. So that's the question.
Dr. Tour. Yes, so thank you, Representative Baird. This is
a real material that is transforming right now. So, like I
said, our production rate is doubling every 9 weeks, so a
single factory within 3 years will be able to produce hundreds
of tons of this per day in about 3 years, and that's the
projection rate. This--the collaborations right now are
happening with companies that are testing these in concrete and
asphalt, and one of those entities is the Army Corps of
Engineers, ERDC, in Mississippi because they have the
capability to do this, and then there's agreements with
companies. We are working with big auto manufacturers taking
their waste plastic because they're responsible now at least
overseas--they're responsible--the American companies that sell
overseas are responsible for their plastic in the E.U. now from
every vehicle, and it's almost 200 kilograms of plastic in a
car. We've converted that into graphene, we've given it back to
them to put it into new plastic that goes into cars, so it's
really a wonderful cycle here.
And the energy savings are real material. This is real
material going into then construction, concrete, wood
composites with wood manufacturers, so this is really beginning
to transform this. And this is one of the things that's been
permitted by keeping this in a small company where I can help
to control this and say, no, we got to get this into these
products, as well as small companies contacting me that want to
deploy this. I say, OK, we're not in the big scale deploying
right now, but that's going to come within a few years and we
marked down their names and we want to see this deployed.
Mr. Baird. Fantastic. I find that extremely interesting.
And with the ag background, some of the materials that you
could have access to, including forest products that can be
converted into this kind of material is of great interest to
me, so I'm glad to see the research that we do, the research
that you've done making that kind of progress.
If any of the other witnesses would like to or care to
make a comment, feel free to do so at this time. I got about a
minute and 25 seconds left.
Mr. Hagerman. I--so this is Joe Hagerman with Oak Ridge
National Lab and, you know, partnerships are a key to our
science, right? They are one of the fuels for our science. In
our BTRIC user facility we have 19 active CRADAs (cooperative
research and development agreements) where we're actively
working with companies, and companies seek us out. And DOE has
just announced or has announced a technical collaboration
program that companies can use and leverage Oak Ridge to solve
their problems, and I think that's a wonderful way that we can
augment U.S. companies and make them get to the results that we
know they can have.
Mr. Baird. Yes, I think it's important, too, that our
national labs--I'm very pleased that they're able to do some of
the basic research sometimes that the industry cannot really
justify, that that then leads into the kinds of things we're
talking about here, so thank you very much. And I yield back.
Dr. Jackson. Can I add as well?
Mr. Baird. Sure.
Dr. Jackson. Yes, so I'd like to add as well, coming from
a background of being a general contractor before going into
the national lab, really understanding that most general
contractors are small and don't have the research budgets, and
so the role of DOE and a national lab being able to provide
research and through programs such as Building America where
Building America is actually taking technologies that are
developed in the lab and working with builders boots on the
ground to actually deploy this, as well as retrofit
contractors, and so that's just one example. Better Building is
another. And then the ABC, Advanced Building Construction, is
yet another initiative that is intending to do that, to be that
venue, and now we can develop science, take science, develop it
into products and bridge that gap, so those contractors like
myself back in the day could help get technologies developed
and deployed.
Mr. Baird. Excellent point, excellent point. I yield back.
Thank you.
Staff. Ms. Bonamici is next.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Chair Bowman and Ranking Member
Weber. Thank you to all of our witnesses for joining us today
and for your expertise.
I know that residential and commercial buildings--we know
this--are notoriously challenging to decarbonize. But to
address the climate crisis, we need to meaningfully repair and
rebuild our Nation's infrastructure in a resilient and
sustainable manner. So last year I joined my colleagues on the
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. We released a bold,
comprehensive, science-based climate action plan to reach net
zero emissions no later than midcentury and net negative
thereafter. Our plan includes many policies to eliminate
emissions from new buildings by 2030, increased homeowner
incentives for energy-efficient affordable housing. And I look
forward to working with my colleagues on this Subcommittee and
the Full Committee to advance these policies.
Dr. Esram, I represent a district in northwest Oregon. I
know you're in the Pacific Northwest as well. In the district I
represent, the Orchards, which is--was completed in June of
2015, at the time was the largest certified multifamily Passive
House building in North America. They anticipated in its 57
units to have a 90 percent energy reduction for heating and 60
to 70 percent overall savings in energy use compared to a
typical building of its size. Not far from the Orchards is the
headquarters of the First Tech Federal Credit Union, which is a
five-story 156,000 square-foot building built of cross-
laminated timber (CLT).
So in northwest Oregon the industrial sector is turning to
mass timber as an alternative to steel and concrete, and cross-
laminated timber, when harvested using sustainable forest
management practices, can sequester and store massive amounts
of carbon dioxide. There are still questions about the
lifecycle assessments of CLT, but the material raises the
possibility of storing massive amounts of carbon in buildings
for decades or perhaps in perpetuity.
So, Dr. Esram, in your testimony you noted that the R&D
gap in our understanding of lifecycle carbon--that there is an
R&D gap. So what initiatives could the Department of Energy's
Building Technologies Office advance to better address embodied
carbon and operational carbon emissions in building materials,
equipment, and construction processes?
Dr. Esram. Well, thanks for the question, Congresswoman.
The most-needed R&D gap is a standardized way to calculate the
lifecycle impact of all these materials and also from a
holistic perspective to consider building as an integrated
entity, not just pieces, you know, the concrete [inaudible]. I
think we need to think about what is a target, how to
standardize it, and also give innovation or freedom to the
architect, to the builders to create low-embodied carbon
buildings and not just really at a surface level and go one
step deeper, standardization, and the most holistic view of
looking at embodied carbon buildings.
Ms. Bonamici. And what difference would it make if we had
those standards?
Dr. Esram. I think that will make the industry being more
innovative to actively think about how can they create building
products that--increase--include multiple benefits for the
society and for the building owners and for the building
occupants because currently our so-called lifecycle analysis is
too narrowly defined on the economic payback of certain
technologies or constructions. It's just----
Ms. Bonamici. That's helpful. And I don't want to cut you
off, but I really want to get a question in to Ms. Patterson.
And, Ms. Patterson, Portland State University recently released
a study demonstrating how historically racist redlining housing
policies in northeast Portland have exacerbated the effects of
warming temperatures and poor air quality and we--for Black
people and people of color. Extreme heat events are expected to
increase in frequency and intensity because of the climate
crisis and, as a result, these same historically underserved
neighborhoods will face health risks of increasing
temperatures, higher energy bills, and inequitable access to
green spaces.
And we know that many Federal programs like the DOE's
Weatherization Assistance Program can't meet current demands.
So what does this mean for our BIPOC communities and how can
Congress better support innovative residential weatherization
and energy practices, particularly for frontline households?
Ms. Patterson. Thank you so much. Yes. So I think one key
strategy is to really think about spending priorities across
the board and think about models that are multi-solving so that
we don't just think about energy retrofits that are just
focused on energy reference retrofits through the Department of
Energy but we think about how we do energy retrofits that are
tied to other--you know, that are financed through health
funding because we know that having better indoor air quality
and better temperature moderation and so forth are better for
multiple reasons and also tied to resources from Department of
Labor. So we've put together kind of cross-sector packages in
order to be able to truly fund these and recognize that it's
not just about providing one single thing, but it's about
lifting the quality of housing and the quality of health and
well-being and think about how each of these sectors contribute
to that goal. So I think really multi-solving is the key--key
term here and therefore multisector or multi-funding
approaches.
Ms. Bonamici. Great, thank you. And I see my time is
expired. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Staff. Mr. Garcia is next.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chair Bowman and
Ranking Member Weber, thanks for pulling this together. This is
actually very interesting discussions here. I want to thank all
of our guests and actually congratulate you all for your
achievements and your successes in being leaders in your
respective fields.
I've got two questions. The first is for Dr. Tour and the
second is for Dr. Jackson. Dr. Tour, this graphene discussion
is very interesting. When I saw the writeups for this, I was
doing some homework yesterday in preparation for today, and
what I was looking at initially was whether or not the use of
graphene would become a potential environmental risk like what
we've seen with PFAS creeping into our water tables. I'm sure
you're familiar with what PFAS is, the polyfluoroalkyl
substances. We have a contamination problem in California with
PFAS getting into our waters. And while I was doing that
research, I was reading that graphene is actually as it is
effectively an allotrope of carbon, right? It's a derivative of
sort of an activated carbon. And I was reading articles where
graphene may actually be used to remove PFAS as a potential
filtrate opportunity. Have you seen any research or done any
research to where the use of graphene within water filtration
systems can help mitigate our PFAS problems that we're seeing
in some of our local communities?
Dr. Tour. Yes, I don't know particularly with PFAS, but I
know that graphene, these carbon materials are indeed being
used for water filtration. In fact, I have a company that's
actually doing that, using graphene in water filtration
systems. And so--and the thing about graphene is it's already
naturally occurring. If you have graphite in a riverbed, it's
shearing off slices of graphene. It's already naturally
occurring, and that's what makes it all the more attractive in
that it's a naturally occurring material, hard to access, but
for water filtration, the PFAS problem, there are other ways
that we're addressing that. And actually my group is addressing
particularly that problem, so I know something about that. And
we've just recently gotten some grant money to do that through
the Department of Defense to try to address specifically that
PFAS problem.
Mr. Garcia. If it's OK, maybe you and I can take it
offline, but I'd love to connect you with our local water
districts here in my district in southern California. They're
struggling with this right now, as many are, but they're on the
precipice of making very significant investments, and I just
want to ensure they're looking at all options before we go too
far downrange. A lot of Federal assistance going into those
types of programs as well, as you know, so I would love to be
able to connect you offline if we can with some of our folks on
our end.
Dr. Tour. I would be glad to.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, sir. Dr. Jackson, it's hard to
believe that solar power for residential applications has been
around for, what, 30 years now, maybe even a little bit longer.
Can you talk to us a little bit about the generational shifts
in solar power? I know the cost curve is coming down. You know,
it's Moore's law really, right? It's double-capacity, half-
price every, what, 5 or 6 years. We're seeing that real-time.
Is it just an improvement in efficiencies and costs, or are
there other sort of revolutionary increments in terms of the
technology? I know the integration of solar into roof tiles now
is a new thing, but can you talk to us about how the solar
industry is actually--what is the state-of-the-art and why is
that so important right now?
Dr. Jackson. So I think that's a great question. I think
we've seen some of the trends because of multiple things. I
think it's a multifold, one being the materials. We have been
able to go from some of the traditional semiconductor-type
materials that we used 30, 40 years ago, and now we're actually
using even some of organics so even one of the things that's
been--really NREL has been leading on is perovskites (PV) is
one where you can basically paint it on. There's YouTube videos
of painting on of PV device.
And so one of the things--then the next step is what we do
as we continue to advance the curve is the soft costs, the cost
of integration, because if you make a supercheap material but
it takes a lot integrate it, then the overall effective cost is
still high. So that's been coming down as well.
Then finally where I see this going is now what we're
seeing--actually, it was a Nature Communications paper last
year where we took those advances in perovskites and other
types of materials and said what if you actually integrated
those into your window--into your building facade? So now you
can see that window that actually is glazing. You can see out
of it, but by innovating some technology that we have, you can
make it where it switches, where it's a clear window when it's
kind of the light it isn't as clear, but then when the sun is
readily available, it can actually serve as a glaze to help
with glare while also collecting solar. So you have a--so it's
taking that perovskites, those types of innovations and
incorporating into traditional facade and windows to be able to
take solar innovation to the building envelope to the next
level.
Mr. Garcia. That's fantastic. I can go on for hours on
this stuff. Thanks, guys, for sharing, very interesting
technologies. And I yield back. I'm out of time. Thanks, guys.
Staff. Ms. Ross is next.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
having this be our first hearing. It's really fascinating.
I want to talk a little bit about your initial theme for
the hearing, and so--which is how do we get some of these
technologies that are good for our environment and good for
people's health in affordable housing. And right now in my
district I have a--I'm from the Research Triangle area. It's a
growing area. And we are coming up against a real battle to get
more affordable housing. At the same time, old--what used to be
called housing projects are being torn down because they are--
they're past their useful lives and the living conditions are
not as good, and we're replacing them.
And so I'd love to know from any of the panelists where
there are good examples of sustainable, healthy, affordable
housing projects in this country or in other countries so that
when we build again, we build in a way that all residents get
the health benefits, get the energy-efficiency benefits, and we
get the environmental benefits. So to anybody, it looks like we
have a few people who want to jump in. Yes.
Mr. Hagerman. So this is Joe Hagerman with Oak Ridge. I
can talk a little bit about our work with Clayton Homes, so
Clayton Homes is the largest affordable housing manufacturer I
think in the Nation. We're working with them to apply some of
the connected-community principles into their manufactured
housing and make those homes safer, more efficient, and
healthier in terms of indoor air quality. And this is really
about adding controls into their normal product and making
those things world-class and really taking the lessons learned
from our previous projects in Alabama, Georgia, and with EPRI,
the Electric Power Research Institute.
Ms. Ross. And as a follow-up, how can we in Congress
create incentives to do that? So, you know, some people who are
in the affordable housing business are in it as a business.
Other people are in it because they really care about the
residents. Are there any triggers or incentives that we in
Congress could provide to have that--these practices--best
practices be more widespread?
Mr. Hagerman. Oh, absolutely. So another project we have
with the Knoxville Community Development Corporation, they're
actually actively decarbonizing their buildings, and they--
those are actually their words, right? And so I think we as a
lab have really learned a lot from that in terms of seeing
retrofits, and as you talk about best practices for retrofits,
they need to pivot to see those as decarbonization events
because it would make the house healthier for the homeowner and
they'd pay one less bill at the end of the day as well. So I
think those incentives to really kind rethink retrofits is a
whole--and incentives to help decarbonize or make the
justification to decarbonize would help.
Ms. Ross. Thank you. Does anybody else know of examples
around the country or around the world, any of the other
panelists?
Dr. Jackson. I'll give some--I'll give an example
[inaudible] because I think one of the things we have to be
[inaudible] to ensure that we approach the affordable housing
challenge particularly with retrofits. Those are distinctly
harder. As the Chairman mentioned, in--because--in New York
we've seen--the New York Times, we've talked about like some of
the urban heat island effects, and so a lot of times in
projects you see the actual temperature change--the temperature
dynamics in those environments are different, so we have to
think through them differently to make sure that we have the
right solution for the right application.
And so a--we've seen in Europe--some of the things they've
done in Europe is they use modular construction and actually
replace the whole building facade. Now, those are some of the
things that the Advanced Building Construction Initiative
through the DOE's funding were actually trying to say how can
we take the best from those things like we--in Energiesprong
that's done in Europe and say what does that look like or what
is a modular-type approach that can be used here or a panelized
approach and say for these types of affordable construction,
how do we do the best thing for that? Because just because it
worked in a market rate or advance market community doesn't
mean it's going to work in an affordable community. And I think
that's the--that's the challenge that we face is if we do that,
we have--we end up with a less optimal or a less correct
solution for those communities that actually need more
investment.
So to your question of what we can do, I think we need to
have a very focused effort on the affordable community so that
we can make sure we're developing the right solutions for those
challenges.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Staff. Mr. Feenstra is next.
Mr. Feenstra. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member
Lucas.
Before I start, I just want to thank each of the witnesses
for their testimony and sharing their extensive research and
opinions with us. Iowa's 4th District, where I'm from, is no
stranger to leading an energy and environmental design. With
over 65 LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design)-
certified buildings in my district, northwest Iowa takes its
sustainable buildings very seriously.
Additionally, I'm an original cosponsor on Ranking Member
Lucas's SALSTA's Act that includes an increase in the
investment in the DOE's Office of Science. Their research can
help support the next generation of clean energy and efficiency
and technology.
Dr. Jackson and Dr. Hagerman, I got a question.
Retrofitting existing buildings, which we have a lot of here in
the 4th District, is one way to avoid the embodied carbon and
cost produced from the building and construction process. What
are some of the most cost-effective and carbon-reducing
retrofitting techniques that can be utilized today?
Dr. Jackson. So I'll start. I think the most cost--one of
the things is it's kind of--you know, as an engineer, it
depends. It depends on the application in many instances. So
for the climate, one of the things that you would do is the
building facade to ensure that you get the biggest bang for
your buck because that helps you with resilience, particularly
as we look forward with climate change and making sure that the
building works today but it also works 50 years from now. So
the best you can do is a building facade.
And so now going back to the question Dr. Esram mentioned
before, we need to ensure that we understand the embodied
impact of the materials that go into that facade, and so that's
why we need to continue to advance the research in what--in
embodied energy so that as we do those facade retrofits that
can be done today, they can use the least-embodied energy
approach. So those are--that's one of the most readily
available.
Mr. Hagerman. So this is Joe Hagerman from Oak Ridge, and
I would answer controls and retuning, so controls, if you can
get your controls right, tune up the equipment, you can save a
lot of money, and then once we have controls available, we can
make the schedules fit people's active lives. And then we can
also expose those controls to the utilities so we can start
using and leveraging those buildings as a resource of the grid
to make the grid more resilient, just as we're making your
house more resilient.
Mr. Feenstra. That's very good. This is for anybody. So my
district, we're very high into agriculture production, and so
we maximize the use of our bio-based materials. As an example,
Iowa State Centers for Crop Utilization has worked on projects
like creating adhesives and insulation from crops and crop
byproducts. These can provide a cost-effective alternative
instead of petroleum-based products. Is there a way--or how do
we see that we could expand this research or do you think this
is a good method that we should be spending our time on in
future research?
Mr. Hagerman. So if I could answer that, yes, and, right,
we see a lot of those types of cellular materials going into
the feedstock for our additive manufacturing machines, so I
would encourage you to explore, you know, other uses of those
materials, too, especially in the advanced construction kind of
industry and this 3-D printed world we're about to live in.
Mr. Feenstra. All right. Well, thank you so much, Doctors.
Mr. Chair, thank you, and I yield back.
Chairman Bowman. Thank you very much. Before we bring the
hearing to a close, I want to thank our witnesses for
testifying before the Committee today. The record will remain
open for 2 weeks for additional statements from the Members and
for any additional questions the Committee may ask of the
witnesses.
The witnesses are excused, and the hearing is now brought
to a close. We are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:35 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]
</pre></body></html>
|