Hearings to examine challenges to meeting increased electricity demand.

1[Senate Hearing 119-125]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                         S. Hrg. 119-12556                   HEARING TO IDENTIFY CHALLENGES TO7                  MEETING INCREASED ELECTRICITY DEMAND89========================================================================1011                                HEARING1213                               BEFORE THE1415                              COMMITTEE ON16                      ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES17                          UNITED STATES SENATE1819                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2021                             FIRST SESSION22                               __________2324                             JULY 23, 202525                               __________2627              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]2829                       Printed for the use of the30               Committee on Energy and Natural Resources3132        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov3334                                 ______3536                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE373861-245                     WASHINGTON : 20263940               COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES4142                        MIKE LEE, Utah, Chairman43JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming               MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico44JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                RON WYDEN, Oregon45STEVE DAINES, Montana                MARIA CANTWELL, Washington46TOM COTTON, Arkansas                 MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii47DAVID McCORMICK, Pennsylvania        ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine48JAMES C. JUSTICE, West Virginia      CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada49BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana              JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado50CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        ALEX PADILLA, California51LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska               RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona52JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota5354                  Wendy Baig, Majority Staff Director55            Patrick J. McCormick III, Majority Chief Counsel56           Jake McCurdy, Majority Policy Director for Energy57                 Jasmine Hunt, Minority Staff Director58                 Sam E. Fowler, Minority Chief Counsel59              Anais Borja, Minority Energy Policy Director6061                            C O N T E N T S6263                              ----------6465                           OPENING STATEMENTS6667                                                                   Page68Lee, Hon. Mike, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Utah............     169Heinrich, Hon. Martin, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from70  New Mexico.....................................................     37172                               WITNESSES7374Huntsman, Peter, Chairman, President, and Chief Executive75  Officer, Huntsman Corporation..................................     476Tench, Jeff, Executive Vice President, North America and Asia77  Pacific, Vantage Data Centers..................................    1278Gramlich, Rob, President, Grid Strategies, LLC...................    207980          ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED8182Gramlich, Rob:83    Opening Statement............................................    2084    Written Testimony............................................    2285    Responses to Questions for the Record........................    6886Heinrich, Hon. Martin:87    Opening Statement............................................     388Hiatt, Shon R. and Angela Ryu:89    Article entitled ``Turning Old Into New: Meeting Immediate90      Data Center Demands by Converting Gas Peaker Plants to91      CCGT'' published on July 30, 2025 by the University of92      Southern California Marshall School of Business............    8393Huntsman, Peter:94    Opening Statement............................................     495    Written Testimony............................................     796King, Jr., Hon. Angus S.:97    Department of Energy press release entitled ``Department of98      Energy Terminates Taxpayer-Funded Financial Assistance for99      Grain Belt Express'' dated July 23, 2025...................    38100    Photograph of a carbon fiber-based conductor next to a101      conventional high-tension conductor........................    41102Lee, Hon. Mike:103    Opening Statement............................................     1104McLaughlin, Thomas:105    Letter for the Record........................................   102106Tench, Jeff:107    Opening Statement............................................    12108    Written Testimony............................................    14109    Responses to Questions for the Record........................    63110111                   HEARING TO IDENTIFY CHALLENGES TO112                  MEETING INCREASED ELECTRICITY DEMAND113114                              ----------115116                        WEDNESDAY, JULY 23, 2025117118                                       U.S. Senate,119                 Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,120                                                    Washington, DC.121    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m. in122Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mike Lee,123Chairman of the Committee, presiding.124125              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,126                     U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH127128    The Chairman. The hearing will come to order.129    Good morning and welcome to all of you. Today's hearing130focuses on the challenges that America faces in meeting the131increased demand for electricity, something that has gotten a132lot of attention, with good reason. Demand has been trending133upward in recent years, and some expect it could grow by 25134percent just in the next five years alone. Data centers135supporting artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, and136the planned retirement of current production sources are just a137few of the causes creating this increased demand, and as more138people are drawn toward electric cars, that could put139additional demand in play, as well.140    America needs to put more electrons on the grid, and we141will be hearing from three witnesses to better understand these142issues today, and we are very fortunate to have them. They are,143first, Peter Huntsman, the Chairman and CEO of Huntsman144Corporation; Jeff Tench, the Executive Vice President of145Vantage Data Centers--welcome--and finally, Rob Gramlich, the146President of Grid Strategies. Thanks to all of you for being147here.148    Now, let's begin with a simple fact. America's electricity149demand is surging. It's not creeping up, it's surging. For150decades, power demand in this country remained relatively151flat--utilities planned for it, markets priced for it,152regulators counted on it, but that era is over. We are now153entering a new era of electrification--data centers, AI154computing, manufacturing returning home, electric vehicles, all155of it. Even conservative estimates suggest that we could see156two to three percent annual growth compounded over the next157decade. Now, that number, two to three percent, annually158compounded--that might not sound like much, but it's like a159two-way highway that was built decades ago that is now expected160to carry rush hour traffic to and from a major city every day161of the year--more cars, bigger trucks, constant congestion. And162if the road hasn't changed, but everything around it has163changed, that is going to be an issue. Now, that is a fairly164decent analogy, something to help understand our power grid and165the challenges now facing it.166    Now, here is the real problem. We have spent much of the167last 20 years shutting down the generation that can actually168meet that demand--coal plants retired, nuclear blocked, natural169gas tied up in endless litigation. And we replaced a lot of170that capacity with wind, solar, and batteries--resources that171by design don't work all the time, but work roughly a third of172the time. One-third of the time--that's not enough. Not enough173to support the dispatchable baseload power that we got from the174other sources I mentioned. These resources, being non-175dispatchable, means that they cannot be dispatched at the exact176moment that they are needed with the predictability and the177reliability that is required. They do not provide baseload178power and they do not build themselves. They require massive179transmission overhauls, grid upgrades, and most importantly, in180many circumstances, subsidies. So this isn't a free market. In181many ways, it's a rigged one.182    The Federal Government has been investing heavily in183certain green energy technologies for decades, handing out tax184credits like candy. So naturally, developers follow these185credits, and why wouldn't they? But what is the result? Ninety-186five percent of the projects waiting to connect to the grid187happen to be wind, solar, and batteries, but only 10 percent of188those ever make it online--onto the grid. Meanwhile, gas189plants, nuclear reactors, geothermal, these things that can190actually power a modern economy, providing predictable,191reliable, affordable, clean baseload power, they get crowded192out or delayed endlessly or blocked entirely. Why? Well,193government red tape is responsible for a lot of it and194activist-funded lawsuits also have a fair amount to do with it195because a government that picks winners and losers--and196consistently picks losers--creates a lot of this problem.197    Now, look at what FERC tells us. According to FERC, between198now and 2028, we are set to retire 24 gigawatts of coal-fired199generation, just in the next three years alone, and replace it200with just five gigawatts of gas-fired power. That math doesn't201work--not in theory, not in practice, not now, not then, not202anywhere, or at any time. The system was built for slow, steady203growth. What we are facing now is a tidal wave. And if we don't204change course, if we don't wake up to this reality, the lights205are going out. We need utilities, developers, states, and206Congress to start telling the truth about this. The grid is not207ready. The system is not built for this. And the path that we208are on will culminate, quite predictably, in rolling blackouts,209rising prices, national vulnerability, and our inability to210remain competitive in what many are describing as the AI global211arms race.212    In fact, on only July 7, the U.S. Energy Department warned213that between the growth in demand and the retirement of some214current sources, if we don't take steps to respond to the215increased demand, the risk of blackouts in the United States216will increase a hundredfold. I repeat, increasing 100 times217what we currently face in terms of blackouts across the218country. We currently experience annual outage hours in the219single digits. And if we don't take effective steps, the220estimate is more than 800 outage hours per year in the next221five years. We cannot allow that to happen. We have too much222riding on that. It's time that we face the facts, and that's223what this hearing is about.224    The Chair now recognizes the Ranking Member, Senator225Heinrich.226227          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,228                 U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO229230    Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman Lee. Welcome to our231witnesses, Mr. Gramlich, Mr. Huntsman, and Mr. Tench.232    As we will discuss today, the scale and drivers of today's233rising electricity demand are relatively unprecedented. It's234not just that electricity demand is reaching record highs, it's235that we are entering a new era of sustained load growth. The236structural forces underlying today's load growth are237converging--the growth of AI data centers, the electrification238of vehicles, buildings, industry, as well as a resurgence in239domestic manufacturing. And meeting this load growth will240require structural changes to how we permit and build our241energy infrastructure.242    In his testimony, Mr. Tench states that Vantage would243prefer to source power from the grid, but that the system is244out of sync. From interconnection timelines that are too long,245transmission lines that take too long to build, and permitting246that is too fragmented, the challenges that Mr. Tench247articulates are the same ones that this Committee has been248trying to address for some time. As Mr. Tench notes in his249testimony, no single business or technical workaround can250substitute for a coordinated, modern, responsive grid.251Fortunately, we sit on the Committee that can help make that252happen. The urgency isn't just about maintaining our edge in AI253innovation, it's about affordability. As Mr. Gramlich points254out in his testimony today, electricity bills are becoming255unaffordable for too many Americans, and recent actions by256President Trump and by the ``Big Bad Bill'' will make this257worse.258    The reconciliation bill alone is estimated to increase259annual energy costs more than $16 billion in 2030, and more260than $33 billion by 2035. This is because, at a time when we261need every single electron we can get, the reconciliation bill262is causing many clean energy projects to be canceled. And the263President's tariffs are driving up equipment costs, raising the264cost of all energy generation resources--all of them. This is265leading directly to Americans spending more on their utility266bills. And on top of this, an aging electrical grid is causing267many energy projects to be stalled for years in interconnection268queues.269    In June 2025, Grid Strategies released a study that found270that investing in well-planned, high-capacity transmission271could save U.S. households between $6.3 and $10.4 billion272annually, and that is even after accounting for the cost of273actually building those transmission lines. The amount of274energy currently in U.S. interconnection queues substantially275exceeds the existing electricity demands--if only the grid276could integrate it. According to the Energy Information277Administration (EIA), in 2024, the U.S. installed nearly 49278gigawatts of new grid capacity, 95 percent of which was for279renewable resources. This year, the EIA estimates that280developers will build 63 gigawatts of new capacity, including28132.5 gigawatts of new utility-scale solar, 7.7 gigawatts of282wind power, 18.2 gigawatts of energy storage, and just 4.4283gigawatts of natural gas-fired generation. Clean energy is the284most affordable, and it's the fastest type of energy generation285to deploy, outpacing natural gas, which is facing years-long286backlogs in turbine availability. If you order a combined-cycle287natural gas turbine today, you will be lucky if it puts its288first electron on the grid before 2032.289    Meanwhile, states like Texas and California are290demonstrating that high levels of renewable energy do not291compromise grid reliability. In fact, they improve it. After292Texas added 9,600 megawatts of clean energy, including 5,400293megawatts of solar, 3,800 megawatts of energy storage, and 253294megawatts of wind, ERCOT CEO Pablo Vegas said that the risk of295grid emergencies dropped to less than one percent. That is down296from 16 percent the previous year. NERC's 2025 Summer297Reliability Assessment confirmed this trend, showing that the298risk of rolling blackouts in Texas fell from 15 percent to 3299percent as battery capacity came online.300    I will close by saying that I am deeply disturbed by the301recent Department of Interior policy that requires Secretary302Doug Burgum to personally review and sign off on wind and solar303projects on federal lands. This nakedly political decision will304risk delaying new generation additions to the grid when we need305them the most. And consequently, it will drive up cost.306According to the Department of Energy, federal lands in the307contiguous United States could support more than 7,700308gigawatts of renewable energy capacity. And with that said, I309look forward to discussing how we can meet the rise in310electricity demand and lower energy costs for households by311integrating the most affordable and rapidly deployable energy312resources today while also investing in long-term313modernization.314    Thank you, Chairman.315    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Heinrich.316    We will now hear from each of our witnesses, giving you317five minutes to make your opening statements.318    We will hear first from Mr. Huntsman, then from Mr. Tench,319and then from Mr. Gramlich.320    Mr. Huntsman, you may proceed.321322  STATEMENT OF PETER HUNTSMAN, CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT, AND CHIEF323            EXECUTIVE OFFICER, HUNTSMAN CORPORATION324325    Mr. Huntsman. Thank you very much.326    Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, members of the327Committee, my name is Peter Huntsman, and I am Chairman,328President, and Chief Executive Officer of Huntsman Corporation.329For the first time in a generation, America faces an increase330in electricity demand that will have far-reaching consequences331if not managed appropriately by elected officials in both332parties at federal, state, and local levels. This may sound333like hyperbole, but it is not. Look no further than Germany,334the United Kingdom, and much of Europe and see how quickly335great powers can implement policy to kill productive and336thriving industries that form the backbone of modern economies.337Just a decade ago, these nations were great industrial338powerhouses. Today, they have the highest electricity prices in339the industrialized world, shrinking economies, and factories340are being shuttered almost daily. Sadly, I have experienced341this firsthand, as our company has laid off thousands of342employees in Europe. Facilities that were globally competitive343just a few years ago are now closed and are no longer operating344due to ruinous and unrealistic net-zero and decarbonization345policies and the failed ideas that you can power a modern346economy without developing oil and gas resources.347    In the chemical industry, we use large amounts of energy348and electricity, take molecules mostly derived from oil and349gas, break them apart, and then put them back together to make350the physical building blocks of virtually everything you see,351touch, and consume in modern life. Our entire supply chain352employs millions of Americans and is mostly domestic-based--353from transportation, technology, food supplies, medical354equipment, building materials, pharma, and textiles--none of355this would be possible without the chemical industry. None of356it. Technology companies perform similar functions, taking357energy and electricity to create data that enables everyone of358us to tap our mobile phones--by the way, another product that359contains over 100 different chemicals to build--and access the360world at our fingertips. Virtually every step in the tech361world, from chip manufacturing to data generation, storage,362transmission, computing, and consumer interface, uses363petrochemicals and enormous amounts of electricity to not just364maintain, but to grow this vital industry.365    The advent of artificial intelligence is fast changing the366face of modern society and global competitiveness. AI will367bring an enormous wave of societal benefit, similar to every368past industrial and technological advancement. However, it is369simply impossible for this to happen in a society that does not370have the basic hydrocarbons to both construct the physical371materials needed to build and the electricity required to power372this great advancement. The challenge before us today is real,373but the opportunities are even greater. The United States has374both the raw material and the technological base to not just375compete, but to continue to lead. Our greatest challenge will376be to balance the enormous demand for more electricity while377being able to keep prices affordable and supplies reliable for378both consumers and industry, especially those who do not379benefit from trillion-dollar balance sheets.380    If our growing demand for electricity being consumed by381data centers and a growing tech industry are not met with382additional reliable and affordable energy sources, we risk383losing both our manufacturing and consumer affordability. It is384simply impossible to build a modern industrial and385technological economy on an energy base that is neither386reliable nor affordable. We can talk all we want to about387nuclear ambitions that are decades away or intermittent wind388and solar dreams that are operable 25 to 40 percent of the time389and require even greater investment and more reliable backup390and unrealistic battery storage, but these dreams will never391solve today's problems. The demand for power and raw materials392is here today and growing tomorrow. If we continue to build out393more tech industry consumption than production of electricity394while at the same time prohibiting the reliable and affordable395production of largely hydrocarbon-based energy sources, we will396look more like Europe and less like the continued model of397growth that has made the United States the envy of the world.398    Senators, now is the time for ambitious and bipartisan399planning that will allow American industry, capital markets,400and innovation to meet the needs of these exciting times and401opportunities. Our company, our industry, and most importantly,402the millions of people who rely on our operations, look forward403to being a part of the needed solutions and innovations that404will be required for our continued success. Thank you.405    [The prepared statement of Mr. Huntsman follows:]406407    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]408409    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Huntsman.410    Mr. Tench.411412   STATEMENT OF JEFF TENCH, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, NORTH413        AMERICA AND ASIA PACIFIC, VANTAGE DATA CENTERS414415    Mr. Tench. Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, and416members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to417testify today. My name is Jeff Tench, and I serve as the418Executive Vice President for North America and Asia Pacific at419Vantage Data Centers, a Colorado-based developer, owner, and420operator of hyperscale data centers for leading U.S. technology421companies. I would like to briefly summarize my written remarks422that have been submitted for the record.423    While I do not claim to be an expert on energy policy, I424have spent my career building businesses and leading teams that425construct and operate the most efficient, secure, and resilient426large-scale digital infrastructure in the world, and I appear427before you with one message, based on what I have seen from my428position: the greatest barrier we collectively face to our429country's leadership on artificial intelligence today is timely430access to reliable electric power. Demand for the AI and cloud431infrastructure that Vantage provides is accelerating. Over the432past decade, I have seen the scale and speed of hyperscale data433center development grow dramatically. Five years ago, a 30-434megawatt facility was considered large. Today, 100 megawatts is435the starting point, with campus developments commonly reaching436500 megawatts or more. And we have multiple customers seeking437one gigawatt or more for AI infrastructure, which is the438equivalent of all electrical power used here in Washington, DC.439    In market after market across the U.S., our development440teams all report the same issue: we cannot get the amount of441electricity we need in the time frame to build our data442centers. Without electrical power, it is not possible to build443digital infrastructure. The infrastructure that supports AI,444data centers, transmission lines, and generation facilities445must scale rapidly if the U.S. is to remain the global leader446in AI innovation. We are asking for your leadership to drive a447more modernized policy framework that reflects today's growth,448aligns with investment timelines, and ensures that the power449system is ready when and where it is needed. From Vantage's450perspective, the challenge is clear: we cannot access power on451a timeline that aligns with customer demand.452    First, interconnection timelines are too long, both for new453load and new generation resources. Second, we must develop new454transmission for a more scalable and reliable grid. Third,455permitting is fragmented and sequential, resulting in both456increased costs and delays in projects that are otherwise ready457to proceed.458    If we do not act decisively, we risk ceding AI leadership459to countries that are moving faster to modernize their energy460infrastructure. The United States is at a pivotal moment. The461United States is looking at an AI era that is not coming, but462is here. We have the capital. We have the customers and the463talent, but we will not lead if we cannot power it. By464prioritizing infrastructure for high-growth sectors,465strengthening federal leadership, enforcing interconnection466reforms, and incentivizing high-impact transmission, these467policies can unlock the power system needed to support468America's digital future.469    Vantage is prepared to invest and deliver. We bring470development and operational expertise, capital, and long-term471commitments to the communities where we build. Let us work472together to build an energy delivery system that is ready to473meet the scale and the importance of this moment. Thank you for474the opportunity to share our experience. I look forward to your475questions and working together on solutions that can keep the476United States at the forefront of digital infrastructure,477innovation, and investment.478    Thank you.479    [The prepared statement of Mr. Tench follows:]480481    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]482483    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Tench.484    Mr. Gramlich.485486                   STATEMENT OF ROB GRAMLICH,487                 PRESIDENT, GRID STRATEGIES LLC488489    Mr. Gramlich. Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich,490members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to491testify. My name is Rob Gramlich. I am founder and President of492Grid Strategies. We are a power sector transmission and power493markets consulting firm based here in the DC area. Thank you494for doing this hearing. This is about one of the most important495topics facing the country before one of the most--if not the496most--important legislative committee. Power demand growth is497sudden and significant, and it will be a challenge to meet, and498affordability is equally important, as I am sure you are499hearing from your constituents.500    I will focus now on how we can meet demand growth501affordably. Basically, we need both transmission and502generation. I am going to start with transmission because that503is the one that is largely in federal jurisdiction and has a504federal role, while generation is largely reserved for the505states under the Federal Power Act. Transmission is also the506main thing we need right now. It has the highest impact. It is507the great integrator of all resources. It may seem like it's a508renewable energy piece of infrastructure, but that is just509because over the last five years, that is all anybody was510trying to connect to the grid. Right now, we are seeing a lot511of other things trying to connect to the grid, including Jeff's512data centers and data centers around the country, other large513loads, manufacturing, and other types of generation. And514whether it is nuclear, CCS, or other types of generation, guess515what--it is going to face that same constrained grid. So we516should really focus on the grid.517    Transmission is also a great deal for consumers. The518economies of scale are massive. There is a 75 percent discount519if you do it at the higher voltage, like 765-kV lines, as520opposed to 230, like four regions are doing. Transmission can521also help in the 2020s. It's not just the 2030s or 2040s522option. There are a lot of ways to expand transmission. Some523lines are actually quick, and there are advanced transmission524technologies and other ways to use existing corridors.525Transmission supports reliability and resilience more than any526other resource. The availability of transmission lines is 99.85527percent or above for all voltage classes, meaning it is much528more available than any type of generation.529    With severe weather events in recent years, we have seen530tens of gigawatts, like up to 10 percent of a region's power,531served from large-scale movements of power across the regions532of the country because of interregional transmission, which is533why Congress directed the North American Electric Reliability534Corporation (NERC) to study interregional transmission, which535it did, and it found we have a need for 35 new gigawatts of536interregional transmission. The U.S. is falling far behind its537competitors. China is doing 80 times what we are doing here on538high-voltage transmission. So I do think transmission really539should be the bipartisan and the unifying force that commands540Congress's attention.541    But in addition to transmission, we do certainly need to542expand generation as well. There are three general types. There543is, low-cost, plentiful energy. There is the fast, flexible544balancing type of generation. And then there is firm power. So545I am not saying all resources provide all of these things. We546do need firm power to meet peak loads. Resources provide547varying levels of contributions to meeting peak loads. Nuclear548has the highest contribution at 95 percent, but we're not able549to get much more very soon. Gas CTs, at least according to PJM,550are around 60 percent in terms of their ability to serve peak551loads. Combined cycle is a little higher--in the 70s. Offshore552wind is actually 69 percent. And so, none of these resources553are perfect, but the point is, when you put them all together554on the integrated grid, that is how you get nearly 100 percent555reliability of the power system--by way of flexible loads,556flexible data centers, and other loads to help alleviate the557need for that capacity.558    The good news is, we have two working processes in this559country to get the generation we need. We have utility-owned560planning--sort of regulatory planning under states, and we have561some regions with markets. It's up to the state whether they562want to be in a market or have planning. It turns out, both are563working. Older plants are staying online longer than anybody564thought, and new plants are coming in, both in the integrated565resource planning context and in the market context. Look at566the PJM prices that came out yesterday. Markets are screaming567for generation to either stay on or be added, and that is568working. The interconnection queues do need some improvement to569get those there.570    So in my final 20 seconds, what can Congress do here? I571really would focus on transmission. I have some specific ideas572in my testimony--regional planning, like FERC Order 1920-A,573interregional planning, like this Committee's EPRA. By the way,574congratulations on a bipartisan and decisive vote on EPRA last575year. It had a lot of great ideas, and I hope that is a576starting point for further bipartisan cooperation on577legislation.578    Thank you.579    [The prepared statement of Mr. Gramlich follows:]580581    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]582583    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Gramlich.584    Okay, we will now begin five-minute rounds of questions,585alternating between Republicans and Democrats. I will lead off,586followed by Senator Heinrich and then we will alternate between587Republicans and Democrats in order of seniority, subject to the588early bird arrival rule.589    Mr. Tench, let's start with you. In comments filed in590response to the AI action plan RFI issued by the White House,591Vantage noted its development of an onsite utility-scale gas592power plant in Virginia to power a data center in that region.593Can you explain why Vantage decided to use gas for that onsite594generation?595    Mr. Tench. Well, the shortest answer is that we were left596no choice. The planning cycles for our data center developments597can sometimes expand multiple years. And in this particular598case, we were subject to a change in the demand algorithm from599the local utility. It had been planning on having allocated to600us 100 megawatts, or MVA worth, of power to power our data601center project there in Loudoun County, when suddenly, after we602were under construction, we were told that power was no longer603available and would not be available for five to seven years,604at which point we had already committed hundreds of millions of605dollars into the development project.606    So in this particular case, we were fortunate in the fact607that our property sat on top of a high-volume, high-pressure608natural gas line. And we scrambled and we designed, built, and609commissioned a power plant operating completely independent of610the grid within 18 months, and that data center is up and611running with a very important customer of ours today.612    The Chairman. Great. And I assume you didn't go with others613for various reasons. Nuclear would have taken too long. Why not614wind and solar?615    Mr. Tench. Well, in this particular case, our option was616only to be able to develop a power solution for that site that617was not grid dependent at all.618    The Chairman. Got you.619    Mr. Tench. And that was the choice we made, and people may620refer to that as island mode, but it effectively has no621connection to the public grid.622    The Chairman. Right. But wind and solar wouldn't provide623the----624    Mr. Tench. Not in that particular case. The parcel was only625big enough to handle a turbine plant, and there would have been626no way to bring in wind and solar in that particular case.627    The Chairman. Got you.628    Mr. Huntsman, in testimony that you provided, I believe629last year to the Senate Finance Committee, you argued that630affordable, abundant, reliable energy is foundational to631American manufacturing dominance. America has abundant632resources like coal, gas, geothermal, and in some cases633hydroelectric. We also have expertise to build advanced634nuclear, which I am optimistic about as far as it becoming635commercially viable in the coming years, assuming we can636overcome the regulatory hurdles, which we are anxiously trying637to do.638    Now, there have been some anti-growth forces, including639environmental NGOs, that have helped capture many of our640Fortune 500 companies--in some cases, big energy companies, in641other cases, big tech companies--to endorse a net-zero642framework. Now, I believe corporate leaders know that such643goals and commitments are impossible to achieve, not to mention644that they are harmful to many of the varied industries they645represent. Can you elaborate on how the sustainability646commitments harm energy affordability and reliability?647    Mr. Huntsman. Well, so many of these commitments have a648longer-term objective, like we are going to be carbon free by6492050 and so forth. You would be shocked at the number of CEOs I650have spoken to that have said, ``I don't have to worry about651that, I won't be around.'' I can make the commitment today, but652I am not going to be around then. There is no viable path when653you look at, on a global basis, when you look at just replacing654hydrocarbons with renewables. Again, renewables have a very655important role to play in certain areas, in certain fields. We656make the raw materials to go into the wind blades and solar657panels and so forth. I am not anti any of that. I want to be658very clear on that. But as far as the reliable, the reason why659you are building gas turbines is because you don't have the660reliability. Nobody knows if a week from today wind turbines661are going to be turning or not. Nobody knows exactly how much662power you are going to be getting out of solar panels a week663from today. They can tell you what you are going to be getting664out of a gas turbine.665    So I am more concerned about the today and how we get to666the issues of today and how we get to the issues over the next667five or ten years because that will dictate where we are in6682040 and 2050. And coming up with unrealistic goals that we669just hope that eventually we will come up with some means or670some mechanism just isn't plausible and isn't realistic. That's671what we are seeing in Europe.672    The Chairman. So they have got their place, certainly, and673there are good things that can be accomplished with those, but674some of those areas, including those areas that are growing675fastest within our economy, things like AI data centers, you676can't really rely on that because it doesn't provide baseload677power. What would happen if you tried to do that, whether it's678manufacturing or an AI data center that needs consistent679baseload power? What would happen if you had to rely on680something that is intermittent?681    Mr. Huntsman. Well, you are shutting down. In facilities682like ours, if they go down unexpectedly, they can take as long683as 30 days to restart, costing tens of millions of dollars. So684unexpected shutdowns--that is why I mentioned, I think, four or685five times in my oral testimony the word reliability. And that686is very key here.687    The Chairman. Right. And some of the emerging nuclear688technologies certainly hold a lot of promise in that area,689offering zero-emissions alternatives. Those are coming--not yet690here in a way that is commercially deployable.691    Okay, my time is expired. We will go to Senator Heinrich.692    Senator Heinrich. Mr. Tench, you may be aware the693Department of the Interior recently released a memo that is694going to require the Secretary to review all wind and solar695projects on federal lands. It adds just one more layer of red696tape. Do you have an opinion on what the potential business697impacts are of energy projects being delayed in that regulatory698process--how further delays impact the business prospect?699    Mr. Tench. Our observation and our requirement is for more700electrons, as you called out in your opening remarks. Vantage701is relatively agnostic as to the source of those electrons. So702in the case of rulemaking or regulatory action that slows down703the process of approving new generation or new transmission,704that would definitely be a negative for our business.705    Senator Heinrich. In the sort of five-year window, like7062025 to 2030, shouldn't we be focused on putting as many707electrons, agnostic of generation source, on the grid as708possible to be able to meet the kind of demand that you709represent?710    Mr. Tench. Yes. Our position is that efforts to move711electrons around through enhanced transmission is important.712Necessary, but insufficient----713    Senator Heinrich. Sure.714    Mr. Tench [continuing]. Relative to the overall demand. We715need more energy----716    Senator Heinrich. More generation and----717    Mr. Tench. More generation and we need more transmission,718independent of source. That said, it does need to be a719reliable, you know, grid-dispatchable source, which I believe720can be accomplished with the right combination of energy source721for generation and energy storage.722    Senator Heinrich. And storage.723    You know, one of my concerns is, we have an existing724pipeline that is the result of decisions that have been made725over the course of the last decade. That pipeline is 95 percent726clean energy plus storage. It's about five percent gas. You727know, a year or two ago, we had a couple of nuclear plants come728online, which are great. I support that, but that's kind of a729one-off. You know, in the next five years, if we start building730new nuclear today, whether that's SMRs or traditional light-731water reactors, that is going to take longer than the five-year732window. If I order a combined-cycle natural gas turbine today,733it's probably going to come on the grid in 2032 or 2033, if we734are lucky.735    So if you don't allow the existing projects that are in the736queue today that are renewables plus storage, what does that do737to the price pressure on the grid? What's the impact of that?738    Mr. Tench. As it relates to price pressure, I will probably739defer to Rob on that question as more of a grid expert, but in740the broader context, you know, our goal is to encourage speed741and change in the regulatory process to bring more electrons742onto the grid. And again, you know, depending upon the site we743are developing, our access to proximate energy sources varies,744and we are being very pragmatic about how we approach that,745making available to ourselves whatever we can in order to meet746the demand.747    Senator Heinrich. Mr. Gramlich, do you want to address the748price pressure issue?749    Mr. Gramlich. Sure, I mean, basically, it's supply and750demand. There is scarcity of generation, so anything that is751limiting new generation from coming on, whether it's752interconnection queues, permitting holdups at Interior, or753anything else, that is cutting off supply, and that is754definitely raising prices and----755    Senator Heinrich. We are actually seeing prices go up as a756result.757    Mr. Gramlich. We are seeing prices go up. Wholesale power758prices are going up. Those higher costs are required to be759incorporated by state public utility commissions into retail760bills. So retail consumers/voters are paying more.761    Senator Heinrich. Are there places where prices have762actually come down in recent years that you can point to, and763what was the reason why those prices came down?764    Mr. Gramlich. Sure, well, I mean, if you just look at, say,765the supply stack for someplace like Texas. Texas, just over the766last couple of days, has had a majority of their peak demands--767not just overnight, not just winter, but peak afternoon air768conditioning-driven demand served by a majority renewables plus769storage.770    Senator Heinrich. And were there rolling blackouts?771    Mr. Gramlich. There were not. Reliability----772    Senator Heinrich. Has reliability gone up, or----773    Mr. Gramlich. You probably heard about rolling blackouts in774California like five years ago. Honestly, they got behind on775resource adequacy, but what did they do? They built a lot of776solar and batteries. So same dynamic there. I am sure we are777seeing a majority renewable energy. Any hour now, it's going to778kick in and then, you know, when the air conditioning load this779afternoon is high, there is going to be solar, and then the sun780will set. Air conditioning load will still be high, but the781batteries will then kick in and serve through the evening. So782again, they don't do everything----783    Senator Heinrich. One last question, because I am running784out of time here, Mr. Gramlich. What could we do, as the785Congress, to improve the interconnection queue process? Because786that is preventing a lot of resources, a lot of electrons from787getting on the grid in a timely way to meet the kind of demand788that Mr. Tench represents.789    Mr. Gramlich. Yes, so, FERC has been working on790interconnection queues, and each RTO is kind of doing it in791their own way. I think there are some great models, like the792Southwest Power Pool, where it's more just a simple entry fee.793You pay it, you get in, and you don't have to do a four-year-794long study. Congress could encourage things like that,795encourage FERC to undertake activities like that, and you have796probably a couple of nominees coming before this Committee797pretty soon. You could ask them about that.798    Senator Heinrich. I will.799    The Chairman. We will now turn to our colleague from800Mississippi, Senator Hyde-Smith.801    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,802Ranking Member. And thank you to all of our witnesses that have803come to share your testimonies. It's great to have the resource804that we have to you and I appreciate your willingness to do805that.806    My question is going to be directed to Mr. Tench. You807mentioned in your testimony that Vantage prefers to connect to808the grid for power, obviously, but there may be a need to809deploy outside generation at the start of the project, which810makes sense. And as you point out, beyond company building811schedules, adding to the grid can take a long time. It can take812years, and usually taking around five years for the most813traditional baseload power that you are looking at there. What814short-term solutions has Vantage explored for initial builds,815and do you think other companies would follow a similar pattern816waiting to connect to the grid?817    Mr. Tench. In the case of Vantage, we have, coming out of818the experience I described in Virginia, been far more planful819in terms of the expectations of our delays as it relates to the820interconnection that we applied for to receive load from the821grid. And the form that it has taken, for the most part, has822been in investing in a supply chain of turbines and823reciprocating natural gas engines, which we increasingly plan824to deploy at a mobile setting so that we can deploy them on825trailers for, let's say, two years, three years, until we can826get the interconnection from the grid, and that has proven to827be an important part, but only one part, of our overall plan828for how we make our way through the wait, if you will, as it829relates to the electrons that we need.830    Senator Hyde-Smith. And you think other companies may831follow a similar pattern to that?832    Mr. Tench. Well, I think that would be up to them, but833certainly for us, we found it to be a way of reducing our risk834and smoothing out the gaps in availability.835    Senator Hyde-Smith. And from a connectivity standpoint,836what would Vantage's plan be once utilities meet electrical837generation demand, once you get there?838    Mr. Tench. Well, our plan would be to connect to the grid839and operate according to the regulations that exist in any of840those states in terms of having a firm commitment from the841utility through an electrical services agreement. And then, we842would use that as our primary source of power to our data843centers, coupled with emergency generation backup, which we844deploy in most of our sites as well.845    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will846yield.847    The Chairman. Senator Wyden.848    Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This is849an important panel. And let me begin by saying I don't believe850we got in this predicament by osmosis. The fact is, the851Republicans have been doing favors for their big oil buddies at852the consumer's expense, and that is why--a major reason why--853energy bills are going through the roof. And I am just going to854take a minute to look backward and then talk about where we855ought to be going. We had 50 years' worth of gridlock on856climate--no pricing, no regulatory reform, no nothing.857    In the Senate Finance Committee, we put together an858alternative, and it was based on markets. It was based on859technology neutrality. Underline those words--technology860neutrality. Everybody is part of the market. You get choices.861And the more you reduce carbon, the bigger your tax savings.862And in a couple of years, we got hundreds of billions of863dollars committed--committed--to making sure that we had those864renewable choices.865    Now, along come the Senate Republicans, particularly in the866last couple of weeks. And when the natural gas folks--these are867not the environmentalists, these are the natural gas folks--868basically said, we will take electrons if they are from Mars.869We have got to have electrons. We will take them from anywhere,870not just because of AI, but because of growth, because of871innovation. And regrettably, the Senate Republicans said, we're872not for choices. We're not for options. We're not for873alternatives. And of course, that doesn't let us meet the874challenge of demand.875    So my view is, and what I am going to keep pushing for as876the senior Democrat in the Finance Committee, is working with877anybody across the political spectrum to get us more choices,878and particularly, as my colleague from New Mexico said, the gas879industry, not the League of Conservation Voters or the Sierra880Club, will tell you that the cheapest alternatives now are881solar and wind, and they need them today, not tomorrow. They882need them today in order to drive markets. So apropos of your883good work, Mr. Gramlich, I would be interested in what your884ideas are to kind of resurrect a choice-based system, rather885than one that just hands out the goodies to the big oil886companies. And by the way, people tell me, and you all are887welcome to add this, fossil fuels cannot meet our demand today.888If we are going to meet demand, we need solar and wind. We need889these alternatives.890    And after 50 years of gridlock on this issue, we broke up891the inertia. We broke up the lack of progress. And we were892making a lot of progress. And I want to see us get back to893something that has as many of those choices, the technological894neutrality principles that we wrote in the Finance Committee,895because I think that is America's energy future. And by the896way, nobody knows what the big alternatives are going to be 30897years from now. We need a science-driven kind of approach. And898when we talked to Joe Manchin about putting this together,899which he backed, he said we need more science, and we will get900that with a technology-driven kind of system.901    So tell us about what you would be working on in terms of902more choices for the days ahead.903    Mr. Gramlich. Well, Senator Wyden, thank you for your904leadership on the technology-neutral tax credit. I think that905is a perfect example of something that provides the support to906any and all technologies that meet the performance standards907that Congress can set out. And so, I thought that was a great908idea. Glad to see it enacted. Sad to see the early phaseout. I909think at this point it's important for Treasury to implement at910least what Congress passed recently.911    Senator Wyden. So you want to make sure that there is no912more stalling around because, as you know, we got a modest bit913of the current system into the final bill, and now it looks914like a bunch of people in the House are trying to roll that915back. You tell the Administration, suck it up here and stand in916there for choices and alternatives. Is that one of your917messages?918    Mr. Gramlich. Certainty is critical for investment, and919uncertain IRS regulations kill certainty. You can't invest if920you don't know what the rules are.921    Senator Wyden. What else would you do? More choices.922    Mr. Gramlich. Well, I think, you know, generally, as I was923saying before, the transmission grid really is in the purview924of this Committee and Congress and FERC, and that is the great925integrator of all resources that enables choice of whatever a926state may choose, and generation----927    Senator Wyden. Good. My time is up. That was the one thing928that we weren't able to get in the 2022 election, and had we929been able to negotiate a compromise with more choices, I would930have put transmission number one as our challenge for the931future. And we are going to try to get those choices back, and932we are interested in working with you on transmission.933    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.934    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Wyden.935    We will go next to Senator Cortez Masto.936    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.937    Thank you, all three of you, for being here. In many ways,938Nevada has really led the way in developing new energy capacity939over the last several years. And quite honestly, with the help940of the tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act, Nevada was941able to attract new businesses hoping to use our natural942resources, one of them being solar, geothermal, in the great943state. I assume that's one of the reasons, Mr. Tench, you were944there. And I am excited to hear that not only has Vantage945pushed for new data centers to be sustainable by design, you946are including an AI campus in Nevada, which was announced July94715th, that also seeks to use a closed-loop chiller system to948minimize the need for large volumes of water, again, in the949West, where there is a lot of drought.950    Can you talk a little bit about why renewables are951important, depending on the region where your data center is,952and are you using a renewable source for this data center and953the AI in Nevada?954    Mr. Tench. Yes, we are, as you know, developing a955substantial AI-focused campus in TRIC, just outside of Reno,956and the selection of that location was driven by a number of957factors, including its proximity to the West Coast, as an958alternative to California, where things can get pretty959expensive and pretty hard to do. At the same time, the mix of960energy sources that were available to us through Nevada Power961included, as you noted, there are prior investments in solar,962in particular. And for Vantage, for our customers, again, we963prefer to use grid, and the combination of total cost of964ownership, the ease of doing business in Nevada, and the965physical location conspired to make it a great location for966this deployment.967    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.968    Mr. Gramlich, you have outlined some of the challenges969contributing to increased electricity bills across the country.970In addition to severe weather and electric equipment971constraints, you listed the uncertainty surrounding the current972administration's tariff policy and the Republicans' termination973of the tax credits. A recent Bloomberg Government article974stated that when fewer renewables meet more expensive gas and975explosive demand from data centers, an upward pressure on rates976is the predictable result. Some estimates suggest that977electricity bills in parts of the country could jump as much as97860 percent to 350 percent over the next decade.979    My question to you is, can you summarize current market980considerations and why U.S. grid operators aren't in a position981to turn away renewable electrons?982    Mr. Gramlich. Yes, grid operators need all the power they983can get, and as I have said, not all resources do all of the984functions, right? So we do need firm power, and by the way, the985geothermal in your state is providing excellent clean firm986power, and I really am hopeful about geothermal going in many987more states to provide that clean firm power, but the grid988operators do depend on it, and in terms of affordability, it's989supply and demand. If we take any of these resources out of the990mix, that just leads to higher wholesale prices, and those991necessarily move down into retail customers' electric utility992bills.993    Senator Cortez Masto. And shouldn't the states, working994with the private sector, basically determine what that energy995mix or that portfolio should be based on their geography, based996on their opportunities there? I mean, we have geothermal. We997have solar. We have wind. We have battery storage. We have998natural gas. That's different than my colleague here sitting to999my left, from Maine. So shouldn't it be driven by that need,1000based on the states where their region is, what the private1001sector is wanting to build there? Does that make sense?1002    Mr. Gramlich. I think that's exactly right. Well, that's1003the structure of the Federal Power Act that you all oversee on1004this Committee and its implementation at FERC. Generation is1005largely in the purview of states. I mean, it's kind of a1006states' rights issue. And so, this micromanaging of individual1007power plant dispatch through things like Department of Energy1008emergency orders, or, you know, specific targeting of projects1009for not getting permitting at Interior--that is really1010micromanaging from the federal level something that really is1011the states' job to address.1012    Senator Cortez Masto. And if we are going to compete with1013other countries like China and others, and grow out our grid1014and our transmission and really invest in it, that1015micromanagement shouldn't occur. It really should be driven1016from the states, the private sector on, correct?1017    Mr. Gramlich. That's right. And I mean, the reality is, we1018have a very diverse electric industry structure. Your state has1019one structure. It's very different in Maine and other states.1020And so, each state uses markets or regulation or various1021combinations of investor-owned and other types of utilities to1022meet their power demand needs. And that is where the process1023should take place.1024    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.1025    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1026    The Chairman. Senator King.1027    Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1028    The word transmission has come up numerous times today and1029how important it is, and what a great important part it is of1030this discussion. Unfortunately, this morning, the Department of1031Energy terminated a loan program for a major interregional1032transmission system in the Midwest.1033    [Department of Energy press release follows:]10341035    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]10361037    Senator King. So here we are talking about how important1038transmission is, and here's the Department of Energy, and it1039wasn't a grant, it was a loan guarantee program. I just think1040the timing is somewhat ironic.1041    We all know that solar and wind are intermittent. We1042understand that. Everybody knows that. I was in the hydro1043business. That's also intermittent. It doesn't always rain, as1044well as wind and biomass and large-scale conservation. But1045what's really happening is really dramatic in terms of energy1046storage. If you have adequate energy storage, solar and wind1047are baseload, because you have something to make up the1048difference. And I used AI in your honor, Mr. Tench, to check on1049where we are on batteries.1050    As of five minutes ago, the U.S. added a record 10.41051gigawatts of utility-scale battery storage in 2024, marking a105266 percent increase from the prior year. In 2025, the EIA1053anticipates a record-setting year, with another 18 gigawatts of1054utility-scale battery storage on the grid. Looking ahead, the1055EIA forecasts that U.S. utility-scale battery storage will1056nearly double, reaching 65 gigawatts by the end of 2026. In1057other words, the battery industry is no longer a fantasy or a1058distant dream. It's happening right now on a very substantial1059scale. And as you point out, Mr. Gramlich, it saved the day in1060Texas and in California, and it's already working--the idea of1061the integration of batteries with solar and wind.1062    Let me talk for a minute though about transportation. And1063Mr. Gramlich, this is what worries me. It used to be an1064electric bill in Maine was 25 percent transmission and1065distribution and 75 percent source of energy. It's now about106650/50, and transmission is getting more and more expensive.1067Everybody knows we have to rebuild the grid. My concern is,1068it's going to be done in an expensive way that's going to add1069dramatically to ratepayers' costs. Mr. Gramlich, you are1070nodding. I take it you agree. The record doesn't show nodding.1071    Mr. Gramlich. Absolutely. We are doing transmission in1072sometimes the most expensive way possible now and we could1073change that.1074    Senator King. Well, one way to change it is reconductoring.1075Here is a conventional electric line, a high-tension conductor.1076Here is a carbon fiber-based conductor. This little guy will1077carry twice the energy as this one.1078    [Photograph of the two conductors follows:]10791080    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]10811082    Senator King. So if we put these on the grid, we don't need1083to change all the poles, the rights-of-way, all of that kind of1084thing, and we can get a significant amount of additional1085throughput in the grid at a fraction of the cost of rebuilding1086the whole system. The same with--you are familiar with the term1087GETs--the various technologies that enable the grid to be1088managed more efficiently in terms of temperature and load and1089all those kinds of things. The estimates I have seen is that1090reconductoring and GETs could increase throughput on the grid1091by something like 40 percent, at a fraction of the cost of1092rebuilding. My concern is that the rate-based model encourages1093utilities to build rather than to reconductor or use GETs.1094    Mr. Gramlich, talk to me about how we solve that problem.1095How do we provide incentives for those who will be rebuilding1096the grid to do so in the most cost-effective way and to1097minimize the effect on the ratepayers?1098    Mr. Gramlich. Yes, well, and I would note, that cable that1099you are holding is manufactured near Los Angeles, but1100unfortunately, 90 percent of that company's sales go to other1101countries, which are deploying advanced conductors and grid-1102enhancing technologies in far greater levels than we are here.1103    Senator King. Is that partially because there is no1104incentive on our utilities to use this kind of technology?1105    Mr. Gramlich. I think that is generally right. I think a1106lot of utilities are actually looking at them now, but we need1107to get beyond pilot stage to make it more systematic.1108    Senator King. And another factor we haven't talked about is1109demand response. That is, the ability of customers to modify1110their demand load in terms of what's on the grid. Is that a1111promising technology?1112    Mr. Gramlich. That is a very promising technology, and it's1113not just sort of the peak hour, but think about flexible data1114centers. Sometimes there is some grid contingency that might1115happen once every three years, and if they can just curtail1116just a little bit at that time, then we can integrate a lot1117more data centers without having to rely on the full network1118capacity, which takes so long to serve that data center. So1119that type of flexibility is critical.1120    Senator King. And I should point out, I know I have run out1121of time, solar and wind today are (a) the cheapest and (b) the1122quickest to deploy. And I am worried that, as the Vice Chairman1123has said, there is a five- to seven-year lag in new grid-scale1124gas turbines. We can't give China a five- to seven-year head1125start in AI, and we have got to be timely as well as control1126costs.1127    So thank you all for your testimony. Thank you, Mr.1128Chairman.1129    The Chairman. Senator Risch.1130    Senator Risch. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you1131for being here today. This is a fascinating subject, really, to1132dig into. I have to tell you, in recent years, as I have sat in1133this Committee, we have had the people come in here and predict1134to us what was going to happen as far as demand for electricity1135in America because of AI and the other things that are coming1136on board, particularly AI. And I have to tell you, I was a1137doubter at the beginning, but the further we go, the more1138obvious it has become that we are going to be inundated with1139demand for electricity here in the next recent years.1140    It's a problem, but the good news is that this particular1141problem, we know how to deal with, and that is, we know how to1142generate electricity. We, in Idaho, in 1951, demonstrated for1143the first time that nuclear energy could be used to create1144electricity and we have been at it ever since. Of course, we1145had the setback as a result of Three-Mile Island, which really1146put us a generation behind, but now I think the world knows1147there is a real renaissance going on as far as nuclear energy1148is concerned, not only in the United States, but also1149particularly in Eastern Europe, where they are trying to cut1150the cord with Russia.1151    So I guess I would like to get your thoughts on this. You1152know, we are going flip the switch, hopefully, in the next year1153or so on the first SMR, which is really going to change the1154delivery of electricity in the world. And this August, we are1155going to cut the ribbon on a microreactor that they are1156starting at the INL in Idaho. We are very proud of the work we1157do in Idaho on nuclear. We really think that we have the1158solution to all of this. I really think that nuclear is going1159to have to be--and I agree that we want to be all-of-the-1160above--but I think to deliver the load, I really think it's1161going to take nuclear to do that.1162    And I would like to get each of your thoughts on that.1163Peter, good to see you again. And your thoughts first, please.1164    Mr. Huntsman. I believe that nuclear eventually will be1165able to fill that baseload, but look, I just, I will be honest1166with you. I am the only one that sitting here at this table1167that pays a power bill of over a quarter of a billion dollars a1168year. That's my gas and electric bill in my company. We can1169talk all we want about all these renewables and so forth and1170solar and wind. The fact of the matter is, it's failing in1171Europe, where it has been implemented on a widespread basis, it1172is failing. And the prices are going up through the roof. We1173can't afford it. We are shutting down facilities. We are laying1174off people. And we talk about these--especially in the State of1175Texas, we have spent hundreds of millions of dollars a year1176manufacturing in the State of Texas. The State of Texas's1177entire baseload is natural gas and nuclear and petroleum-based1178projects. The incremental piece that is renewable is wonderful.1179Again, I am not opposed to that, but without the baseload, we1180couldn't afford to buy electricity in Texas.1181    And the only way we are able to compete today is because of1182the hydrocarbon-based energy sources. That's just the reality1183of all of this. Eventually, somebody has got to pay for all1184this stuff.1185    Senator Risch. Well, the fact that the utilities now are1186really kindling a lot of interest in nuclear, does that give1187you any solace going forward?1188    Mr. Huntsman. Not a great deal. Personally, I am very1189concerned about where a lot of this stuff is going. When I see1190how much of this is renewable coming off--for every windmill1191that is built--again, this is our product--but for every1192windmill that is built, you have got to build a backup to it1193because 70 percent of the time it's not going to be turning. So1194you have got to have a backup that most of the time is going to1195be idle. So therefore, I am paying for two systems. If I have1196wind, solar, and backup, I am paying for three systems.1197    Senator Risch. Not a problem with nuclear.1198    Mr. Huntsman. Not a problem with nuclear, no, but again, I1199think we are probably ten-plus years away from having mass-1200scale nuclear power.1201    Senator Risch. Mr. Tench.1202    Mr. Tench. You know, as I think about our fleet across the1203United States, we are fortunate to be operating data centers in1204places where part of the grid power we take down is nuclear. We1205are big proponents of further investment and acceleration of1206nuclear power, both as a complement to the entire grid, as well1207as some of the emerging technologies around SMR. I hope you are1208right about in the next couple of years us seeing the first1209commercially viable solution for that, but I think nuclear is1210absolutely a big part of the solution here.1211    Senator Risch. Mr. Gramlich.1212    Mr. Gramlich. Yes, I have not seen a change in public1213perception about a technology ever as much as we have with1214nuclear, which, because so many people motivated by the climate1215crisis want clean power, and I think everybody who is looking1216at the grid also realizes, we do need firm power. So that is a1217clean firm source that could make a great contribution.1218    Senator Risch. Well, take heart, Idaho is here to help you.1219We've got the SMR that we developed there and moving forward,1220and we are really excited about the micro that's coming. Those1221two things are just going to change the world, I think, as they1222develop them and as they prove them out in the marketplace and1223as they interest utilities in being able to get what will be a1224new wave, I think, of how they produce nuclear energy.1225    My time is up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1226    The Chairman. Thank you.1227    Senator Hickenlooper, you are up next.1228    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair.1229    Mr. Tench, let me start with you. I think we all agree with1230you that we have got to win the AI race. And it's not just our1231economic future, it's our national security that's at stake1232there. In your testimony you highlighted the importance of1233high-voltage transmission, noting that, and I will quote,1234``Enabling the transfer of electricity between regions can1235lower operational costs for data centers and other large1236users.'' Without action from this Administration and this1237Congress to accelerate high-voltage transmission development,1238will the U.S. stay globally competitive in the AI race?1239    Mr. Tench. I don't think we can say definitively that1240without interregional transmission we will fail to be globally1241competitive. What I can say is that our ability to move1242electrons seamlessly across this country in between these1243regions will free up access to power where it's needed, and it1244allows us to build the data centers that contain the AI that we1245are all scrambling for here in terms of being able to stay1246competitive. So it is one part--and an important part, I1247think--of a change we can make in order to make better use of1248the grid that we have, but it is not, in and of itself,1249sufficient to avoid the outcome you are describing.1250    Senator Hickenlooper. Well, let me rephrase it then. Would1251you agree that the probability of our losing ground in the race1252toward AI, the probability that we are going to lose ground1253increases if we don't address this issue within the grid?1254    Mr. Tench. Yes.1255    Senator Hickenlooper. Good. And would you believe that any1256bipartisan or administration-led permitting reforms aimed at1257supporting data centers should also include some of these1258ambitious reforms to building that high-voltage transmission?1259    Mr. Tench. Yeah, I would agree with that, yes.1260    Senator Hickenlooper. Great.1261    Mr. Gramlich, studies show that high-voltage transmission1262improves reliability and affordability, yet in the U.S. we have1263only built 3,238 miles of high-voltage transmission from 20171264to 2024. Experts say we should be building 5,000 a year. So1265that means we should have built 35,000, and we built less than12663,500. Meanwhile, China is rapidly building a super-grid of1267ultra-high-voltage that allows it to support growth on a1268variety of facets that we will not be able to match. In 2023,1269Congress directed NERC to study U.S. transmission needs. The1270Commission found we may need 35 gigawatts of additional1271interregional capacity just to ensure reliability.1272    So Mr. Gramlich, can you explain in layman's terms the1273value of interregional transmission in terms of affordability1274and reliability?1275    Mr. Gramlich. Sure, thank you, Senator.1276    It is absolutely true that interregional transmission is1277one of the best ways to improve reliability and resilience. We1278sometimes see 10 percent of a region's power served by the1279large-scale movement of power across the country over that1280interregional transmission network. Unfortunately, none of us1281inherited a power system that is very conducive to that, with1282thousands of little vertical silos of utilities that don't have1283those horizontal connections, and our regulatory structure is1284only trying to catch up to that. So your work through EPRA and1285other efforts, other bills that you have introduced on1286interregional transmission, is very welcome.1287    Senator Hickenlooper. We always appreciate the preparations1288that our witnesses make that make us Senators look good. We1289appreciate that.1290    Senator Cassidy. It takes a lot of preparation for you, but1291that's okay.1292    [Laughter.]1293    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Senator, I appreciate1294that.1295    Also, Mr. Gramlich, I was going to put out--within all of1296this discussion we have been making, there is a hard truth that1297we need 100 gigawatts of power or more, really, by 2030, yet1298only four gigawatts of natural gas projects are even in the1299pipeline, and certainly zero for coal. So the market isn't1300buying what's out there being sold. What kind of state-level1301intervention studies and subsidies should Congress and the1302Trump Administration--what would we have to back, which they1303would be backing, to actually build that 100 gigawatts of new1304natural gas or coal capacity by 2030?1305    Mr. Gramlich. Yeah, it's not really feasible to do it all1306with gas or, you know, nuclear in this decade isn't going to1307happen. Nothing against it, it's just not going to happen. Gas1308turbines are constrained, as Senator Heinrich mentioned. You1309just can't get one to get in line. So we really have to, just1310as a physical matter, we have to rely on many sources, all of1311those sources that are being developed, and that certainly1312includes wind, solar, and battery storage.1313    Senator Hickenlooper. Great, thank you.1314    So what you are saying is that we need to take those things1315that are in the queue and are ready to be built, even though1316they're not going to be sufficient to provide a baseline, that1317I think there is a consensus that we need to raise the1318baseline, or the baseload capacity. We need to build everything1319we can right now.1320    Mr. Gramlich. Yes.1321    Senator Hickenlooper. Great, thank you. I yield back to the1322Chair.1323    Senator Cassidy [presiding]. Mr. Huntsman, in your1324testimony--now first, as context, I have seen that the GDP of1325Europe over the last 20 years, which was roughly equal 20 years1326ago to1327the U.S.--collective GDP--has flattened out and ours has grown.1328Now, there is a relationship we all know between power usage1329and with economic growth. You speak about the1330deindustrialization of Germany and how no rational executive1331would now invest in Germany, which is incredible. Can you1332expound on that? Because that would have incredible impacts1333upon jobs for working Germans, just like having a similarly1334wrongheaded policy in the U.S. would have incredibly negative1335implications for working Americans.1336    Mr. Huntsman. Yeah, as somebody who has done business in1337Germany for 40 years, we have never had power outages in1338Germany. It's just not a question of availability of electrons,1339it is a question about the value of electrons. And in Germany,1340I'm paying for coal, I'm paying for solar, I'm paying for wind,1341I'm paying for nuclear from France, and I'm paying for imports1342of gas coming in from the United States. I am paying for five1343sources. At best, two of those sources are actually operating1344and supplying our facilities. But I am paying for all five of1345them. I mean, that literally--and you add on to that the1346regulatory, the carbon taxes, and the costs above that, and I1347am paying roughly about six times more for electricity. For1348exactly the same facility in your State of Louisiana, we1349operate a very large facility in Geismar, Louisiana, and we1350operate virtually the same facility----1351    Senator Cassidy. So how many people did you employ at peak1352in Germany?1353    Mr. Huntsman. In Europe, across Europe was about 6,500.1354    Senator Cassidy. At peak?1355    Mr. Huntsman. At peak.1356    Senator Cassidy. And where are you now?1357    Mr. Huntsman. Just over a thousand.1358    Senator Cassidy. And so, the implications are that if you1359get your regulatory policy and if you get your electricity1360policy or your power policy wrong, then people disinvest, de-1361invest, and then you end up with working families losing their1362livelihood.1363    Mr. Huntsman. Not just ours, but our customers, our1364suppliers, the entire supply chain.1365    Senator Cassidy. I once heard you say, going to another1366portion of your testimony--intriguing conversation--you are1367suggesting that the chemical industry may be more carbon-1368intensive but the downstream effect is to decrease carbon1369intensity. You use the example of using carbon fiber instead of1370steel in a plane. I can imagine how much fuel that saves in a1371plane. But I can imagine that the carbon-intense carbon fiber,1372by definition, may be a little bit more carbon-intensive to1373produce, or at least roughly equal. But it saves you more in1374life cycle.1375    Mr. Huntsman. That's right.1376    Senator Cassidy. Can you elaborate on that? Because I think1377there are probably other examples.1378    Mr. Huntsman. Earlier, the Senator, I believe it was King,1379that had the cabling--the wraparound of that cabling, of that1380carbon fiber, is going to be for the most part an epoxy1381material that obviously insulates a lot of that transmission.1382That's the same materials that are going in and lightening the1383load, lightening the transmission, making these things1384stronger. The Boeing 787 gets about 35 percent better mileage1385than the Boeing 767, the model it replaced, and all of that is1386virtually no aluminum, it's mostly carbon fiber and composite1387materials. We have, just our company alone, about somewhere1388between 17 and 18 tons of liquid material--glue, essentially--1389that goes on each 787 or Airbus A350. That is lightening the1390plane. It is allowing it to fly further over the lifetime of1391that plane. You will be saving a hundredfold.1392    Senator Cassidy. So even though, in the moment in time, in1393the snapshot, it may look like, oh, my gosh, emissions are1394increasing, or whatever is increasing at Huntsman, but if you1395take that product you are producing over the life cycle of its1396use, the global climate is better, if you are looking at it1397from the perspective of carbon.1398    Mr. Huntsman. That's right. I would also tell you though1399that our carbon is actually coming down----1400    Senator Cassidy. I accept that too.1401    Mr. Huntsman. From our manufacturing.1402    We are getting the benefit of both, better and lighter1403usage on the customer side and also the manufacturing side.1404    Senator Cassidy. Sounds good.1405    Well, next is going to be Senator Padilla.1406    Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1407    Senator Cassidy. Excuse me, hang on. I have Padilla before1408Cantwell. That's the list given to me.1409    It's up to you guys. You all work it out.1410    [Laughter.]1411    Senator Padilla. All right, well, if you don't mind because1412you were here earlier.1413    Thank you all for your participation here today. I want to1414begin by talking about transmission. Obviously, the only way to1415meet our growing energy demand is by building out the necessary1416transmission infrastructure to get power from where it's1417generated to where it's needed. In the last Congress, I was1418proud to work with my colleagues on this Committee in a1419bipartisan manner, as we crafted the Energy Permitting Reform1420Act, which would have significantly advanced transmission1421efforts. Since last Congress, we have not only continued to see1422delays, but also consistent projections of load growth. And in1423addition to that, we have seen energy costs increase.1424    So Mr. Gramlich, in your testimony, you talked about the1425need to improve our transmission infrastructure as a means to1426improve energy affordability. So I would love to see you expand1427on that and specifically discuss how building more transmission1428would directly increase energy affordability.1429    Mr. Gramlich. That's right. Well, your State of California1430is now accessing resources in New Mexico, Wyoming, and other1431parts of the West, and what that does is, it's like a puzzle--1432putting pieces together. At different times of day, different1433resources are operating, right? The wind from Senator1434Heinrich's state or the wind from Senator Barrasso's state or1435others are operating at different times than the solar in1436Southern California, right? So you put all these resources1437together and you get an overall much more steady supply that1438holds rates down and it improves reliability. So the1439transmission network is critical to making that happen. Your1440state has been leading in getting a lot of that transmission1441built.1442    Senator Padilla. Do I hear you suggest that multi-state1443coordinating of the grid will improve affordability as well as1444reliability and even efficiency, with some emission reductions,1445as a result? I hear chatter among some western states around1446that concept.1447    Mr. Gramlich. Yes, and that legislation in Sacramento is1448critical to get that regional network of an integrated grid, a1449seamless grid.1450    Senator Padilla. As long as we get it right, I agree.1451    Mr. Gramlich. That's right.1452    Senator Padilla. So, to be continued.1453    Let me also do a quick sidebar because I heard the Chairman1454in his opening remarks talk about some concerns in some1455quarters about solar and wind and other renewable energy and1456the concerns about intermittency, to which I just want to make1457sure we are adding storage to the conversation. If you look at1458California's capacity now, not just breaking records on the1459amount of our electricity that comes from renewable sources,1460but a huge reduction in the threat of blackouts, even1461brownouts, because of the stability brought when you add1462storage to the equation.1463    In addition to storage, another technology that I am1464excited about is reconductoring. So I was proud to hear a1465couple of you talk about the benefits of grid-enhancing1466technologies and high-performance or advanced conductors in1467meeting our load needs. Rewiring our existing transmission1468lines with state-of-the-art carbon fiber or aluminum alloy1469materials has the potential to deliver as much as twice the1470current of the same size conventional steel and aluminum1471transmission cables. And what's especially exciting, it's by1472utilizing existing infrastructure and existing rights-of-way.1473    So again, Mr. Gramlich, can you expand on how these new1474technologies, particularly reconductoring, can help us meet1475load growth in the future?1476    Mr. Gramlich. That's right. Well, we all know how scarce1477rights-of-way are and how hard it is to get new rights-of-way,1478right? So we have these rights-of-way around the country that1479are a tremendous asset for this country. And so, if we can1480squeeze more power over those rights-of-way, which might be as1481simple as stringing up a new cable on the existing towers, or1482it might be a rebuild of the towers, but these advanced1483conductors and superconductors can really help to sometimes1484double the capacity right there. And then grid-enhancing1485technologies are more the operational technologies that Senator1486King also referenced. Those squeeze more, sometimes up to 401487percent for dynamic line ratings, for example. And these1488operational tools can create more headroom on the grid that1489allows more load to be developed reliably.1490    Senator Padilla. So are you suggesting that with these1491upgrades, we can deliver more electricity more quickly than1492projects that are built from the ground up?1493    Mr. Gramlich. Yes, and we are going to need both. We are1494certainly going to need new rights-of-way and lines as well,1495but creating that headroom quickly and much more affordably1496seems like a no-brainer.1497    Senator Padilla. So the last question I have, and I will1498try to make it quick, I know my time is running out here.1499    Obviously, I am proud to represent California. We are proud1500to be a policy leader on not just building capacity, but1501lowering our emissions footprint as a result. But California is1502not alone in investing and bringing online more solar, more1503wind. Can you name other states, maybe some not-blue states,1504that are similarly investing in improving their grid1505reliability and affordability as a result?1506    Mr. Gramlich. Well, absolutely. I mean, the whole center of1507the country from Texas up through North Dakota has tremendous1508penetrations of both solar and wind. Texas, the last couple1509days, has had over 80 gigawatts demand. They are nearing record1510demand. And a majority is being met with solar, wind, and1511battery storage. They are using storage, just as you suggest,1512and just as you do in California when the sun is setting, that1513is when the batteries have charged up with all the solar power1514and then they discharge to keep the evening lights on.1515    Senator Padilla. So renewables plus storage is not a1516Democratic agenda or a Republican agenda. It's just common1517sense. Thank you very much.1518    Senator Murkowski [presiding]. Gentlemen, thank you for1519being here. These kinds of hearings before this Committee, I1520think, are so important because they remind us that an energy1521policy that really covers from Maine to Alaska and Hawaii and1522the parts in between requires a diversity, right? I come from a1523state where we are proud to be producing oil. We are proud to1524be producing natural gas. But our reality is that most of that1525is--most of the oil, of course, is sent outside. Our natural1526gas supplies in Cook Inlet are dwindling to the point where our1527utilities today are discussing how they are going to keep the1528lights on in the South Central region, where the vast majority1529of Alaskans call home. And they are looking to Canada for their1530source of supply. That is insult to injury to this Senator, who1531has been working so hard to get us to a place where our energy1532is affordable, reliable, secure, diverse, whatever you want to1533call it. It is a challenge for us right now.1534    And one of the things that we have looked to, we have1535recognized that there is no one-size-fits-all that fits us. And1536so, I think we have--I don't know if it's fair to say that we1537have pioneered microgrids in Alaska, but we have darn well been1538leading in the country when it comes to how you take these1539isolated grids, because we have one grid in the state, and it's1540called our Railbelt grid. And it goes up about 350, 400 miles1541and it comes down. And it's not a grid, it's like a rope, and1542there is vulnerability in that rope. And so, this is something1543that, again, we are looking at ways that we can reduce our1544energy costs in the state that, unfortunately, experiences some1545of the highest energy costs in the entire country. And I think1546that is counterintuitive to so many people who think, well,1547wait a minute, you guys supply all of this stuff. Why are you1548not able to keep your own lights on?1549    So we are a little bit of a conundrum. At the same time, we1550have got great opportunities. We would love to be a leader in1551data servers. It's cold up there. We have got cold water. It's1552all the right things for you all, but if we can't power it, we1553can talk about these advantages until the cows come home. We1554don't have very many cows in Alaska. But we need to recognize1555that there is more that must be done in recognizing the1556extraordinary diversity.1557    Mr. Huntsman, I really appreciated your testimony. You talk1558about the risk of distorted markets. I absolutely agree. I1559think our challenge is that we don't have a distorted market,1560but we just need to have more on our Railbelt grid, just like1561we need on our microgrids. We were kind of pushed behind with1562this executive order that came out a couple weeks ago on wind1563and solar because we do have a couple projects that were going1564to be integrated into this broader grid that is LNG, it's1565hydro, it's a little bit of wind, it's a little bit of solar.1566Basically, we are piecing everything together as best we can,1567and now we see a pushback on that EO by taking away the1568opportunities for greater affordability and reliability.1569    It reminded me that we have been down this road before. It1570was the late 70s where the government prohibited the use of1571natural gas for electric generation. Think about where we would1572be if we still had that policy in place. And so, we are back to1573this place where it's kind of dangerous to pick winners and1574losers. Just figure out how everybody participates in, again,1575advancing a portfolio, an energy portfolio that makes sense1576across the board.1577    So I guess I would direct a question, well, to any of the1578three of you in terms of the importance of ensuring that our1579federal policies are not in a position where we are picking the1580winners and the losers. And I grant you, wind and solar have1581been the ``mature'' technologies for a long time--a long time.1582But we are now in a place where the Secretary of Energy and his1583Deputy are going to be spending a lot of their time over at DOI1584with a review of every individual wind and solar decision that1585comes before the Department. They have got a lot to do. I think1586that this is going to be distracting and taking away the time1587that they need to be working on some of the issues that all1588three of you have mentioned here this morning.1589    Any comment on that? I have run my full five minutes. So1590that's not very fair to you, but go ahead.1591    Mr. Tench. Well, real quick. Oh, sorry, go ahead.1592    Mr. Huntsman. I would just say, to the extent that it adds1593cost to consumers, I hope they take a long time in reviewing1594those projects because there are a lot of companies out there1595and a lot of consumers that just can't afford these redundant1596systems and the higher cost to all of them. And I think we are1597losing focus here. When a Tier 4 data center comes online, they1598need 99.997. That means they are out of electricity--an Amazon1599center could be out of electricity for 27 minutes per year.1600They're not going to be relying on wind. They're not going to1601be relying on solar. That may be part of their system--a very1602small part of it--but for the most part it's why they are1603looking to buy nuclear facilities and so forth. And it's the1604consumers that are going to get caught up with this higher1605pricing and it's companies like ours that are going to get1606caught up with this higher pricing. So I am concerned about a1607lot of those.1608    Senator Murkowski. No, I hear you. I just want to add one1609final point to this. I am dealing with communities, though,1610that if they can get 20 percent of their diesel-powered1611consumption offset by some incremental wind and solar, it's 201612percent that they're not spending.1613    Mr. Huntsman. Totally right.1614    Senator Murkowski. So we are operating in different worlds,1615I get that. I get your point. And I just need to make sure that1616you understand what it means in some of these really remote1617off-the-grid places.1618    Mr. Gramlich.1619    Mr. Gramlich. Well, I would just thank you for your1620leadership on the permitting issue, not just this review, which1621seems awfully inefficient and could take whole generation types1622off the table. But on the staffing, many of these permitting1623agencies for your state and others, have great staff, but they,1624you know, they need to be staffed up. They are trying to get1625permits issued, but they are trying to do it in a legally1626sustainable way. And if we lose staff at these permitting1627agencies, that is a real challenge for any of the1628infrastructure we are trying to build.1629    Senator Murkowski. Very good.1630    Mr. Tench. You made the comment a minute ago that it's not1631a job to pick winners and losers. You know, I agree. We are, in1632our business, we are simply trying to deliver for our customers1633the technology and the buildings and the infrastructure to1634drive the deployment of AI, the grid, and as we receive1635electrons off of it, it doesn't know what the source was. We1636have requirements in terms of availability. We have backup1637generation for those times when there is a problem with the1638grid. But anything we can do to encourage as many different1639sources of power to increase the total load that's available,1640along with the transmission of that load, you know, I think is1641a good idea.1642    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chair.1643    The Chairman [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.1644    We will now begin a second round of questions under the1645same terms as the original one.1646    Mr. Huntsman, I would like to start with you, if that is1647all right.1648    One big tech company recently released its sustainability1649report sometime last week, and it shows that that company's1650carbon emissions rose by six percent last year in 2024,1651primarily due to the development of data centers and1652electricity consumption that goes along with that and other1653activities. Now, despite the rhetoric from some big tech1654companies and others about net-zero, the reality is that their1655business model, particularly the business model of those that1656are heavily reliant on big data centers, requires reliable1657power, affordable power, and oftentimes natural gas is the best1658option. In many cases, it is effectively the only realistic1659option. Can you discuss how Huntsman Corporation focuses more1660on innovation than sustainability as a means to achieve both1661economic growth and cleaner supply chains?1662    Mr. Huntsman. Well, I think that in all of these supply1663chains, again, as we look at, particularly in the chemical1664industry, the innovation that we have is to make things1665lighter. If you look at just the science of something as basic1666as a water bottle. Think of the water bottles you pick up1667today. This is, unfortunately, pretty poor science right here,1668but most of the water bottles you pick up today, they feel like1669they are almost going to fall apart. That water bottle today1670contains about 15 percent of the material that the same1671application did 10 years ago. That's innovation. It's making1672the industry more efficient, it's lowering the cost, and it's1673better for the environment.1674    And if you apply that same technology into the1675lightweighting of an EV, you are going to extend the mileage,1676and of a plane, you are going to extend the mileage and the1677fuel consumption. A long-range power cable, high-voltage power1678cables, again, being able to lighten that, being able to1679increase the capacity of that, depending on the insulative1680materials that are built into that cable. It's all about1681science and it's all about innovation.1682    I would just note that when we talk about the battery and1683the materials that make all of this stuff, how much of that is1684actually being built and made and produced here in the United1685States? That's something that I think may be a topic for1686another day, but we import a lot of raw materials, especially1687on the mineral side and the copper side and all this from1688foreign powers and from foreign entities. And so, when we talk1689about the battery buildout and we talk about the long-term1690cable construction and so forth, a lot of this is going to1691require more construction and more permitting here in the1692United States. If we really want to domesticate and we really1693want to take advantage of this buildout, we ought to be1694building these raw materials in the U.S. as well.1695    The Chairman. If I am understanding you correctly, you are1696saying for every widget that a Huntsman chemical produces, or1697every widget that someone else produces using Huntsman chemical1698products, something like this, for example (the Chairman holds1699up a water bottle), I will never look at these any more without1700thinking ``poor science.'' If you are able to innovate, you can1701produce the same number of widgets or even more widgets with1702fewer environmental impacts, including fewer emissions through1703technological innovation. Do I understand you correctly?1704    Mr. Huntsman. I believe our industry does that as well as1705anybody, if not better.1706    The Chairman. Mr. Tench, arguably, the primary issue that1707your industry contends with involves the availability of1708reliable power. According to some reports, there are some1709utilities that told data center developers that additional1710power to fuel data centers can take up to a decade to deliver.1711Obviously, that could be unsatisfying in that industry, which1712needs to be nimble and move quickly. What barriers exist within1713traditional utility business models to deploying large data1714centers at scale?1715    Mr. Tench. You know, I am not an expert on the underlying1716business model for most of these utilities, but I can describe1717what I observe and the interactions that we have, and that is1718that when we begin our planning cycle, we will submit1719applications for engineering studies, which can take a year.1720They are then coupled with other developers that are looking to1721do similar things and, in some cases, we are all attempting to1722serve the same load requirement. So the utilities do have a1723difficult job in sifting through ten requests that may be for1724actually two projects that ultimately go live. Their response1725to that has been to require very significant financial1726commitments to even undertake the engineering studies. And1727again, those take a long time.1728    The need that we have is speed and certainty as it relates1729to that power. And in our observation over the last five years,1730across the country, those two factors are moving in the1731opposite direction.1732    The Chairman. So existing challenges coupled with the1733urgent need for permitting and regulatory reform sort of1734manifest to us a problem. We are kind of on the knife-edge of a1735problem, which, if we move in the right direction can help1736bring about needed reform quickly, and it can go the opposite1737direction quickly.1738    And then, finally, I want to just make a point in response1739to some of the comments that we have had so far that puts some1740of the comments in context. As the Wall Street Journal pointed1741out earlier this week, ``the IRA,'' meaning the Inflation1742Reduction Act, ``turbo-charged subsidies for wind and solar in1743ways that distorted energy investment because the subsidies can1744offset more than 50 percent of the project's cost.'' It's a1745significant amount that ends up being borne by the U.S.1746Government and the U.S. taxpayer. Now, the claim that these tax1747credits reduce electric rates is, I think, contradicted, or1748certainly undermined, by experience. Wind and solar credits1749must be backed by peaker gas plants or batteries, which cost1750more than three times as much as baseload power.1751    So the problem is not that there is anything inherently1752wrong with wind and solar being used to generate electricity.1753As I said earlier, they have their place. There are things that1754they can do. But baseload power is not something that they1755produce. And when you need baseload power, nothing else will1756do, and those don't provide that.1757    Senator Heinrich.1758    Senator Heinrich. I just want to make the point that in my1759own experience, because the thing I find most intuitive is to1760look at the power in my own grid and to ask the question, does1761what people are representing line up with actual reality? On my1762grid, we are only five percent coal now, and that's because1763coal is really freaking expensive. We are 23 percent gas and1764declining, but that's very useful generation. It's hard to add1765to because you can't get a turbine. We are seven percent1766nuclear, which is great. It's firm, it's baseload--if people1767like those terms. I prefer capacity factors, and it has got a1768really good capacity factor, but it's really expensive, really1769expensive. And then, we are 35 percent solar, 15 percent wind,1770and with just 15 percent battery storage and a little bit of1771geothermal, we are able to balance all of that with incredible1772reliability, and consumers will not compromise on reliability.1773But most importantly, they also like low cost.1774    And in most of the country, the average--you are paying 171775and change cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity. In my grid,1776we are paying about 11--10.8, to be precise. So it is bringing1777the price pressure down and it is providing the cheapest new1778sources of generation to replace the older, more expensive1779sources of generation.1780    One of the things we have to deal with here is these1781agencies and the role that they play in permitting new1782generation and transmission. So Mr. Gramlich, if our permitting1783agencies--for example, the Department of the Interior, which1784has added this new level of red tape, stall or slow-walk1785permits for generation projects, which we are currently seeing,1786and those permit projects, as a result, don't get on the grid1787or they get on the grid slower, what is the impact to people1788who pay retail electric prices?1789    Mr. Gramlich. Sure, well obviously, that will raise prices.1790And what's happening is, you know, love it or hate it, many1791utilities with their state regulators have put in place plans1792for the next few years of how they are going to meet load.1793There might be retirements. There might be load growth. They1794routinely go through these plans, and just the reality is, it's1795largely wind, solar, and storage that are in those plans----1796    Senator Heinrich. About 95 percent in most cases.1797    Mr. Gramlich. Right, to meet next load. So if----1798    Senator Heinrich. So if you take that 95 percent out, even1799some portion of it, say a third, what are you going to replace1800it with in year one, two, or three? Nothing.1801    Mr. Gramlich. Curtailment, per load.1802    Senator Heinrich. Curtailment, exactly.1803    Why I said capacity factors is because I am an engineer and1804I don't remember a lot the terms and buzzwords that get thrown1805around a lot here now--firm, baseload, dispatchable. What I1806remember from my education is capacity factors, right? And if1807you look at generation today, you know, I have wind in my state1808that has a 40 percent capacity factor. It's not perfect, but1809it's pretty darn good. You know what else has a 40 percent1810capacity factor, Mr. Gramlich?1811    Mr. Gramlich. The gas?1812    Senator Heinrich. Coal, today, in the United States of1813America. Everybody says it's firm and baseload and it's not.1814It's not, because it's expensive and it's unreliable. And when1815you have a coal-fired generating station go down, the whole1816thing goes down. It doesn't go down three percent, it doesn't1817go down 10 percent--you lose that generation until that thermal1818plant is back up and running.1819    So, in your testimony, you talked about the increase in1820demand over time. DOE also is predicting a similar amount,1821about two percent a year. But they are also claiming that there1822is somehow a hundredfold increased risk of outage, and this1823relates to the capacity factor issue if forecasted retirements1824occur between now and 2030, as predicted. What were the1825assumptions that went into that, that were baked into that1826claim?1827    Mr. Gramlich. Yeah, I think the Department of Energy, I1828mean, they provided useful analysis with this report, but I1829think they vastly overstated the retirements of generation. And1830as I said earlier, we have processes, either through utility1831planning or markets.1832    Senator Heinrich. And markets.1833    Mr. Gramlich. Right, you know, to discourage or prevent1834retirements, and that's happening, but also on the supply1835addition side. There is a lot more generation out there that1836could come onto the grid, and I think the Department of Energy1837study understated that new supply. So if you understate supply,1838overstate retirements, suddenly you have a reliability crisis,1839but it might just be manufactured by those numbers.1840    Senator Heinrich. Yeah, we certainly haven't seen that in1841New Mexico, and we haven't seen that next door in Texas. where1842they have a totally separate grid from ours, but they are1843bringing on lots of new sources of generation, lots of new1844solar and batteries, in particular. You know, transmission1845lines are such an important piece of all this because they do1846help us wheel power around the country. And it's hard to build1847transmission. It's why we need to actually do permitting1848reform, which this Committee did last Congress, but hasn't done1849this Congress yet.1850    You know, I worked on one transmission line for 17 years of1851my life. And today, it has facilitated tens of billions of1852dollars of economic output. It has facilitated the largest1853renewable project in the continent's history, but it wasn't1854easy to get that done. If you create a system where the1855politics can change overnight, where, for example, a loan from1856the Loan Programs Office can be decided by politics rather than1857by metrics, what is the impact of that on reliability and on1858price pressure?1859    Mr. Gramlich. Well, I mean, so many utilities have1860testified before this Committee over the years about the need1861for stability. They are making 60-year investments--6-0--and if1862the policies change 180 degrees every four years, they simply1863can't do that. So I think your point is well taken. We need1864some stability, I do think. FERC is a great place for a lot of1865these orders, as a bipartisan, non-partisan agency. For1866permitting, they could do more in that regard, but we need to1867get that regulatory stability for investment.1868    Senator Heinrich. Thank you.1869    The Chairman. Senator Justice.1870    We will go to Senator Justice, then Senator Cantwell, then1871Senator Hirono.1872    Senator Justice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1873    Well, guys, you know, we have got some really smart folks1874up here. There is no question about that. And I am sure that1875you all are super-smart and I am very proud of your1876contributions to this great country in every way. And I really1877thank everybody out here in the audience and everything. I know1878you have family and everything, and we congratulate everybody1879for being here.1880    Let me just ask you just simply just this--or make this1881statement: why do we continue to make this so much harder than1882it is? Really and truly. I am from West Virginia. And I am a1883new kid on the block and I have got a lot of white hair and1884everything. But I was the Governor of the great State of West1885Virginia for eight years and everything, and we did it with1886logic, and reason, and businessmen or businesswomen approaches1887and everything, and all of a sudden, we took a state that was1888flat dead on its back any way you can cut it, to prospering1889like you can't imagine in no time. We know in the energy sector1890today that a year from now or a year and a half from now, we1891are going to hit the wall like nobody's business. That is all1892there is to it. We know that.1893    And we absolutely know the contribution of fossil fuels,1894and that if we had carried on and gone down the pathway of some1895that would say we want rid of all of it, coal is the nastiest,1896terrible, most terrible word in the dictionary, and so, with1897all that being said, we want rid of all of it, and what would1898have happened? Here is exactly what would have happened, you1899know, and there is no point in dancing around it. We would1900absolutely be deciding between homes and industry or homes and1901jobs because we couldn't do them both. There's no way. And you1902know it. We all know it. All of you all know it.1903    So why don't get at trying to do something that is the1904right thing? We know what the problem is. My dad would have1905told me ten million times, son, you've got to first know how1906deep you are in the hole, but when you know the position you1907are in the hole, then we can try to get out of the hole. He1908would have also said, for God's sakes-a-livin', I don't care1909how hard you try, don't confuse effort with accomplishment. You1910know, we've got to achieve right now. That is all there is to1911it.1912    So I would ask you just this, and this is the simplest1913thing I can possibly ask you. We all know we have got to have1914reliable. We know we have to have a regulatory climate that we1915can function. I mean, for God's sakes, we know all the answers.1916Why don't we just get at fixing the problem? But my question is1917just simply just this--from the standpoint of can you talk1918about the dangers of retiring all fossil fuels, whether it be1919gas or coal or whatever, can you talk about where we would be1920in this country today if we just decided, okay, that is what we1921are going to try to do, because I do know this--West Virginia--192283 percent of the power in West Virginia comes from coal. I do1923know there are states out there that don't derive a lot of1924power from coal. I was the guy that said embrace all, but for1925God's sakes-a-livin', let's quit subsidizing one and making it1926unfair against the others. If it's not fair, let's quit doing1927it.1928    You know, so talk to us about just what I just asked. Talk1929to us, please, and just go very quickly because I have only got1930a minute left.1931    Mr. Huntsman. National suicide.1932    Senator Justice. I love it. And I will tell you this, I was1933going to say this before we started. I love--and I don't know1934Peter Huntsman at all, but I love your bluntness, gosh1935almighty, because that's exactly what we need. We need to quit1936dancing around the ring around the rainbow. We need to1937absolutely do it.1938    Now, go ahead, sir.1939    Mr. Tench. Look, we are at the edge right now in terms of1940having the power we need. We are going to be running short. We1941need to preserve and add resources everywhere we can.1942    Mr. Gramlich. All I will just say, I mean, your state is1943very different in its preferences than neighboring states and1944that is a good reason why states are largely in charge of1945generation choices and portfolios. So I don't think the Federal1946Government needs to be meddling right now in specific power1947plans. Let's leave that to the states.1948    Senator Justice. Would we not all say, if we were all being1949really smart, we have a situation that could become a national1950security situation, and it's right at our doorstep. Would we1951not all say, for God sakes-a-livin', why in the world don't we1952just look at what countries of the world are trying to do right1953today? China is building a coal-fired power plant every day,1954you know? And I am exaggerating to make my point, but they're1955not doing it just for fun. I mean, they know how absolutely1956important power is.1957    So nevertheless, I thank you for being here.1958    Mr. Chairman, I defer.1959    The Chairman. Thank you.1960    Senator Cantwell.1961    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1962    Good to see you, gentlemen.1963    I like the subject of affordable electricity. It has kind1964of built the State of Washington over and over again. And so,1965we have had a pretty robust conversation now with all of my1966colleagues from different parts of the United States about how1967to get there. I haven't heard the word fusion yet. I certainly1968believe that while we are talking about transmission capacity1969and various sources of energy, the United States continuing to1970be a leader in breakthrough technology is also a key component,1971very important to the equation. Maybe if somebody wants to1972address that.1973    But I did, Mr. Huntsman, want to talk about the need for1974more electricity in the AI revolution, and particularly this1975issue you were talking about, the large amounts of composite1976material. I really did want to follow Senator Cassidy because1977it was a good lead up, being from the State of Washington and1978aerospace and the transformation that we want to see in1979aerospace with larger percentages of composite materials. But1980won't we be able to create some efficiencies by using AI and1981then making it more efficient in the development of these very1982lightweight materials, but also intensity in what it takes to1983actually produce them? Won't there be a feedback loop here that1984will help us?1985    Mr. Huntsman. Absolutely, Senator. You are spot-on correct1986in that if you use the sciences of material scientists to1987lightweight anything, it's just a simple law of physics. You1988are going to require less energy to move that product, whether1989that end-item is an automobile or whether it's an airplane. And1990yes, AI is going to greatly facilitate the design,1991specifications, and the raw material usage to do these. What we1992also need to make sure of is that we have a permitting process1993in place. If AI can tell us that we can make this new product,1994and we have got the capability of altering our manufacturing1995footprint to make it tomorrow, I may have to wait three to five1996years for the EPA to approve a new chemistry. And that is1997simply not acceptable when you look at what we are doing with1998AI and what we are doing with material sciences. So you are1999spot-on.2000    Senator Cantwell. Okay, so how do we accelerate that then?2001    Mr. Huntsman. Well, it would be great if the EPA would2002follow the laws that all of you passed creating TSCA, which is,2003they have 90 days to approve a product or not. Right now, we2004have products that have been waiting for three to four years to2005get approval. I can build a facility in China in less time than2006that. If you are going to be building these composite2007materials, you are better off going someplace other than the2008United States because it takes so long.2009    Senator Cantwell. No, no, we don't want that. We have a2010world demand for 40,000 airplanes right now.2011    Mr. Huntsman. That's right.2012    Senator Cantwell. We are about to go to a major2013transformation where instead of building 40 planes a month, you2014will be able to build 100 planes a month. But wait, only if you2015get this next phase of composite manufacturing or thermal2016plastics right.2017    Mr. Huntsman. We are ready to go.2018    Senator Cantwell. And so, and we want to see that. We want2019to see it particularly related to AI and large-scale parts of2020the airplane. Obviously, you articulated very well in your2021earlier testimony how much the current manufacturing prowess2022has given us some percentage--18 to 20, maybe even higher--2023percentage of an airplane now with these lightweight materials,2024but the big move now is, you can build bigger pieces. And2025obviously, instead of taking hours to bake in an autoclave, you2026can do them in a large-scale press. And so, that's the thing in2027front of us.2028    I was thinking a little more like, I mean, yes, TSCA, but a2029little more about what agencies or what other people do you2030think we need to get involved to get people to understand that2031AI, you know, we went to one of our national labs and were just2032seeing some testing that was done that might have been done in2033the past by individuals--a very repetitive, formulated process,2034very time consuming, probably would have taken, you know, maybe2035years, but certainly months, but it was AI and automated and2036they just ran 24/7. So they are going to get that chemical2037analysis done in a few months instead. That's what AI is2038helping us to deliver.2039    So how can we communicate this in a broader way that we get2040more people understanding what the opportunity is?2041    Mr. Huntsman. Well, I think if you make it applicable to2042the average person, for example, in cancer research, if you are2043able to apply AI, what if your cancer outcomes for cancer2044medications were to improve multiple fold? What if your prices2045of your groceries and so forth because of growing seasons and2046so forth and AI, what if that were to improve? I think you need2047to be able to--there is such a fear of AI taking my job. That2048needs to be supplanted with the idea that every technological2049advancement we have had in modern industry has benefited larger2050society. AI will do likewise. We need to do a better job2051selling that, both at a federal level and a state level, and at2052an industrial level.2053    Senator Cantwell. We just, I know my time is up, but2054fusion, good idea to make sure we are keeping/making progress,2055right?2056    Mr. Gramlich. I would say absolutely. That's an exciting2057opportunity.2058    Senator Cantwell. Thank you.2059    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2060    The Chairman. Thank you.2061    Senator Hoeven.2062    Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.2063    So you all need a lot of power for your AI. How are we2064going to get more baseload on the grid? We keep adding2065variable-rate sources, and that is creating grid instability.2066You all want to use a lot of power off the grid. And when2067Chairman Lee turns his lights on and the lights don't come on,2068or he turns on his air conditioning on a hot day in Utah and it2069doesn't work because you are sucking all the power off the grid2070and we are having blackouts and brownouts, he is going to be2071really unhappy, and he has got a temper. So how are you going2072to get enough baseload out there to make sure that you not only2073can do all your great AI stuff which you have been talking2074about, but we keep the power on for everyone, all of our2075consumers that need it 24/7?2076    And you can go in any order you want, but I would like to2077get your opinions on it.2078    Mr. Tench. I would be happy to start. Look, I think what we2079have been talking about in the hearing is about ways in which2080we can ensure that we can gain access to the electrons that are2081already on the grid through greater levels of interconnection,2082enhancement to the intelligence of the grid itself, so that it2083can be more adaptive to load changes that are occurring. And2084again, use better the generation and transmission2085infrastructure that we already have.2086    That said, it's not enough, and you know, our position is2087that we need to encourage as much new generation of whatever2088type as we can, including nuclear, including geothermal, et2089cetera.2090    Senator Hoeven. Right, but if you don't balance it out, you2091are going to have instability, you are going to have blackouts.2092If you just keep adding wind power, or other variable sources,2093you are going to have problems. And it seems to me there are a2094lot of people who want to take coal off the grid and there are2095a lot of people that seem to have phobia about nuclear, and a2096lot of people don't want to allow any transmission or any of2097those kinds of things to be built. How are you going to break2098through that and get this done, because you all are bringing on2099a big-time demand for power at a high rate. And at some point,2100you know, everybody kind of wants to go on like everything is2101going to be just fine and they are going to have all their2102power and not kind of get the idea that we are going to have to2103do some of these things.2104    How are you going to crack this mindset so people kind of2105put their shoulder to the wheel and say, yeah, we need all2106these things?2107    Mr. Tench. Well, hopefully, hearings like this, where we2108are helping to inform folks like yourselves, who are in a2109position to influence regulation and the other agencies that2110are involved in this will help. But if we can agree that the2111ability for the United States to be dominant in AI technology2112is a matter of national security, which I think it is,2113hopefully that will rally folks around us applying our2114influence, our pressure, and in our case, our capital toward2115incremental sources of generation and transmission.2116    Mr. Huntsman. Simple fact----2117    Senator Hoeven. Well, let me add one more thing before both2118of you, the others, you know, give me some thoughts, but look,2119nuclear is going to take some time. And we are going to have to2120change the way we build it to practically build it at some2121reasonable cost and a reasonable time frame, which, obviously,2122we are trying to do. Chris Wright and everybody is trying to do2123it. And we are going to need to keep baseload coal around, you2124know, for a lot longer. So we are going to have to start2125putting some of these things together. How do we do that? I2126mean, it's not just telling our Chairman about it. I mean,2127somehow, we have got to get folks to really understand and buy2128in to this program if you guys are going to get the power that2129you want for AI, because a lot of folks see the potential of2130AI, but a lot of folks aren't all that thrilled about it.2131    Mr. Huntsman. I am not an AI producer. I am from the2132chemical industry. But if I have got a trillion-dollar balance2133sheet, I am always going to be able to afford the power. That's2134not a concern to me. If he's got a billion-dollar balance2135sheet, he comes behind me, and if he's got a thousand-dollar2136balance sheet, like the average household in America, guess who2137is going to pay the highest price, and guess who is going to2138get the incremental last bit of electricity? And that is the2139way it's going to work. It's a pyramid.2140    And so, if you can afford it, and what we need to be doing2141is, you are absolutely right, we need to be building out the2142baseload power, which has got to come back to natural gas. That2143is going to be the cleanest. It's the fastest. It's the most2144economical means of having a reliable baseload across the2145board. And that's from our industry, because we don't have a2146trillion-dollar balance sheet. That's--we have been through2147Europe. We have been through all these continents that have2148tried seven different ways of making electrons and they are2149virtually bankrupt. It doesn't work. We know it. It's not a2150theory. It doesn't work.2151    Senator Hoeven. That was a really well--that's exactly what2152I am getting at. I think folks have got to hear what you just2153said because that is going to be meaningful to them, you know?2154That was very good.2155    And sir, any thoughts you would have?2156    Mr. Gramlich. Well, I would just say we have heard a lot2157today about a balanced, diverse portfolio, and the power system2158is more like a basketball team. The point guard doesn't do what2159the center does and vice versa, and you need it all. And2160particularly in this moment of rapidly rising load growth, we2161can't be taking one of those players off the court.2162    Senator Hoeven. Yeah, I mean, I just think folks need to2163understand what we have to do here. And I think how you all2164communicate that, how we all communicate it, really matters2165because we have got to get going.2166    Thanks for being here.2167    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2168    The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Hoeven.2169    Just to wrap up, I want to push back a little on some of my2170colleagues claims that renewable generation paired with2171batteries is somehow significantly cheaper and more reliable.2172It's just not borne out by the data. Renewables and storage2173have a significant scalability issue. Backup power is required2174and is needed whenever you have renewables and storage2175operating as a significant leg of the energy stool because it2176happens from time to time when they don't perform adequately up2177to the task when demand peaks. Now, this is especially true2178whereas is bound to happen with some frequency demand peaks for2179a period of time longer than four hours. Four hours matters2180because that is about the capacity of utility-scale batteries2181to hold power.2182    So you are inevitably going to have times when the wind,2183the sun, some combination of the two, aren't doing what they2184need to do when demand peaks and then, at those moments, you2185have got to have something to back it up. Then, additionally,2186if we want to cherry-pick data, let's look at some of the2187electric power costs in different parts of the country.2188Louisiana's retail cost of electricity is lower than, say, New2189Mexico's. And its electricity mix is 76 percent gas and three2190percent renewables. Utah's retail cost of electricity currently2191stands at around nine cents per kilowatt-hour, and statewide,2192the grid runs on 77 percent coal and gas-fired generation. And2193more specifically, my local utility also has low retail rates,2194about ten cents per kilowatt-hour, and runs on roughly 602195percent gas and coal.2196    So renewables and storage have a place. They are capable of2197helping do their part to make the grid more resilient and2198reliable, but scalability is an issue. We cannot forget the2199need for backup generating capacity. And if we are going to2200have two grids to accommodate all of that, it's going to get a2201lot more expensive, and that in turn drives a lot of the2202potential for our competitiveness, a lot of the demand for2203these things outside the United States, and we don't want to2204lose that race.2205    This has been a great hearing, and I want to thank each of2206you for being here and for your testimony. All three of you2207have offered phenomenal insights, and I am grateful for the2208participation of my colleagues as well, who made some great2209points.2210    This will wrap up today's hearing. The deadline for2211submitting questions for the record, any Senator who wants to2212do that must do so no later than 6:00 p.m. tomorrow, Thursday,2213the 24th of July. Senators will also have until 6:00 p.m. this2214coming Wednesday, July 30th, to add statements for the record2215to today's hearing.2216    Thanks again to our witnesses and to all of you who2217participated.2218    The Committee stands adjourned. Thank you.2219    [Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]22202221                      APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED22222223                              ----------22242225[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]22262227                                 [all]