Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Congressional research reportMay 27, 2020
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the
American Energy Innovation Act
May 27, 2020
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
R46372
SUMMARY
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the
American Energy Innovation Act
Issues in the 116th Congress reflect the ongoing debate over the federal role in energy policy,
particularly related to research and development (R&D), development of fossil and renewable
energy on federal lands, and the role of federal regulation, particularly as it relates to greenhouse
gas emissions.
R46372
May 27, 2020
Brent D. Yacobucci,
Coordinator
Section Research Manager
Members of the House and Senate have introduced bills on a range of energy topics, and the
Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources (ENR) have proposed major
legislation integrating many of these topics. On February 27, 2020, ENR leadership introduced S.Amdt. 1407, a substitute
amendment for S. 2657, titled the American Energy Innovation Act, which incorporates language from energy bills reported
by the Committee. Cloture on the bill was invoked on March 2, 2020, and on March 5 several amendments were adopted. On
March 9, 2020, a cloture on S.Amdt. 1407 was denied on a 47-44 vote.
Energy issues addressed in the bill include:
Energy efficiency in buildings, schools, and industrial/manufacturing facilities;
Amendments to Department of Energy (DOE) loan programs; and
Federal agency energy efficiency;
Research and development of renewable and nuclear energy technologies;
Research, development, and demonstration of efficient and alternative fuel vehicles;
Reauthorization and amendment of the Weatherization Assistance Program;
Modernization and security of electricity infrastructure;
Energy storage;
Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS);
“Clean” (generally meaning low-carbon) energy workforce development;
Promotion of small-scale liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports;
Deployment of “smart manufacturing” to increase the productivity and energy efficiency of U.S.
manufacturing;
Programs to provide energy sector employment for veterans, and to use artificial intelligence and
supercomputing to improve veterans’ health.
The bill remains on the Senate calendar, although since discussion of the bill was suspended several major events have
occurred: on March 11 the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic leading to limits on personal and
other travel, as well as a range of economic activities; during the month of March crude oil prices dropped by more than 50%
because of declining demand and a lack of consensus among OPEC and other oil producers to limit production; U.S. gasoline
and jet fuel product supplied (a proxy for consumption) dropped dramatically in the subsequent weeks, reaching levels not
seen since at least the 1990s; and electricity demand in most parts of the country also declined. Whether these factors have
sustained effects for U.S. energy is unclear, but they may influence any future discussion of U.S. energy policy.
Congressional Research Service
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Contents
Background: Comprehensive Energy Policy ................................................................................... 1
Title I—Innovation .......................................................................................................................... 2
Subtitle A—Efficiency .............................................................................................................. 2
Part I—Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness .................................................... 2
Subpart A—Buildings ......................................................................................................... 3
Subpart B—Industrial Efficiency and Competitiveness ..................................................... 6
Subpart C—Federal Agency Energy Efficiency ................................................................. 8
Subpart D—Rebates and Certifications ............................................................................ 13
Subpart E—Miscellaneous................................................................................................ 14
Part II—Weatherization .................................................................................................... 15
Subtitle B—Renewable Energy .............................................................................................. 16
Subtitle C—Energy Storage .................................................................................................... 22
Subtitle D—Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage ........................................................... 25
Subtitle E—Nuclear ................................................................................................................ 31
Subtitle F—Industrial Technologies ........................................................................................ 35
Part I—Innovation ............................................................................................................ 35
Part II—Smart Manufacturing .......................................................................................... 38
Subtitle G—Vehicles ............................................................................................................... 40
Subtitle H—Department of Energy ......................................................................................... 41
Title II—Supply Chain Security .................................................................................................... 50
Subtitle A—Mineral Security .................................................................................................. 50
Subtitle B—Cybersecurity and Grid Security and Modernization .......................................... 51
Part I—Cybersecurity and Grid Security .......................................................................... 51
Part II—Grid Modernization............................................................................................. 55
Subtitle C—Workforce Development ..................................................................................... 60
Title III—Code Maintenance......................................................................................................... 65
Tables
Table A-1. Appropriations Authorized in S. 2657 (S.Amdt. 1407) by Fiscal Year ........................ 66
Appendixes
Appendix A. Authorizations of Appropriations ............................................................................. 66
Appendix B. Abbreviations ............................................................................................................. 1
Contacts
Author Information.......................................................................................................................... 3
Congressional Research Service
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Background: Comprehensive Energy Policy
Congress has enacted several broad energy policy laws since the 1970s, most recently the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA, P.L. 110-140). These laws have addressed a wide
range of topics, including energy efficiency in vehicles, appliances, consumer goods, and
buildings; development of energy and mineral resources on federal lands; incentives for the
production and/or use of renewable energy; limits on export of energy resources; and research
and development of advanced energy technologies. Since the enactment of EISA, the U.S. energy
landscape has changed dramatically, with growing U.S. energy production from natural gas,
petroleum, and renewable energy, and a significant decline in coal production and use.
In the 114th and 115th Congresses, the House and Senate considered broad energy legislation. In
the 114th Congress, both the House and Senate passed versions of S. 2012, although the
Conference Committee did not reach agreement. In the 115th Congress, a related bill, S. 1460,
was introduced in the Senate but was not brought to the floor. These bills would have addressed a
variety of energy topics, including energy efficiency in federal buildings, data centers,
manufacturing facilities, and schools; water conservation/efficiency; electric grid cybersecurity;
liquefied natural gas (LNG); grid energy storage; renewable energy; critical minerals; nuclear
research and development (R&D); and energy workforce development.
In the 116th Congress, Members of the House and Senate have introduced bills on a range of
energy topics, many of which were reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources (ENR) in the 1st Session.
On February 27, 2020, the ENR Chairman and Ranking Member introduced S.Amdt. 1407, a
substitute amendment to S. 2657, titled the American Energy Innovation Act.1 The amendment
incorporates language from a range of energy bills reported by the Committee. Cloture was
invoked on the bill on March 2, 2020, and on March 5 several amendments to the amendment
were adopted. On March 9, 2020, cloture on S.Amdt. 1407 was denied on a 47-44 vote.
The American Energy Innovation Act would reauthorize existing programs and establish new
programs, mainly through the Department of Energy (DOE), on energy efficiency and
conservation in buildings, public schools, federal agencies, and industrial and manufacturing
facilities. It would also reauthorize and amend the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP),
and establish programs to promote retraining and other assistance for workers affected by shifts in
the U.S. energy system, and for U.S. veterans. The amendment would promote federal research,
development, and demonstration (RD&D) on renewable energy technologies, nuclear energy, and
carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS). Electric grid modernization, cybersecurity, and
resilience are also included in the proposal.
This report provides a summary and analysis of the energy bill which was debated on the Senate
floor starting March 2, 2020. The report refers to the March 5 version of S.Amdt. 1407, the
substitute amendment to S. 2657. It compares the language in S.Amdt. 1407 to bills reported by
ENR in the 1st Session of the 116th Congress. In some cases, there is no comparable ENR bill.
The bill remains on the Senate calendar, although since discussion of the bill was suspended
several major events have occurred: on March 11 the World Health Organization declared
COVID-19 a pandemic leading to limits on personal and other travel, as well as a range of
economic activities; during the month of March crude oil prices dropped by more than 50%
because of declining demand and a lack of consensus among OPEC and other oil producers to
1 The introduced and reported versions of S. 2657 are titled the Advanced Geothermal Innovation Leadership Act of
2019. S. 2657 is the vehicle for the combined energy package.
Congressional Research Service
1
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
limit production; U.S. gasoline and jet fuel product supplied (a proxy for consumption) dropped
dramatically in the subsequent weeks, reaching levels not seen since at least the 1990s; and total
electricity demand in many parts of the country also declined. Whether these factors have
sustained effects for U.S. energy is unclear, but they may influence any future discussion of U.S.
energy policy.
Title I—Innovation
Subtitle A—Efficiency
Part I—Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness2
Part 1 of the Subtitle A addresses energy efficiency policies for buildings, industry, and federal
agencies, among other provisions. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration
(EIA), the building and industrial sectors collectively consume approximately 72% of all U.S.
primary energy consumption.3 The residential and commercial buildings sector accounts for 39%
of all U.S. primary energy consumption, and the industrial sector accounts for 33%.4 Increased
adoption of energy-efficiency technologies by these sectors could potentially realize significant
energy savings and reduce emissions to the environment. DOE estimates that building energy use
could be reduced by more than 20% through implementation of technologies that are known to be
cost-effective.5 In 2020, the National Academies estimated that implementing existing, costeffective efficiency technologies in the industrial sector could reduce energy consumption by 1422%.6 A more recent study by EIA estimated that industrial sector energy intensity could be
reduced by 44% globally between 2018 and 2040.7 Challenges to energy efficiency include
market forces that do not incentivize investment in energy efficiency, a lack of information or
awareness of energy saving opportunities and investment returns, and some policy approaches
that reward selling energy and discourage investment in energy efficiency.
Provisions in Part 1 build upon the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2019
and upon congressional action from previous versions of the bill introduced in the 112th, 113th,
114th, and 115th Congresses.8 S. 2137, the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of
2 Prepared by Corrie E. Clark, Analyst in Energy Policy, unless otherwise noted.
3 The building sector is an end-use energy consumption segment of the nation’s energy system that is comprised of
residential and commercial buildings. The industrial sector is an end-use energy consumption segment of the nation’s
energy system that is comprised of energy-intensive manufacturing, non-energy-intensive manufacturing, and
nonmanufacturing activities. EIA, “Table A2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source,”
Annual Energy Outlook, 2020, https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/excel/aeotab_2.xlsx.
4 See EIA, “Table A2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source,” Annual Energy Outlook, 2020,
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/excel/aeotab_2.xlsx.
5 DOE, “Chapter 5: Increasing Efficiency of Building Systems and Technologies,” Quadrennial Technology Review,
September 2015, p. 2, at https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/03/f34/qtr-2015-chapter5.pdf.
6 National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and National Research Council. 2010. Real
Prospects for Energy Efficiency in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, p.15, at
https://doi.org/10.17226/12621.
7 Energy intensity refers to energy use per unit of gross value added. The projection is for International Energy Agency
(IEA) countries and other major economies as determined by IEA. IEA. 2018. Energy Efficiency 2018: Analysis and
Outlooks to 2040, IEA, Paris, p. 101, at https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-efficiency-2018.
8 For more information on previous versions of the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, see CRS
Report R44911, The Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act: S. 385 and H.R. 1443, by Corrie E. Clark.
Congressional Research Service
2
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
2019, was reported by ENR on October 23, 2019. Some provisions from S. 2137 are not included
in S.Amdt. 1407.
Subpart A—Buildings
Chapter 1—Building Efficiency
Subpart A, Chapter 1 contains several provisions for buildings and energy efficiency. The chapter
does not include provisions from S. 2137 that pertain to building energy codes that have
previously raised opposition. Those provisions would have made DOE’s state certification
process for model building energy codes consistent for both commercial buildings and residential
buildings. Additional language would have directed DOE to establish energy savings targets in
the code development process and to establish a new grant program to facilitate adoption and
implementation of updated building energy codes. Some supporters state that the provisions,
“which would strengthen federal support for voluntary building energy codes, account for the vast
majority of the efficiency gains in [S. 2137].”9 Some opponents state that DOE’s role should be
as “technical advisor,” and expressed concern that the language in S. 2137 directing DOE to
support the model building energy code development process by establishing national aggregate
energy savings targets would “[deny] the code consensus bodies freedom in decision-making.”10
Sec. 1001. Commercial building energy consumption information sharing.
Both the EIA and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) collect commercial building
energy performance data. EIA conducts the Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey
(CBECS), a national sample survey that collects information on U.S. commercial buildings,
including energy-related building characteristics, energy consumption, and energy expenditures.11
Respondent information provided to CBECS is confidential. EPA collects commercial building
energy and water performance data on a voluntary basis as part of the ENERGY STAR
Program.12 Using the ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager tool, commercial building owners or
managers can document a building’s energy and water performance, compare a building’s
performance to a typical building with a similar function, and submit performance data for
consideration and certification with the ENERGY STAR label. For a building to receive the
ENERGY STAR label, it must be verified to perform among the top 25% of similar buildings
nationwide; EPA relies upon EIA’s CBECS for data on typical building performance. In August
2018, EPA updated performance metrics for U.S. buildings in ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager
based on data collected for EIA’s 2012 CBECS.13
Section 1001 would direct EIA and EPA to enter into an information-sharing agreement. The
section would direct the agreement to provide access to the EIA to building-specific data within
9 Alliance to Save Energy, “Alliance Calls for Stronger Efficiency Provisions in Senate Energy Bill,” February 27,
2020, https://www.ase.org/news/alliance-calls-stronger-efficiency-provisions-senate-energy-bill.
10 National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), Federal Intrusion in Energy Codes Hurts Housing Affordability, at
https://www.nahb.org/-/media/NAHB/advocacy/docs/industry-issues/federal-intrusion-in-energy-codes-hurts-housingaffordability.pdf; NAHB, “Take Action to Prevent the Federal Government from Hijacking Building Codes,” March 2,
2020, http://nahbnow.com/2020/02/take-action-to-prevent-the-federal-government-from-hijacking-building-codes/.
11 CBECS includes building types such as schools, hospitals, correctional institutions, buildings used for religious
worship, stores, restaurants, warehouses, and office buildings. For more information on the CBECS, see
https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/about.php.
12 For more information on ENERGY STAR, see CRS In Focus IF10753, ENERGY STAR Program, by Corrie E.
Clark.
13 EPA, “Updates to ENERGY STAR® metrics with new market data,” https://www.energystar.gov/buildings/facilityowners-managers/existing-buildings/use-portfolio-manager/update-energy-star-scores-cbecs.
Congressional Research Service
3
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
the Portfolio Manager database, to describe the manner in which EIA will incorporate the data
into any future CBECS, and to describe and compare methodologies to maximize the quality of
data collected by EIA and EPA. The section also directs EIA and EPA to protect submitted
information according to existing public law.
This language in Section 1001 is identical to language in Section 103 of S. 2137 as reported by
ENR on October 23, 2019.
Sec. 1002. Energy efficiency materials pilot program.
Section 1002 would authorize the creation of a grant program to provide matching funds for
nonprofits that retrofit buildings with energy efficiency improvements, including renewable
energy generation, improved lighting, heating and air conditioning systems, and insulation.
Criteria for awarding grants would be based upon the expected energy savings from
improvements, the cost-effectiveness of the improvements, the evaluation and verification plan,
financial need, and matching contribution.
This language in Section 1002 is nearly identical to language in S. 520, a bill to require the
Secretary of Energy to establish an energy efficiency materials pilot program, which was reported
by ENR on August 16, 2019. Similar provisions were introduced in the 113th, 114th, and 115th
Congresses.14
Sec. 1003. Coordination of energy retrofitting assistance for schools.
Section 1003 would require DOE to coordinate and provide information on existing federal
programs that could assist states, local educational agencies, and schools in initiating, developing,
and financing energy efficiency, renewable energy, and energy retrofitting projects for schools.
DOE would be required to coordinate and consult with appropriate federal agencies, to develop
and maintain an online resource with relevant information, and to report to Congress on the
implementation of this section.
This language in Section 1003 is nearly identical to language in Section 121 of S. 2137 as
reported and Section 2 of S. 253, the Streamlining Energy Efficiency for Schools Act, as reported.
Differences between Section 1003 and Section 121 of S. 2137 pertain to the definition of a
school. Section 1003 would include a school operated by the Bureau of Indian Education under
the definition of a school while S. 2137 would include a school operated by the Bureau of Indian
Affairs under the definition of a school.15 S. 2137 was reported by ENR on October 23, 2019.
Differences between Section 1003 and Section 2 of S. 253 pertain to language in S. 253 that
would have required DOE to identify duplicative programs across federal agencies, which was
not included in Section 1003. S. 253 was reported by ENR on September 19, 2019.
Sec. 1004. Grants for energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy improvements
at public school facilities.
Section 1004 would authorize a competitive grant program to be administered by DOE to make
energy improvements at schools. Energy improvement would include any improvement, repair,
renovation, or installation that results in energy cost savings. It could also include an energy
14 See U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Energy Efficiency Materials Pilot Program
Act, report to accompany S. 520, 116th Cong., 1st sess., August 16, 2019, S.Rept. 116-72.
15 The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) are both within the U.S. Department
of the Interior and administered by the Assistance Secretary of Indian Affairs. For more information on Indian
education, see CRS Report RL34205, Indian Elementary-Secondary Education: Programs, Background, and Issues, by
Cassandria Dortch.
Congressional Research Service
4
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
improvement that leads to an improvement in teacher and student health and results in a reduction
in energy costs. The installation of renewable energy technologies, the installation of zeroemissions vehicle infrastructure, and the purchase or lease of zero-emissions vehicles would
qualify as energy improvements. Awardees would be required to submit a report to DOE
describing the use of funds, cost savings realized by the energy improvements, the results of any
audit, the use of any utility programs and public benefit funds, and the use of performance
tracking for energy improvements. Wage requirements for contractors and subcontractors would
be consistent with Davis-Bacon Act wage requirements.16 DOE would be required to develop and
publish guidelines and best practices for the program and may provide technical assistance to
eligible entities for implementation of guidelines and best practices. Section 1004 would
authorize $100 million annually for FY2021-FY2025.
This language in Section 1004 is similar to language in Section 2 of S. 1890, the Renew
America’s Schools Act of 2019, as reported. S. 1890 was reported by ENR on December 18,
2019. Section 1004 includes an expanded section of requirements for the best practices that DOE
would develop that are not included in S. 1890. In addition, S. 1890 did not include the
requirement that an energy improvement that leads to an improvement in teacher and student
health also result in a reduction in energy costs.
Sec. 1005. Smart building acceleration.
Section 1005 would promote the adoption of smart building technology. According to the bill, a
“smart building” has an energy system that is flexible and automated; allows for remote
monitoring and analysis; takes a systems-based approach to building operations for control of
energy generation, consumption, and storage; communicates with utilities or other entities as
appropriate; protects the health and safety of building occupants and workers; and is cybersecure.
The section would direct the Secretary to establish the Federal Smart Building Program, which
would implement smart building technology, and demonstrate the costs and benefits of smart
buildings. DOE may expand awards made under the Federal Energy Management Program
(FEMP) and the Better Building Challenge to recognize those federal agency achievements that
accelerate the adoption of smart building technologies. DOE would also be directed to conduct a
survey of privately owned smart buildings throughout the United States and evaluate their costs
and benefits. DOE would conduct an R&D program to address the barriers to the integration of
advanced building technologies to accelerate smart building adoption. Section 1005 would also
require DOE to demonstrate policies and approaches that accelerate the transition to smart
buildings through the Better Building Challenge.
The language in Section 1005 is nearly identical to language in S. 2335, the Smart Building
Acceleration Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 24, 2019. Section 1005 does not
include congressional findings included in Section 2 of the S. 2335.
Chapter 2—Worker Training and Capacity Building
Sec. 1011. Building training and assessment centers.
Section 1011 would direct DOE to provide grants to colleges and universities to establish
building training and assessment centers, to promote building energy efficiency and
16 The Davis-Bacon Act set certain minimum labor standards for workers employed in federal contract construction:
notably, that contractors must pay their employees not less than the locally prevailing wage. For more information on
the Davis-Bacon Act, see CRS Report 94-408, The Davis-Bacon Act: Institutional Evolution and Public Policy, by
William G. Whittaker.
Congressional Research Service
5
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
environmental performance, and to coordinate with industrial research and assessment centers.17
To the maximum extent practicable, the section would direct DOE to collocate building training
and assessment centers with industrial assessment centers. The section would authorize $10
million to be made available until expended.
Section 1011 is identical to language in Section 111 of S. 2137 ,the Energy Savings and Industrial
Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019.
Sec. 1012. Career skills training.
Section 1012 would direct DOE to award grants to eligible entities to pay the federal share of
career skills training programs (50%) to train and certify students to install energy efficient
building technologies. Eligible entities would include nonprofit partnerships that include equal
participation of industry and labor organizations and may include other organizations such as
workforce investment boards, community-based organizations, qualified service and conservation
corps, and education institutions. The section would authorize $10 million to be made available
until expended.
Section 1012 is nearly identical to language in Section 112 of S. 2137, as reported, with the
exception that Section 112 of S. 2137 provides the following reference to technologies listed
under 112(b) Establishment: “including technologies described in subsection (b)(3) of section 307
of the Energy Conservation and Production Act (42 U.S.C. §6836).”
Subpart B—Industrial Efficiency and Competitiveness
The industrial sector accounts for approximately 33% of U.S. primary energy consumption.18 The
EIA conducts a national sample survey, the Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS),
approximately every four years. According to the EIA, U.S. manufacturing energy intensity
decreased by approximately 4% from 2010 to 2014.19 During the same time period, total primary
energy use for U.S. manufacturing increased by approximately 4% from 2010 to 2014.20 This is
the first measured four-year increase in manufacturing energy consumption since 2002 according
to MECS data.21 DOE’s Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO) administers programs to
improve the energy and material efficiency, productivity and competitiveness of manufacturing.
AMO’s activities include R&D projects, convening R&D consortia, and providing technical
assistance.
Subpart B would provide additional authority for industrial efficiency programs at DOE. This
subpart is largely consistent with provisions in S. 2137, the Energy Savings and Industrial
17 DOE industrial assessment centers conduct energy assessments for eligible manufacturers to identify opportunities to
improve energy efficiency, productivity, and competitiveness and to reduce waste. The draft bill would also make
changes to the authorization for the industrial research and assessment centers; see “Sec. 1022. Future of Industry
program and industrial research and assessment centers.”
18 EIA estimates that the industrial sector consumed 32.5 quadrillion Btu of energy in 2019. See Table A2 in EIA,
Annual Energy Outlook, 2020, at https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/section_appendices.cfm.
19 Publicly available data are from 2014. The most recent survey collected data for 2018; data from that survey is not
available at this time. EIA reports that U.S. manufacturing overall fuel intensity decreased by 4.4% from 3.016
thousand British thermal units (Btu) per dollar of output in 2010 to 2.882 thousand Btu in 2014.
20 DOE, Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint (2010 MECS), June 2015, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/
files/2018/11/f57/manufacturing_energy_footprint-2010_0.pdf; DOE, Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint
(2014 MECS), April 2019, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/06/f64/
Manufacturing%20Energy%20Footprint-2014_Latest_compliant.pdf.
21 EIA, “Preliminary Estimates Show That U.S. Manufacturing Energy Consumption Increased Between 2010 and
2014,” (October 13, 2016), https://www.eia.gov/consumption/manufacturing/reports/2014/pre_estimates/.
Congressional Research Service
6
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019, with the exception of
Section 1023, which does not appear in S. 2137. Sections 1021, 1022, 1024, and 1026 are
identical to language in S. 2137, as reported. Section 1023 is nearly identical to language in S.
2425, the CHP Support Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on December 17, 2019, with the
exception of the years for authorized appropriations. Section 1025 is similar to language in H.R.
2659.
Sec. 1022. Future of Industry program and industrial research and assessment centers.
Section 1022 would direct DOE to expand the industrial research and assessment centers, create
Centers of Excellence for the highest-performing industrial research and assessment centers, and
improve coordination with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), FEMP,
and the Building Technologies Program within DOE. DOE would increase partnerships with the
DOE National Laboratories, energy service providers, and technology providers, identify
opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote sustainable manufacturing. The
section would direct DOE to provide funding to outreach and coordination efforts. DOE would
also be directed to pay for half the cost of associated internship programs and associated
apprenticeship programs. The section would also direct the Administrator of the Small Business
Administration to expedite consideration of loans from eligible small businesses. The section
would also include water and wastewater treatment facilities within the definition of an “energyintensive industry.”
Section 1022 is identical to language in S. 2137, the Energy Savings and Industrial
Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019.
Sec. 1023. CHP Technical Assistance Partnership Program.
Section 1023 would amend section 375 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA, P.L.
94-163) to establish the CHP Technical Assistance Partnership Program.22 The program would
include the existing 10 regional combined heat and power (CHP) technical assistance
partnerships, any others that DOE would establish, and any supporting activities within the
technical partnership program of DOE’s AMO.
Section 1023 would establish criteria for the program, which would encourage deployment of
CHP, waste heat to power,23 and efficient district energy technologies and provide project specific
support. Language would direct the program to make funds available to universities, research
centers, and other institutions to ensure continued effectiveness of regional CHP Technical
Assistance Partnerships. Allowable uses of those funds would include the research, development,
and distribution of informational materials relevant to manufacturers, commercial buildings,
institutional facilities, and federal sites; supporting mission goals of the Department of Defense
(DOD) relating to CHP and microgrid technologies; maintaining and updating CHP databases and
websites; conducting workshops and seminars; providing onsite CHP technology deployment
assessments; identifying opportunities for hybrid renewable CHP; providing appropriate
engineering support; assisting organizations in overcoming barriers to deployment; and assisting
with field validation and performance evaluation clean energy technologies. Section 1023 would
authorize appropriations for $12 million for each of FY2020-FY2024.
22 CHP refers to combined heat and power, which is the concurrent generation of electricity or mechanical power and
useful thermal energy from a single source of energy. CHP systems are considered to be efficient as the thermal energy
that is used would otherwise be wasted in a conventional power system.
23 “Waste heat to power (WHP) is the process of capturing heat discarded by an existing industrial process and using
that heat to generate power.” Neeharika Naik-Dhungel, Waste Heat to Power Systems, EPA, Washington, DC, May 30,
2012.
Congressional Research Service
7
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Section 1023 is nearly identical to language in S. 2425, the CHP Support Act of 2019, as reported
by ENR on December 17, 2019, except that authorization period is one year later in Section 1023,
reflecting the different dates the legislation was introduced.
Sec. 1024. Sustainable manufacturing initiative.
Section 1024 would direct DOE to provide technical assessments to manufacturers to maximize
energy efficiency, minimize waste, improve water efficiency, and conserve natural resources.
DOE would also coordinate with the private sector and carry out a joint industry-government
partnership program for R&D in sustainable manufacturing and industry technologies and
processes.
Section 1024 is identical to language in S. 2137, the Energy Savings and Industrial
Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019.
Sec. 1025. High efficiency gas turbines.
Section 1025 would direct the Secretary to establish a multiyear, multiphase program within the
Fossil Energy Program to research, develop, and demonstrate technologies that improve the
efficiency of gas turbines to be used in power generation systems and aviation. Section 1025
would specify program elements such as supporting gas turbine design for small-scale and utilityscale electric power generation, technology demonstration, field demonstrations, performance
assessments, increasing fuel flexibility to enable high proportions of hydrogen or other renewable
gas fuels, enhancing foundational knowledge needed for low-emission combustion systems, and
increasing operational flexibility. Section 1025 would establish program goals in two phases.
Phase one goals would be to develop and demonstrate advanced high efficiency gas turbines with
efficiencies of at least 65% for combined cycle turbines and 47% for simple cycle turbines; for
aviation gas turbines, phase one goals would be to reduce fuel burn by 25%. Phase two goals
would increase efficiency goals to 67% for combined cycle turbines and to 50% for simple cycle
turbines. The section would authorize appropriations for $50 million for each of FY2021FY2025.
Section 1025 is similar to language in H.R. 2659, which was introduced in the House on May 10,
2019. Among the differences between the bills, H.R. 2659 would direct the Fossil Energy
Program to establish a program to improve the efficiency of gas turbines for power generation
systems and does not mention aviation applications.
Subpart C—Federal Agency Energy Efficiency24
Sec. 1031. Energy and water performance requirements for Federal buildings.
Since the 1970s, Congress has mandated energy requirements for federal agencies. Legislation
required reductions in fossil fuel consumption and increases in renewable energy use, and energy
efficiency targets for government fleets and buildings. Congress enacted the National Energy
Conservation Policy Act (NECPA, P.L. 95-619), which, among other actions, established a
program to retrofit federal buildings to improve energy efficiency. Federal agencies were required
to reduce building energy intensity incrementally from FY2006 through FY2015. By FY2015,
federal agencies should have reached an energy intensity reduction of 30% compared to FY2003.
Federal agencies may typically exclude buildings that have a dedicated energy process that
overwhelms other building consumption, such as one designed for a national security function or
for the storage of historical artifacts.
24 Prepared by Heather Greenley, Analyst in Energy Policy.
Congressional Research Service
8
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Section 1031 would amend NECPA (42 U.S.C. 8253), extending existing energy efficiency
improvement targets to federal building through FY2028, requiring federal agencies to reduce
building energy consumption incrementally from FY2021 through FY2028 compared to FY2018.
By FY2028, federal buildings would be required to reach a 20% reduction in energy use. Section
1031 would also add water use reduction targets through 2030. Each federal agency would be
required to improve water efficiency at a rate of 2% per fiscal year. Exclusions are provided for
buildings with energy and water intensive activities. Section 1031 also includes
recommendations, reporting requirements, evaluation roles for energy managers, exceptions for
recommissioning or retrocommissioning, and performance contracting requirements.
The language in Section 1031 is nearly identical to language in Section 421 of S. 2137, the
Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23,
2019; and S. 1706, the Energy Savings Through Public-Private Partnerships Act, as reported by
ENR on September 24, 2019. S. 2137 outlines the various targets and the considerations for
federal energy managers, including evaluation requirements, whereas the language on
performance contracting can be found in S. 1706. Section 1031 would require federal agencies to
use performance contracts for at least 50% of energy or water saving measures identified by
energy managers.
Sec. 1032. Federal Energy Management Program.
Federal agencies report energy and water consumption annually to DOE’s Federal Energy
Management Program (FEMP). FEMP collects this data and helps agencies meet federally
mandated energy and water reduction goals. FEMP helps federal agencies identify affordable
solutions to improvement through trainings. Federal agencies can request assistance from FEMP
to improve energy management.
Section 1032 would authorize FEMP in statute, and details FEMP’s authorizations and roles.
FEMP would continue to maintain and track energy and water management through an online
database, and continue to develop and implement trainings, among other duties. Additionally,
Section 1032 would authorize appropriations of $36 million for each of FY2021 through FY2031.
Section 1032’s language is nearly identical to Section 422 of S. 2137, the Energy Savings and
Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019. The main
difference is that authorization periods are one year later in Section 1032, reflecting the different
dates the legislation was introduced.
Sec. 1033. Use of Energy and Water Efficiency Measures in Federal Buildings.
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct92, P.L. 102-486) amended NECPA and authorized
alternative financing methods for federal energy projects, including energy savings performance
contracts (ESPCs) and utility energy service contracts (UESCs), among other provisions. An
ESPC is a multiyear contract between a federal agency and an energy service company. In
general, under an ESPC, a federal agency agrees to pay an amount not to exceed the current
annual utility costs for a fixed period (up to 25 years) to an energy service company, which
finances and installs facility improvements. In return, the contractor assumes the performance
risks of energy conservation measures made during the contract period, and guarantees that the
improvements will generate energy cost savings sufficient to pay for the improvements over the
length of the contract, as well as providing the energy services company a return on the
investment. After the end of the contract, the agency benefits from reduced energy costs because
of the improvements. A UESC is a contract between a federal agency and the serving utility.
Congressional Research Service
9
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Under a UESC, the utility arranges financing for efficiency projects and renewable energy
projects, and the costs are repaid by the agency over the length of the contract.25
Section 1033 would amend NECPA to require DOE to report to the President and Congress on the
status of ESPCs and UESCs of each agency, including information on quantity and investment
value, savings, forecast, and any data discrepancies. Further, Section 1033 would provide
additional authority to federal agencies allowing the acceptance, transfer, and application of
proceeds from any energy and water incentive including renewable energy certificates (RECs) to
fund these contracts. RECs are created when a qualified renewable source of energy generates a
megawatt-hour of electricity.26 Additionally, Section 1033 would expand the definition of “energy
savings” by amending 42 U.S.C. §8287c to include RECs as well as revenue generated from
energy or water reductions or more efficient equipment.
Section 1033 is identical to language in S. 1706, the Energy Savings Through Public-Private
Partnerships Act, as reported by ENR on September 24, 2019.
Sec. 1034. Federal building energy efficiency performance standards; certification system
and level for green buildings.
The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and
the International Code Council (ICC) manage model building energy code development. Each
model code, or example standard, is typically updated every three years through a public
consensus process. ASHRAE is responsible for maintaining standard 90.1, Energy Standard for
Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. The ICC is responsible for maintaining the
International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), which contains separate provisions for
commercial buildings and for low-rise residential buildings. DOE supports and participates in the
model building energy code development processes administered by ASHRAE and the ICC. The
development processes rely on stakeholder engagement to propose changes and provide feedback
to the committees on proposed changes. These consensus standards are developed and published
to define minimum performance values.
Section 1034 would amend 42 U.S.C. §6834 by adding a definition of “major renovation” to
include modifications to the energy systems of a building that can achieve compliance with
applicable energy standards. It would also set revised energy-efficiency standards for federal
buildings. These standards would update from the 2004 ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and the 2004
IECC to the most recently published edition. The Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the
Administrator of General Services and the Secretary of Defense, would also review and compare
private sector green building certification systems.
Section 1034 would strike and replace paragraph (D) of 42 U.S.C. §6834, thereby rescinding a
fossil energy elimination requirement for new federal buildings. EISA Section 433 currently
25 See CRS Report R45411, Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs) and Utility Energy Service Contracts
(UESCs), by Corrie E. Clark.
26 Each REC has a unique identification number and provides data (e.g., the resource type, service date, location, etc.)
that is traceable and certifiable. RECs can be traded and have monetary value. They are used by utilities to comply with
state renewable electricity standards. Thus, RECs can help improve the return on investment for renewable projects.
The ownership of these credits is often a contract stipulation associated with the project for the developer. State and/or
local renewable requirements play a role in determining the contract stipulations for the credit ownership. For more
information, see Office of Federal Sustainability Council on Environmental Quality, Federal Renewable Energy
Certificate Guide, June 16, 2016, p. 4.
Congressional Research Service
10
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
requires federal agencies to reduce fossil fuel consumption in new or majorly renovated buildings
by specified amounts.27
The language in Section 1034 is nearly identical to Section 432 of S. 2137, the Energy Savings
and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019. The
language is also similar to bills introduced in the 115th Congress: The Energy Savings and
Industrial Competitiveness Act, S. 385 and H.R. 1443.28
Sec. 1035. Energy-efficient and energy-saving information technologies.
EISA Section 527 (42 U.S.C. §17143) requires federal agencies to report to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) on the status and implementation of energy efficiency
improvements, energy reduction costs, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Subsequently,
EISA Section 528 (42 U.S.C. §17144) directs OMB to provide a summary of this information and
an evaluation of progress for the federal government to the House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform and to the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs.29 The Director of
OMB compiles the compliance status of the EISA requirements and description of each into an
agency scorecard.30
Section 1035 would amend NECPA by adding language to require the OMB Director, the EPA
Administrator, and the Secretary of Energy to collaborate with each federal agency to develop an
implementation strategy for the maintenance, purchase, and use of energy-efficient and energysaving information technologies.31 Additionally, Section 1035 would direct the OMB Director to
establish performance goals and best practices to meet those goals, including the consideration of
utilizing ESPCs and UESCs.
The language in Section 1035 is nearly identical to Section 301 of S. 2137, the Energy Savings
and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019.
Sec. 1036. High-performance green Federal buildings.
The Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings, within the General Services
Administration (GSA), coordinates activities relating to such buildings across federal agencies
(42 U.S.C. §17092).32 The office delivers actionable information to improve building
performance and conducts assessments on existing green buildings. GSA has several green27 42 U.S.C. §6834(a)(3)(D)(i) applies only to new and majorly renovated buildings that are (1) “public buildings” or
(2) those that cost at least $2,500,000 adjusted for inflation.” In FY2020, these buildings are supposed to reduce fossil
fuel consumption by 80% with an ultimate goal of 100% by FY2030, relative to a similar building’s consumption
levels in FY2003. DOE proposed a rulemaking for comment on this legislation on October 15, 2010. However, the
rulemaking was not finalized, and no further action has been taken since December 2014 when the comment period
closed. Without a finalized rule, it is difficult to track and evaluate the progress toward this goal. For more information,
see U.S. Department of Energy, “Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction for New Federal Buildings
and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings, Proposed Rule,” 79 Federal Register, October 14, 2014, pp. 6169361735.
28 For more information, see CRS Report R44911, The Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act: S. 385 and
H.R. 1443, by Corrie E. Clark.
29 Now known as the House Committee on Oversight and Reform and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs, respectively.
30 For a scorecard example, see U.S. Department of Defense, FY2018 OMB Scorecard for Efficient Federal
Operations/Management, accessed March 10, 2020, available at https://www.sustainability.gov/images/scorecards/dodscorecard-fy2018.png.
31 Information Technology as defined in 40 U.S.C. §11101.
32 For more information on green buildings, see CRS Report R40147, Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and
Issues, by Eric A. Fischer and Danielle A. Arostegui.
Congressional Research Service
11
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
building programs and projects that are the result of collaborations with other agencies and
offices. The Director of the Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings provides
recommendations to the Secretary of Energy on rating and certification systems that can be used
by agencies to meet federal green building requirements, based on the results of a study to be
conducted by the office every five years.33 The office coordinates with DOE on commercial highperformance green building activities.
Section 1036 would amend 42 U.S.C. §17092(h) to require the Director of the Office of Federal
High-Performance Green Buildings to conduct an ongoing review, providing the Secretary of
Energy with a list of certification systems most likely to encourage a comprehensive and
environmentally sound approach to the certification of green buildings. Additionally, these
systems criteria would include sourcing of grown, harvested, or mined materials, and reward
responsible sourcing.
The language in Section 1036 is nearly identical to Section 411 of S. 2137, the Energy Savings
and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019.
Sec. 1037. Energy efficient data centers.
According to DOE, data centers are energy-intensive compared to other building types.34 DOE
estimates that data centers accounted for approximately 2% of total U.S. electricity use in 2014.
Data centers in the United States consumed an estimated 70 billion kWh, and are projected to
consume approximately 73 billion kWh in 2020.35 The growth in cloud computing services has
led to commitments by some data-centric companies to power data centers with renewable
energy.36 Although there are no national efficiency requirements for data centers, the federal
government has taken steps to improve the efficiency of its own data centers.37 In 2010, the
Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative (DCCI) was established. The Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA, P.L. 113-291) was enacted on December 19,
2014, to establish a long-term framework through which federal IT investments could be tracked,
assessed, and managed, to significantly reduce wasteful spending and improve project
outcomes.38 The DCCI was superseded by the Data Center Optimization Initiative (DCOI) in
2016.39 The DCCI established and the DCOI maintains requirements for agencies to develop and
33 42 U.S.C. §6834(a)(3); 42 U.S.C. §17092.
34 Data centers typically consume 10 to 50 times the energy per floor space of a typical commercial office building.
DOE, “Data Centers and Servers,” accessed December 27, 2018, https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/data-centersand-servers/.
35 Shehabi, A., Smith, S.J., Horner, N., Azevedo, I., Brown, R., Koomey, J., Masanet, E., Sartor, D., Herrlin, M.,
Lintner, W., United States Data Center Energy Usage Report, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley,
California, 2016, LBNL-1005775, http://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/lbnl-1005775_v2.pdf, p. ES-1.
36 See Apple Inc., “Apple Now Globally Powered by 100 Percent Renewable Energy,” press release, April 9, 2018,
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/04/apple-now-globally-powered-by-100-percent-renewable-energy/; Brad
Smith, “New Solar Deal Moves Us Ahead of Schedule in Creating a Cleaner Cloud,” Microsoft On the Issues, March
21, 2018, https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2018/03/21/new-solar-deal-moves-us-ahead-of-schedule-increating-a-cleaner-cloud/.
37 For more information, see CRS Report R45863, Bitcoin, Blockchain, and the Energy Sector, by Corrie E. Clark and
Heather L. Greenley.
38 Title VIII, Subtitle D of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2015, P.L. 113-291.
39 U.S. Office of Management and Budget, “Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Data
Center Optimization Initiative,” August 1, 2016, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/
memoranda/2016/m_16_19_1.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
12
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
report on strategies “to consolidate inefficient infrastructure, optimize existing facilities, improve
security posture, achieve cost savings, and transition to more efficient infrastructure.”40
Section 1037 would amend 42 U.S.C. §17112 to direct the Secretary of Energy and the EPA
Administrator to consult with stakeholders to carry out a voluntary national information program
on energy-efficient data centers including a study to assess progress in energy-efficiency
improvement, and analyze the impact of information technologies, cloud platforms, and social
media on energy usage. Section 1037’s study would update the Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory’s United States Data Center Energy Usage Report, from June 2016, within the next
four years. It would also include an evaluation of water usage in data centers and
recommendations for reduction. Section 1037 would also direct the Secretary of Energy to
maintain a data center energy practitioner program to certify qualified practitioners to evaluate
energy use in federal data centers. Agencies would be required to consider having a practitioner
evaluate data centers once every four years. Section 1037 would make energy usage data from
federal data centers available and accessible to the public, but also protect proprietary
information.
The language in Section 1037 is nearly identical to Section 302 of S. 2137, the Energy Savings
and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019.
Subpart D—Rebates and Certifications
Sec. 1041 Third-Party Certification Under Energy Star Program.
ENERGY STAR® is a voluntary labeling program for energy-efficient products, homes,
buildings, and manufacturing plants that is managed jointly by EPA and DOE.41
Section 1041 would direct the EPA Administrator to revise certification requirements for program
partners that have complied with all ENERGY STAR requirements for 18 months such that thirdparty certification for listing a product would not be required (although other documentation may
be required to facilitate product listing and performance verification). The section would also
require termination of the exemption if it is determined that any ENERGY STAR program
requirements have been violated for two models within a two-year period, and the resumption of
third-party certification would be required for at least three years. This would not prevent EPA
from using third parties for ENERGY STAR program administration.
Section 1041 is identical to section 401 of S. 2137, the Energy Savings and Industrial
Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019.
Sec. 1042. Extended Product System Rebate Program.
Electric motors are used in the U.S. industrial, commercial, residential, and transportation sectors.
The industrial sector is responsible for approximately 44% of all motor-drive system electrical
energy consumption in the United States.42 In 2018, the U.S. industrial sector’s total electricity
consumption was more than 25% of end-use electrical consumption in the United States.43 Within
40 Ibid., p. 2. For more on the data center optimization initiative, see CRS Report R44843, The Current State of Federal
Information Technology Acquisition Reform and Management, by Patricia Moloney Figliola.
41 For more information on the ENERGY STAR program, see CRS In Focus IF10753, ENERGY STAR Program, by
Corrie E. Clark.
42 DOE EERE Advanced Manufacturing Office, Premium Efficiency Motor Selection and Application Guide: A
Handbook for Industry, DOE/GO-102014-4107, Washington, DC, February 2014, pp. 1-2.
43 EIA, Monthly Energy Review, February 2020. Table 7.6. Available at http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/
Congressional Research Service
13
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
the industrial sector, motor-driven equipment consumed approximately 63% of the total electrical
energy, and this energy use was approximately 17% of the total U.S. electrical energy use.44
Section 1042 would direct DOE to establish a rebate program for qualified extended product
systems. The section defines a qualified extended product system as a system that includes an
electric motor and electronic control that reduce energy use by at least 5% as compared to base
levels. The section would establish a maximum aggregate rebate per entity not to exceed $25,000
per calendar year. The section would authorize $5 million per year for two years, available until
expended.
Section 1042 is nearly identical to Section 211 of S. 2137, the Energy Savings and Industrial
Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019. S. 2137 includes
commercial or industrial machinery or equipment that was placed back into service during
calendar year 2020 or 2021. Section 1042 includes commercial or industrial machinery or
equipment that was placed back into service during calendar year 2021 or 2022.
Sec. 1043. Energy Efficiency Transformer rebate program.
Section 1043 would establish a rebate program to incentivize the replacement of energy
inefficient transformers with energy efficient transformers. Qualified energy inefficient
transformers would be defined as a transformer that does not meet or exceed applicable energy
conservation standards and meets certain requirements for date of manufacture. Qualified energy
efficient transformers meet or exceed applicable energy conservation standards. Section 1043
would authorize $5 million per year for FY2021 and FY2022, to be available until expended.
Section 1043 is nearly identical to Section 221 of S. 2137, the Energy Savings and Industrial
Competitiveness Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019. The language in S. 2137
would authorize appropriations for FY2020 and FY2021, while the Section 1043 of the draft bill
would authorize appropriations for FY2021 and FY2022.
Subpart E—Miscellaneous
Sec. 1051. State energy conservation plans.45
DOE administers the State Energy Program, which provides funding and technical assistance to
states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories to promote the efficient use of energy and
reduce the rate of growth of energy demand through the development and implementation of
specific state energy programs. The program is authorized under Part D of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (EPCA, P.L. 94-163). Part D (section 361 et seq.) of EPCA authorizes the
Secretary of Energy “to establish procedures and guidelines for the development and
implementation of specific state energy conservation programs and to provide federal financial
and technical assistance to the states in support of such programs.”
Section 1051 would strike the existing paragraph 362(d)(3) of EPCA, which says that state
energy plans can include programs to increase transportation efficiency and the use of alternative
fuels. The replacement language would expand those options to include programs designed to
“help reduce carbon emissions in the transportation sector” and increase vehicle electrification.
data/monthly/pdf/sec7_19.pdf.
44 Percentages are based upon data from 2006; see DOE EERE Advanced Manufacturing Office, Premium Efficiency
Motor Selection and Application Guide: A Handbook for Industry, DOE/GO-102014-4107, Washington, DC, February
2014, pp. 1-2.
45 Prepared by Mark Holt, Specialist in Energy Policy.
Congressional Research Service
14
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Sec. 1052. Report on electrochromic glass.46
Electrochromic (EC or “smart”) glass has the ability to switch from clear to tinted, potentially
lowering building heating or cooling loads and reducing interior glare.47 An electrical charge sent
through the glass causes the glass to react by lightening or darkening. EC window systems can be
manually or automatically controlled, depending on system design.
Section 1052 would require Secretary to study the potential benefits of EC glass to reduce energy
consumption in commercial buildings, improve workplace comfort and employee health, and
provide benefits for hospital patients and staff. A report to Congress would be required by one
year after enactment.
Sec. 1053. Advance appropriations required.48
The text requires that funding authorized by Part I of Title I be available only to the extent it is
“provided in advance in appropriations Acts.” This language in Section 1053, which appears in
other bills as well, may reiterate that this authorization by itself does not provide any funding.
Part II—Weatherization
The Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) enables low-income families to permanently
reduce their energy consumption by making their dwellings more energy efficient. The WAP was
established in 1976 and authorized in Title IV of the Energy Conservation and Production Act
(ECPA, P.L. 94-385). The WAP is a formula grant program: funding flows from DOE to state
governments and then to local governments and weatherization agencies. DOE program
guidelines specify that a variety of energy efficiency measures are eligible for support under the
program. The measures include insulation, space-heating equipment, energy-efficient windows,
water heaters, and efficient air conditioners.
Sec. 1101. Weatherization Assistance Program.
Section 1101 would reauthorize the WAP. The section would clarify that renewable energy
technologies are to be included in the definition of weatherization materials. The section would
amend section 413(b) of ECPA to authorize DOE to account for the non-energy benefits of
weatherization improvements—such as improvements to health and safety—when determining
appropriate standards and procedures for WAP. Section 1101 would add a new Section 414(c) of
ECPA to authorize DOE to request that grant recipients review and encourage the use of private
contractors. A new Section 414(d) would authorize the creation of a financial assistance program
within WAP for enhancement and innovation. Additional provisions, if enacted, would make
changes to the program including increasing the amount of a WAP grant that can be used for
administrative purposes from 10% to 15% and changing the eligibility requirements for
reweatherization of any dwelling to 15 years after the previous weatherization was completed.
The section would also authorize an annual appropriation of $350 million for FY2021-FY2025.
The language in Section 1101 is similar to language in S. 983, the Weatherization Enhancement
and Local Energy Efficiency Investment and Accountability Act of 2019 as reported by ENR on
September 10, 2019; however, there are differences. Section 1101 would remove the requirement
to coordinate with the Director of the Community Services Administration, which was housed in
46 Prepared by Brent D. Yacobucci, Section Research Manager, Energy and Minerals Section.
47 DOE, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO),
Electrochromic Windows - Advanced Processing Technology, accessed March 13, 2020, https://www.energy.gov/eere/
amo/electrochromic-windows-advanced-processing-technology.
48 Prepared by Mark Holt, Specialist in Energy Policy.
Congressional Research Service
15
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
the former Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and is no longer active. The
responsibilities of the Community Services Administration is now included within the
Department of Health and Human Services. Section 1101 would also direct the Secretary to
encourage eligible entities to hire and retain employees from the community where
weatherization services are being provided and from underrepresented communities and groups.
Another difference is a funding distribution requirement that would require the full amount of
assistance for a given fiscal year to be distributed to recipients within 60 days after the date on
which funds have been made available to provide assistance. Section 1101 would also require
additional information to be included in annual reporting to Congress including the number of
multifamily buildings where individual dwelling units were weatherized and the number of
individual dwelling units in multifamily buildings weatherized in the previous year.
Subtitle B—Renewable Energy49
Sec. 1201. Hydroelectric production incentives and efficiency improvements.50
Hydropower is one of many energy sources that could be leveraged to further diversify the
economy’s electricity portfolio. DOE estimates there could be 13 gigawatts (GW) of new
hydropower generation capacity (e.g., from adding power at existing dams and canals, upgrading
existing plants) by 2050.51 Some of this new capacity could come from non-federal hydropower
projects, which are regulated by FERC. There are financial, environmental, regulatory, and
technological concerns related to the additional development of hydropower.52
Section 1201 would amend and reauthorize two hydropower programs: the Hydroelectric
Production Incentives Program and the Hydroelectric Efficiency Improvement Program. Both
programs were established in EPAct05 (P.L. 109-58), and were authorized to receive
appropriations through FY2015. DOE oversees both programs.
The Hydroelectric Production Incentives Program—Section 242 of EPAct05—provides funding
for projects that add hydroelectricity generation to existing dams and conduits.53 The program
allows the Secretary of Energy to make incentive payments to the owner or operator of a qualified
hydroelectric facility.54 A qualified hydroelectric facility is defined as a turbine or other
generating device owned or solely operated by a non-federal entity, which generates
hydroelectricity for sale and is added to an existing dam or conduit. An existing dam or conduit is
defined as any dam or conduit constructed prior to August 8, 2005, that does not require
construction or the enlargement of impoundment or diversion structures in connection with the
installation of the turbine or other generating device. Payments are based on the amount of
electricity generated during the incentive period at a rate of 1.8 cents/kilowatt-hour with
49
Prepared by Ashley J. Lawson, Analyst in Energy Policy, unless otherwise noted.
50 Prepared by Kelsi Bracmort, Specialist in Natural Resources and Energy Policy.
51 DOE analysis estimates that U.S. hydropower could grow from 101 GW of capacity to nearly 150 GW by 2050 with
13 GW coming from new hydropower generation capacity and 36 GW from new pumped storage capacity. DOE,
Hydropower Vision: A New Chapter for America’s First Renewable Electricity Source, DOE/GO-102016-4869, July
2016, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2018/02/f49/Hydropower-Vision-021518.pdf.
52 Ibid; Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Small Hydropower in the United States, ORNL/TM-2015/326, September
2015, https://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/files/Pub56556.pdf.
53 42 U.S.C. §15881.
54 DOE, U.S. Department of Energy Water Power Technologies Office Guidance on Implementing Section 242 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, April 2019, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/05/f62/hydro-guidelinescy18.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
16
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
adjustments for inflation. A facility may not receive more than $750,000 in a calendar year. The
eligibility period for payments is limited to facilities that begin operations within 10 fiscal years
starting in FY2006. A facility may receive payments for a period of 10 fiscal years. No payments
are to be made after an expiration period of 20 fiscal years starting with FY2006. The program is
authorized to be appropriated $10 million annually for FY2006-FY2015. Congress has
appropriated funds for the program.55 DOE maintains a list of annual selected recipients for the
program.56
Section 1201 would amend the Hydroelectric Production Incentives Program. It would modify
the definition of a qualified hydroelectric facility to mean a turbine or other generating device
owned or solely operated by a non-federal entity that (1) generates hydroelectricity for sale and
(2) is added to an existing dam or conduit, or has a generation capacity of no more than 20
megawatts (MW) for which the entity has received a construction authorization from FERC and
is to be constructed in an area where there is inadequate electric service. The bill would increase
the eligibility window from 10 to 22 fiscal years starting in FY2006. It would also increase the
expiration period of the program from 20 to 32 fiscal years starting with FY2006. Among other
things, the bill would authorize appropriations for the program for FY2021-FY2036.
The Hydroelectric Efficiency Improvement Program—Section 243 of EPAct05—incentivizes
efficiency improvements at existing hydroelectric facilities.57 More specifically, the program
allows the Secretary to provide payments to owners or operators of hydroelectric facilities at
existing dams to be used for capital improvements at these facilities to improve their efficiency
by at least 3%. Incentive payments may not exceed 10% of the cost of the capital improvement.
Only one payment may be made for the improvements at a single facility. A payment may not
exceed $750,000 for the improvements at a single facility. The program is authorized to be
appropriated $10 million annually for FY2006-FY2015. Section 1201 would amend the program
to authorize appropriations for FY2021-FY2036.
Section 1201 is similar to S. 859, the Reliable Investment in Vital Energy Reauthorization
(RIVER) Act, as reported by ENR on September 10, 2019. Key differences include a limit of 10
MW to qualify for the incentives program under S. 859 (as opposed to 20 MW in Section 1201),
and authorizations of appropriations that would start two years later in Section 1201 than in S.
859.
Sec. 1202. Marine energy research and development.
Section 1202 would amend an existing DOE research program on marine energy. Marine energy
sources are currently not in commercial use in the United States, although the technical resource
potential is large.58 DOE reports “the [marine and hydrokinetic] industry is at an early stage of
technological development due to the fundamental scientific and engineering challenges of
55 For example, Congress provided $7 million for the program for FY2020. See “Explanatory Statement on
Appropriations Regarding H.R. 1865 Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020,” Congressional Record, vol. 165
(December 17, 2019), p. H11244.
56 DOE, EPAct 2005 Section 242 Hydro Incentive Program, March 18, 2020, https://www.energy.gov/eere/water/epact2005-section-242-hydro-incentive-program.
57 42 U.S.C. §15882.
58 The resource potential varies by type of marine energy technology. For estimates and discussion see DOE,
Quadrennial Technology Review 2015.
Congressional Research Service
17
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
generating power from dynamic, low-velocity and high-density waves and currents, all while
surviving corrosive marine environments.”59
Generally, Section 1202 would emphasize later stages of technology development more than
current law. For example, Section 1202 would “establish and expand critical testing
infrastructure.” Section 1202 also includes specific marine energy technology applications (e.g.,
marine aquaculture, desalination, community microgrids in isolated power systems) that are not
mentioned in current law.
Section 1202 would establish a new National Marine Energy Center associated with an institution
of higher education to conduct marine energy research activities, including housing testing
facilities. DOE currently supports three National Marine Energy Centers, in accordance with
provisions in EISA.60 Section 1202 would direct DOE to continue to support these three centers
while also adding a fourth center. Section 1202 specifies cost-sharing requirements for all centers
and requires them to demonstrate the need for federal support. Current law does not specify costsharing requirements but does require a demonstration of need.
Section 1202 would amend the definition of “marine energy,” though this change would likely
have minimal impacts on program implementation. Section 1202 would expand the definition of
marine energy to also include hydrokinetic energy from non-marine bodies of water (e.g., rivers,
lakes).61 Under current law, “marine energy” and “hydrokinetic energy” are used as separate
terms; for example, in the relevant subtitle section heading in the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (EISA; P.L. 110-441).
Current law requires DOE to consult with the Department of the Interior (DOI) and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in its marine energy research program,
overall. Current law also requires DOE to consult with the U.S. Coast Guard regarding potential
navigational impacts. Section 1202 additionally requires consultation with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) regarding the program overall.
Section 1202 further requires a DOE study, in consultation with the Department of Commerce
and the Department of Transportation. The study would examine how marine energy technologies
could support (1) economic development in the maritime transportation sector; (2) resilience and
disaster recovery for maritime infrastructure, including that serving ports; and (3) scientific
missions at sea, including those in the Arctic.
Section 1202 would authorize $320 million for FY2021-FY2022 for the marine energy research
program and the National Marine Energy Centers (combined). For comparison, current law
authorizes $250 million for FY2008-FY2012.
59 DOE, Marine and Hydrokinetic: Report to Congress, September 2018.
60 The current National Marine Energy Centers are: the Pacific Marine Energy Center, jointly operated by Oregon State
University, the University of Washington, and the University of Alaska Fairbanks; the Southeast National Marine
Renewable Energy Center, operated by Florida Atlantic University; and Hawaii National Marine Renewable Energy
Center, operated by the University of Hawaii: Manoa.
61 Hydrokinetic energy is a type of energy derived from the motion of water. This motion can have many natural
causes, including waterfalls, tides, and river currents. Hydrokinetic energy technologies convert this energy into a
useable form, such as electric energy (i.e., electricity). Marine energy can be hydrokinetic because oceans have tides
and currents (i.e., ocean water moves). Another marine energy source (ocean thermal) comes from the temperature
difference between shallow and deep waters. Other renewable energy sources such as offshore wind and solar may be
located in marine environments, but they are not usually described as a type of marine energy.
Congressional Research Service
18
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Section 1202 is nearly identical to S. 1821, the Marine Energy Research and Development Act of
2019, as reported by ENR on October 23, 2019. A related bill in the House is H.R. 3203, the
Marine Energy Research and Development At of 2019.
Sec. 1203. Advanced geothermal innovation leadership.
Section 1203 would reauthorize an existing DOE research program on geothermal energy. The
reauthorized program would primarily focus on expanding use of conventional geothermal energy
technologies and developing new technologies for enhanced geothermal systems (EGS).62 The
United States is believed to have a large EGS potential, but technology development is still
required to produce energy from these resources.
Geothermal energy can be used to generate electricity, to provide heat for direct use (e.g., heating
for commercial or industrial facilities), and to heat and cool buildings through geothermal heat
pumps. In 2019, geothermal energy generated less than 1% of U.S. electricity.63 The share of
building heating and cooling needs supplied by geothermal energy is likely smaller than the share
of electricity supplied by geothermal energy.
Section 1203 would direct the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to update its assessment
of U.S. geothermal resource potential, last conducted in 2008.64 The update is to focus on
increasing the resolution of geothermal energy resource maps, assessing non-energy aspects such
as mineral coproduction potential and induced seismicity risks, and improving data for Alaska,
Hawaii, and Puerto Rico in particular.
Section 1203 would promote technology development through (1) a new Oil and Gas Technology
Transfer Initiative; (2) a Coproduction of Geothermal Energy and Minerals Production Prize
Competition; (3) DOE-supported testing sites; and (4) a demonstration program. The technology
transfer initiative would aim to demonstrate use of oil and gas drilling and other operations for
geothermal energy development. The prize competition would award up to $10 million for costeffective and environmentally friendly ways to remove minerals from geothermal brines. The
DOE-supported testing sites are to include continued support for the current testing site in
Milford, UT, and support for a new testing site. The demonstration program is to fund at least
four projects demonstrating different types of technologies in different geologic settings. At least
one demonstration project is to be located east of the Mississippi River.
Section 1203 would take other actions to promote development and deployment of geothermal
energy, including:
establishing a voluntary, industry-wide repository of drilling data;
establishing a new R&D program for geothermal heat pumps and direct use of
geothermal energy;
establishing a financial assistance program to promote use of geothermal heat
pumps and direct use of geothermal energy, especially in economically distressed
areas; and
expanding the High Cost Region Geothermal Energy Grant Program.
62 Enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), sometimes called engineered geothermal systems, are man-made systems
created to produce electricity from geothermal reservoirs that may not be economical due to a lack of water or
permeability.
63 EIA, Electric Power Monthly, February 2020.
64 The USGS, DOE, and academic institutions have all conducted various assessments and studies of U.S. geothermal
resources since 2008, though no single study has been as comprehensive in scope as the 2008 USGS study.
Congressional Research Service
19
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Other provisions in Section 1203 promote geothermal energy development on federal lands,
including:
directing DOI, DOE, USDA, and other relevant federal agencies to establish
national goals for geothermal energy capacity on public lands;
allowing noncompetitive leasing for coproduction of geothermal to holders of oil
and gas leasing permits (after meeting determination of national energy security
interest);
categorically excluding most geothermal test wells from certain requirements
under the National Environmental Policy Act (as is currently the case for some
oil and gas exploration wells); and
establishing an inter-agency Geothermal Energy Permitting Coordination
Program to “improve Federal permit coordination and reduce regulatory
timelines.”
Section 1203 would authorize $825 million for FY2021-FY2025 for geothermal research
activities. Of this amount, $25 million would be for the prize competition and $5 million would
be for the drilling data repository. For comparison, current law authorizes $450 million for
geothermal energy research activities in FY2008-FY2012. The section separately authorizes $25
million for FY2021-FY2025 for the High Cost Region Geothermal Energy Grant Program. For
comparison, current law authorizes “such sums as are necessary to carry out this section.”
Section 1203 is largely identical to S. 2657, the Advanced Geothermal Innovation Leadership
(AGILE) Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on December 17, 2019.65 Some of the provisions in S.
2657 are similar to provisions in H.R. 5374, the Advanced Geothermal Research and
Development Act of 2019. The committee report for S. 265766 states that the bill follows many
recommendations included in a 2019 DOE report, GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our
Feet.
Sec. 1204. Wind energy research and development.
Section 1204 would remove existing program goals for wind energy research at DOE (which date
back to the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Technology Competitiveness Act of 1989,
P.L. 101-218) and replace them with new goals. Use of wind energy in the United States has
grown in recent years, due to a combination of state and federal policy incentives and cost
declines. In 2019, wind energy generated approximately 7% of U.S. electricity.67 Wind energy’s
share of electricity generation is expected to grow further in coming years.
Section 1204 would establish a wind energy research program to “improve the energy efficiency,
cost effectiveness, reliability, resilience, security, integration, manufacturability, and recyclability
of wind energy technologies.” Some of these program goals, such as recyclability, reflect
concerns that have been raised recently regarding the growing use of wind energy in the United
States.68 Other program goals, such as cost effectiveness, have long been an area of research focus
at DOE.
65 S. 2657 is the vehicle for floor discussion of S.Amdt. 1407, the American Energy Innovation Act.
66 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Advanced Geothermal Innovation Leadership
Act of 2019, committee print, 116th Cong., 2nd sess., January 7, 2020, S.Rept. 116-197.
67 EIA, Electric Power Monthly, February 2020.
68 For example, Chris Martin, “Wind Turbine Blades Can’t Be Recycled, So They’re Piling Up in Landfills,”
Bloomberg Green, February 5, 2020.
Congressional Research Service
20
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Section 1204 would require DOE to establish (within 180 days) program targets related to nearterm (up to 2 years), mid-term (up to 7 years), and long-term (up to 15 years) challenges facing
the wind industry. Section 1204 specifies that DOE should seek to advance a variety of wind
energy technologies, including those located onshore, offshore, distributed, and off-grid.69 Section
1204 also specifies that DOE should prioritize research projects that are (1) located in diverse
geographic regions; (2) in collaboration with Indian tribes (and affiliated organizations),
territories, or freely associated states, or in economically distressed areas; (3) can be replicated in
a variety of regions and climates; and (4) have the potential to increase domestic manufacturing
or exports.
Section 1204 would also authorize a grant program for wind technician worker training, for both
onshore and offshore wind technologies. Eligible entities, including institutions of higher
education, government research agencies, and tribal organizations, could purchase wind energy
equipment with DOE grants for purposes of worker training.
Section 1204 includes other program goals and requirements that are not discussed here.
Generally, they relate to manufacturing and operating wind energy equipment.
Section 1204 would authorize $600 million for FY2021-FY2025 for wind energy research
activities at DOE.
Section 1204 is nearly identical to S. 2660, the Wind Energy Research and Development Act of
2019, as reported by ENR on December 18, 2019. Section 1204 adds distributed and off-grid
wind technologies to the set of wind energy technologies to be covered by the program. Minor
text changes throughout the section reflect this expanded scope (compared to S. 2660). A related
bill in the House is H.R. 3609, the Wind Energy Research and Development Act of 2019.
Sec. 1205. Solar energy research and development.
Section 1205 would remove existing program goals for solar energy research at DOE (which date
back to a 1974 law, the Solar Energy Research, Development, and Demonstration Act, P.L. 93473) and replace them with new goals. Use of solar energy in the United States has grown in
recent years, due to a combination of state and federal policy incentives and cost declines. In
2019, solar energy generated approximately 3% of U.S. electricity.70 Solar energy’s share of
electricity generation is expected to grow further in coming years.
Section 1205 would establish a solar energy research program at DOE to “improve the energy
efficiency, cost effectiveness, reliability, resilience, security, integration, manufacturability, and
recyclability of solar energy technologies.” These purposes are identical to purposes Section 1204
would give to a reauthorized DOE wind research program. Section 1205 would direct DOE’s
solar research program to focus on improving solar energy technology performance (including
recyclability), improving grid integration,71 reducing negative environmental impacts, promoting
69 Section 1204 does not define “distributed” or “off-grid.” Those terms generally refer to smaller technologies located
within distribution systems (and therefore not connected to the bulk power transmission system), and technologies
connected to neither a distribution system nor a transmission system, respectively. Distributed and off-grid technologies
may be integrated into a microgrid, though that is not a requirement.
70 EIA, Electric Power Monthly, February 2020.
71 Unlike some other energy sources, solar energy is variable (i.e., sunlight is not always available for electricity
generation), and that variability creates challenges for electric grid operators. These challenges, and the solutions to
them, are broadly described as grid integration. For more information see CRS In Focus IF11257, Variable Renewable
Energy: An Introduction, by Ashley J. Lawson.
Congressional Research Service
21
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
the domestic solar industry, and promoting commercialization and export of solar energy
technologies.
Section 1205 would require DOE to establish (within 180 days) program targets related to nearterm (up to 2 years), mid-term (up to 7 years), and long-term (up to 15 years) challenges facing
“the advancement of solar energy systems.” Section 1205 specifies that DOE should seek to
advance a variety of advanced solar technologies. The text specifically mentions perovskites, a
material that has received congressional attention in the 116th Congress.72 The text also
specifically mentions concentrated solar power, solar heating and cooling, and other nonelectric
applications for solar energy, such as in the agriculture, transportation, industrial, and fuels
sectors. Section 1205 specifies priorities for solar research activities that are identical to those
Section 1204 would establish for wind. Namely, section 1205 specifies that DOE should prioritize
research projects that are (1) located in diverse geographic regions; (2) in collaboration with
Indian tribes (and affiliated organizations), territories, or freely associated states, or in
economically distressed areas; (3) can be replicated in a variety of regions and climates; and (4)
have the potential to increase domestic manufacturing or exports.
Section 1205 would also direct DOE to award grants for research activities related to advanced
solar energy manufacturing technologies and techniques. One of the priorities for such grants
would be operating in partnership with Indian tribes (and affiliated organizations), territories, or
freely associated states, or in economically distressed areas. Reducing U.S. reliance on imports of
solar energy equipment, particularly solar photovoltaic cells from China, has been an area of
interest for the Obama and Trump Administrations, and for some Members of Congress.73
Section 1205 includes other program goals and requirements that are not discussed here.
Generally, they relate to recycling and monitoring the materials used in solar energy technologies,
including the country of origin of such materials.
Section 1205 would authorize $1,350 million for FY2021-FY2025 for solar energy research at
DOE.
Section 1205 is nearly identical to S. 2668, the Solar Energy Research and Development Act of
2019, as reported by ENR on December 17, 2019. A related bill in the House is H.R. 3597, the
Solar Energy Research and Development Act of 2019.
Subtitle C—Energy Storage74
Electricity, as it is currently produced, is largely a commodity resource that is interchangeable
with electricity from any other source. Since opportunities for the large-scale storage of electricity
are few, it is essentially a just-in-time resource, produced as needed to meet the demand of
electricity-consuming customers. Climate change mitigation has increased the use of renewable
energy sources for electricity generation. While energy storage is seen as an enabling technology
with the potential to better integrate intermittent and variable wind and solar resources, energy
72 For example, U.S. Congress, House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Subcommittee on Energy,
Advancing the Next Generation of Solar and Wind Energy Technologies, 116th Cong., 1st sess., May 15, 2019. In lab
tests, perovskite materials convert light energy to electricity more efficiently than the silicon-based materials widely
used today. Perovskites, however, currently face cost, stability, and environmental challenges that prevent their
commercial use.
73 For example, the United States has applied tariffs on imported solar energy equipment since 2012. Further discussion
is in CRS Report R46196, Solar Energy: Frequently Asked Questions, coordinated by Ashley J. Lawson.
74 Prepared by Richard J. Campbell, Specialist in Energy Policy.
Congressional Research Service
22
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
storage resources would have to be charged by low- or zero-emission or renewable sources of
electricity to ensure a reduction of greenhouse gases.75
Energy storage is being increasingly investigated for its potential to provide benefits to the
interstate transmission grid, and perhaps to local distribution systems and thus to retail electric
customers. The ability to store energy presents an opportunity to add flexibility in how electricity
is produced and used, and provides an alternative to address peak loads on the system. By using
renewable electricity stored at times of low-demand, electricity saved can be used at times of high
demand. In addition to providing power on demand, energy storage technologies have the
potential to provide ancillary services to the electricity grid to ensure the reliability and stability
of the power system, and better match generation to demand for electricity. Hydropower pumped
storage (HPS), compressed air energy storage, and cryogenic energy storage are examples of
technologies that store potential (or kinetic) energy. These are examples of the mostly large,
monolithic systems used for energy storage today that do not store electricity directly, but provide
a means of producing electricity by use of a stored medium (e.g., water or air).76 According to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), approximately 24 HPS systems are currently
operating with a total installed capacity of over 16.5 Gigawatts. HPS is approximately 94% of
existing U.S. energy storage capacity.77
Modular battery technologies generally store electrical energy in chemical media that can be
converted to electricity. These technologies consist of standardized individual cells with relatively
small power and voltage capacities that are typically aggregated to serve larger power loads.
Lead-acid batteries and lithium ion (Li Ion) cells are the most used modular battery technologies
for utility scale (i.e., projects of one megawatt or greater in capacity) applications on the electric
grid. However, battery technologies, in general, can provide energy for only a few hours, and vary
with regard to the time required to recharge battery systems. While Li Ion battery systems are
currently the most prevalent form of modular storage, and a key technology for electric vehicles,
several issues exist with system cost, materials used, and the safety of these systems. 78
Procurement of cobalt for Li Ion batteries has also been controversial due to child labor and
safety concerns in many Congolese artisanal mines.79
Sec. 1301. Better energy storage technology.
Section 1301 would require the Secretary of Energy to establish a program (Energy Storage
System Research, Development, and Deployment) focusing on RD&D of energy storage systems
designed for large-scale commercial deployment, with deployment cost targets established by the
Secretary. The program would also address energy storage goals for hourly and subhourly
durations required to provide reliability services to the grid, capable of daily durations (with the
75 Greenhouse gases are any gases that absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere. There are six main greenhouse
gases discussed in the context of climate change: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and
fluorinated gases—sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and perfluorocarbons (PFCs). Carbon
dioxide is the most prevalent GHG, and is produced mainly by combustion of fossil fuels. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Overview of Greenhouse Gases, April 11, 2019, https://www.epa.gov/
ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases.
76 See CRS Report R45980, Electricity Storage: Applications, Issues, and Technologies, by Richard J. Campbell.
77 FERC, Pumped Storage Projects, January 31, 2020, https://www.ferc.gov/industries/hydropower/gen-info/licensing/
pump-storage.asp.
78 Ibid.
79 Antony Loewenstein, “From Blackwater to Batteries,” ForeignPolicy.com, January 25, 2019,
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/25/from-blackwater-to-batteries-erik-prince-congo-drc-minerals-cobalt-afghanistanmercenaries/.
Congressional Research Service
23
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
capacity to discharge energy for a minimum of six hours), and a system lifetime of at least 20
years under regular operation. Other goals of the program would include the development of 20year lifetime storage systems capable of weekly or monthly durations (with the capacity to
discharge energy for 10 to 100 hours, at a minimum), and the development of longer-term storage
systems (with the capability to address seasonal variations in supply and demand). Among other
goals, the program would focus on RD&D of distributed energy storage technologies and
applications, including transportation energy storage technologies and applications, and vehicleto-grid integration. Cost-effective systems and methods for the reclamation, recycling, and
disposal of energy storage materials, including lithium, cobalt, nickel, and graphite would be
included in the program. New pumping and generating equipment designs would be a focus to
advance HPS, and closed-loop hydropower80 systems using mines and quarries. The Energy
Secretary would be required to develop a 10-year strategic plan to guide the program that would
be submitted to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and the House
Committees on Energy and Commerce and Science, Space, and Technology.
The Energy Secretary would be required to enter agreements for energy storage demonstration
pilot projects (Energy Storage Demonstration Projects Pilot Grant Program) with “eligible
entities” that include states, Indian tribes, tribal organizations, institutions of higher learning, and
electric utilities. Competitive grants would be available to the eligible entities for the
demonstration projects.
A joint program (Long-Duration Demonstration Initiative and Joint Program) for long-term
energy storage demonstration projects would be established by DOE (through the Director of the
Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy) with DOD (through the Director of the
Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP)). Projects would be
regionally diverse, with a range of technologies applied at various levels from the bulk power
system to distribution systems, microgrids, and other off grid applications. The Director of
ESTCP would be required to develop metrics for the program, and ensure that projects apply to a
variety of conditions and environments.
The Energy Secretary would be required to establish a program (Technical Planning and
Assistance Program) to assist eligible entities (including electric cooperatives, municipal utilities,
and investor-owned utilities) in identifying, evaluating, planning, designing, and procuring energy
storage systems. Among other goals, the program would be focused on strengthening the
reliability and resiliency of energy infrastructure, and reducing the cost of energy storage systems.
The program would competitively award grants to eligible entities to obtain technical and
planning assistance from outside experts. A report describing the progress of the program would
be submitted to Congress, and be made available to the public, not less than every two years.
An annual competition (Energy Storage Materials Recycling Prize) with cash prizes would be
authorized for critical energy storage materials (including lithium, cobalt, nickel, and graphite) to
advance recycling of these materials.
FERC would be required to issue a regulation to identify the eligibility of, and process for,
electric storage resources so that these resources could receive cost-recovery through FERCjurisdictional rates for energy and ancillary services.81 FERC would also be required to convene a
technical conference on the potential for electric storage to improve electric system operations.
80 With closed-loop pumped hydropower systems, neither the upper reservoir nor the lower reservoir is located on a
dammed stream.
81 In 2018, FERC issued its final version of Order No. 841 to remove what it saw as barriers to the participation of
Congressional Research Service
24
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Sec. 1301 is substantially similar to S. 1602, the Better Energy Storage Technology Act, as
reported by ENR on October 22, 2019. Some provisions are similar to bills introduced and
discussed by the ENR Subcommittee on Energy on July 9, 2019, and incorporated in to the
reported version of S. 1602. These bills are S. 1593, the Promoting Grid Storage Act of 2019; and
S. 2048, the Joint Long-Term Storage Act of 2019.
Sec. 1302. Bureau of Reclamation pumped storage hydropower development.
The Secretary of the Interior would be directed not to issue a lease of power privilege82 for a
proposed HPS project unless the proposed lessee and the Tribes (identified under this section as
the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, and the Spokane Tribe of Indians of the
Spokane Reservation) have entered into a study plan agreement. Alternatively, the Interior
Secretary or the Director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals may make a final determination
for a study plan agreement. The Secretary of the Interior would be required to make an initial
determination no later than 60 days after receiving the study plan that approves or rejects the
study. The initial decision would be subject to an objection process. A final determination would
be required no later than 120 days after an objection. If the initial determination raised no
objections, it would become final.
The language in Section 1302 is identical to language in S. 1751, the Bureau of Reclamation
Pumped Storage Hydropower Development Act (S. 1751), as reported by ENR on October 23,
2019.
Subtitle D—Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage83
This subtitle would expand the scope of DOE research activities related to carbon capture.
Currently, DOE’s research activities focus on (1) capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted when
coal is combusted, for example, in a power plant; and (2) sequestering (i.e., storing) CO2
underground. This subtitle would expand that scope to also include (1) capturing CO2 emitted
when natural gas is combusted, for example, in a power plant; (2) capturing CO2 emitted from
industrial facilities outside the electric power sector; (3) developing new uses for coal outside the
electric power sector; (4) developing new uses for CO2; and (5) developing carbon removal
technologies (i.e., technologies that can remove CO2 from the atmosphere).84
Much interest in carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) comes from its potential to
address climate change by preventing CO2 emissions into the atmosphere. This potential has
received increasing attention, in part because of some recent analyses by prominent international
electric storage resources in RTO/ISO markets. See CRS Report R45980, Electricity Storage: Applications, Issues, and
Technologies, by Richard J. Campbell.
82 “A Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) lease of power privilege (LOPP) is a contractual right given to a nonfederal entity to use a Reclamation asset (e.g. dam or conduit) for electric power generation consistent with
Reclamation project purposes. A LOPP project must not impair the efficiency of Reclamation generated power or water
deliveries, jeopardize public safety, or negatively affect any other Reclamation project purpose.” Bureau of
Reclamation, Hydropower Program, February 5, 2020, https://www.usbr.gov/power/LOPP/.
83 Prepared by Ashley J. Lawson, Analyst in Energy Policy.
84 Carbon removal technologies are distinct from carbon capture technologies in two key ways. First, carbon capture
technologies prevent the release of CO2 to the atmosphere. Carbon removal technologies remove CO2 from the
atmosphere even if that CO2 was released many years ago. Second, carbon capture technologies are located at the site
of CO2 emissions, for example, a power plant. Carbon removal may theoretically occur anywhere, although some
carbon removal options have significant constraints on their location. For example, forest management for purposes of
carbon removal can only occur in locations suitable for forest growth.
Congressional Research Service
25
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
research organizations.85 Some interest in CCUS also comes from supporters of fossil fuel
industries, especially the coal industry. Many supporters see CCUS as a means of enhancing
fossil fuels’ commercial competitiveness (domestically and internationally) in the face of
increasing numbers of policies to restrict greenhouse gas emissions and other market pressures.
On the other hand, some advocates for climate change policies oppose carbon capture. Those
advocates may have other concerns with the production and use of fossil fuel (e.g., environmental
impacts of coal mining or oil and gas development), and they may prefer climate change policies
that exclusively promote renewable energy sources.
Likewise, much interest in carbon removal comes from its potential to address climate change,
and this potential has received increasing attention.86 Some see it as a more expensive option to
address climate change, compared to other options such as increased energy efficiency or
increased use of renewable energy sources. Some also see carbon removal as unable to address
other concerns over fossil fuel use, such as environmental or health concerns.
The provisions of subtitle D are broadly similar to provisions in S. 1201, the Enhancing Fossil
Fuel Energy Carbon Technology (EFFECT) Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on September 24,
2019. Specific comparisons are discussed in the context of individual sections. In general,
authorizations of appropriations are one year earlier in the EFFECT Act than in Subtitle D,
reflecting the different dates the legislation was introduced.
Sec. 1401. Fossil energy.
DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy (FE) supports activities related to coal, natural gas, and petroleum.
Current law directs FE to “carry out research, development, demonstration, and commercial
application programs” in order to improve “the efficiency, effectiveness, and environmental
performance of fossil energy production, upgrading, conversion, and consumption.”87
Section 1401 would expand the objectives for FE programs. The proposed new objectives all
focus on various aspects of CCUS and carbon removal, and are consistent with the new research
programs that would be added for CCUS and carbon removal, as described in the next four
sections.
Sec. 1402. Establishment of coal and natural gas technology program.
Current law directs DOE to “conduct a program of technology research, development,
demonstration, and commercial application for coal and power systems.”88 Section 1402 would
replace the current “coal and related technologies program” at DOE with a “coal and natural gas
technology program.” The new program would focus on technologies related to the use of coal
and natural gas, especially CCUS technologies. Section 1402 would require DOE carry out
activities in four stages of technology innovation: R&D, large-scale pilot projects, demonstration
projects, and front-end engineering and design. The section also provides considerations DOE
85 For example, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Global Warming of 1.5°C, 2018 examined
scenarios that could limit global warming to no more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial temperatures by 2100. Several of
those scenarios included widespread use of carbon capture and carbon removal technologies. International Energy
Agency, Exploring Clean Energy Pathways: The Role of CO2 Storage, 2019 similarly studied future energy scenarios
and found that scenarios with relatively high amounts of carbon capture reduced emissions at lower costs compared to
scenarios with lower amounts of carbon capture.
86 For example, Energy Futures Initiative, Clearing the Air: A Federal RD&D Initiative and Management Plan for
Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies, 2019.
87 42 U.S.C. §16291(a).
88 42 U.S.C. §16292.
Congressional Research Service
26
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
should take into account when developing program goals and objectives, and provides additional
requirements for the demonstration program it establishes.
No deadlines are specified in Section 1402 for when demonstration carbon capture facilities
should be operational. Nor does the section specify how CO2 from demonstration facilities should
be stored or whether demonstration facilities should also include carbon utilization options. One
potential use of captured CO2 is for a process called enhanced oil recovery (EOR), whereby CO2
is injected into aging oil wells. Some of the injected CO2 remains stored underground, and
additional oil is produced. Debate around EOR focuses on the environmental and human health
impacts associated with oil production. Oil producers have used EOR for many decades with CO2
from natural sources, though use of CO2 captured from power plants is relatively new.
Section 1402 would require consultation within DOE and with interested entities, including coal
and natural gas producers and consumers, organizations that promote the use of coal and natural
gas, environmental organizations, organizations representing workers, and organizations
representing consumers. Additionally, the section would require DOE to undertake international
collaborations, submit a report to Congress on the program goals and objectives, and regularly
report to Congress on DOE’s progress in achieving program goals and objectives.
The section authorizes appropriations for four or five years, depending on the component of the
program.
R&D: a total of $910 million for FY2021-FY2025.
Large-scale pilot projects: a total of $1,488 million for FY2021-F2025.
Demonstration projects: a total of $1,700 million for FY2021-FY2025.
Front-end engineering and design programs: a total of $200 million for FY2021FY2024.
Much of the text of Section 1402 is identical to S. 1201, the EFFECT Act of 2019, as reported by
ENR on September 24, 2019. Some of the provisions in section 1402 also mirror provisions in S.
1685, the Launching Energy Advancement and Development through Innovations for Natural Gas
Act of 2019, as reported by ENR on September 25, 2019.
A few text differences between Section 1402 and the EFFECT Act would cause minimal
differences in implementation. For example, the EFFECT Act refers to “plants” in several places
while Section 1402 refers to “electric generation facilities” instead. The term “electric generation
facilities” is more precise because a single power plant can have multiple generation facilities
(i.e., the machine and associated equipment that produce electricity).
Some text differences, though, might lead to differences in implementation. Section 1402
includes requirements for demonstration projects that the EFFECT Act does not have.
Specifically, the requirements that at least two of the five demonstration projects be at coal
electric generation facilities and at least two be at natural gas electric generation facilities. This
requirement would limit DOE’s flexibility in choosing demonstration projects. It would also
ensure that demonstration projects use different energy sources.
The concept of demonstration projects for CCUS on natural gas electric generation facilities
mirrors that in S. 1685. One provision in that bill would establish a DOE demonstration program
to fund at least three CCUS projects on natural gas electric generation facilities.
Congressional Research Service
27
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Section 1402 also adds carbon capture for natural gas reformers (which can produce hydrogen
from natural gas) to the list of considerations for program goals and objectives.89 The EFFECT
Act does mention hydrogen production as a desirable goal, but it does not specify any particular
type of hydrogen production pathway.
Sec. 1403. Carbon storage validation and testing.
Section 1403 would amend current law regarding DOE’s CCUS research program. Current law
established a CCUS research program (to last 10 years, beginning in 2005) for technologies that
could be used by facilities using coal. Section 1403 would modify the program replacing the
existing Large-Scale Carbon Dioxide Sequestration Testing program with a new Carbon Storage
Validation and Testing program. The draft would redefine “large-scale carbon sequestration” as a
project demonstrating the ability to inject and sequester CO2 into geologic formations with a
“goal of sequestering not less than 50 million metric tons … over a 10-year period.” Currently,
“large-scale” means more than one million tons of CO2 “from industrial sources annually or a
scale that demonstrates the ability to inject and sequester several million metric tons of industrial
source carbon dioxide for a large number of years.”90
Section 1403 would further establish a new research program for carbon storage focused on
assessing U.S. capacity for geological sequestration, developing monitoring tools, evaluating
health and safety risks, and related topics. Regarding U.S. capacity for geological sequestration,
the amendment specifies eight onshore and offshore geologic settings to be included in the
assessment. The carbon storage research program would also include a demonstration program
for large-scale carbon sequestration projects (using the new definition of large-scale). Existing
regional carbon sequestration partnerships would be eligible to receive funding under the new
demonstration program. The National Energy Technology Laboratory would be tasked with
acting as a “clearinghouse” for information related to carbon storage demonstration projects.
DOE would also be allowed to transition demonstration projects to “integrated commercial
storage complexes.” Such transitions would be aimed at identifying storage sites capable of
accepting “large volumes of carbon dioxide” for “commercial contracts” and improving
understanding of “technical and commercial viability” of geologic storage.
For DOE’s CCUS research program, Section 1403 would authorize a total of $580.192 million
for FY2021-FY2024. For comparison, current law authorizes $1,200 million for FY2008FY2012.91
Much of the text of Section 1403 is identical to S. 1201, the EFFECT Act of 2019, as reported by
the ENR on September 24, 2019. One key difference is that the definition of “large-scale carbon
sequestration” is more specific in Section 1403 than in the EFFECT Act (and both definitions are
different than current law). Section 1403 defines large-scale carbon sequestration as that with a
goal of sequestering at least 50 million metric tons of carbon dioxide over a 10-year period. The
EFFECT Act’s definition, though, is the ability to sequester “several million metric tons of carbon
dioxide for not less than a 10-year period.”
Another difference is that Section 1403 would not require a report on carbon dioxide capture
contracting authority that the EFFECT Act would require. The EFFECT Act would require a
89 Section 1402 refers to “technologies for the capture of carbon dioxide produced during the production of hydrogen
from natural gas.” This hydrogen production process is generally called natural gas reforming. Steam methane
reforming is a commonly cited example of natural gas reforming.
90 42 U.S.C. §16293(c)(3)(D).
91 42 U.S.C. §16293(d).
Congressional Research Service
28
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
report assessing options for the federal government to contract with power plants equipped with
CCUS. The report would also identify costs and benefits of such options.
Sec. 1404. Carbon utilization program.
Section 1404 would establish a new DOE research program focused on carbon utilization. The
new program would:
assess and monitor potential lifecycle changes in greenhouse gas emissions and
“other environmental safety indicators” (which are not defined) associated with
EOR;92
identify and assess novel uses for carbon, such as converting carbon and carbon
dioxide to industrial products;
identify and assess carbon capture technologies for industrial systems; and
identify and assess alternative uses for raw coal and processed coal products.
Section 1404 calls for new two-year demonstration programs to “accelerate the commercial
deployment of coal-carbon products.” The demonstration programs are to be located “in each of
the 2 major coal-producing regions of the United States.” The section does not define “coalcarbon products.”93 The section also calls for a study within 180 days by the National Academies
of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) assessing “barriers and opportunities relating to
commercializing carbon, coal-derived carbon, and carbon dioxide in the United States.”
This section would combine research activities into alternative (i.e., non-power) uses for coal and
uses for CO2 into a single program. Likewise, the NAS study that the section would require is to
study commercialization and other challenges facing both coal-derived carbon products and CO2.
Generally, these two industries have little overlap. In other words, research activities in coalderived carbon products are not likely to benefit participants in the CO2 industry (including CO2
producers like power plants), and vice versa. Section 1404 does not specify how the proposed
carbon utilization program’s R&D portfolio should be divided between these areas, though the
proposed demonstration program is to be solely focused on coal-carbon products.
Section 1404 would promote research activities in carbon capture for industrial facilities. Section
1402 also would promote research activities in carbon capture for industrial facilities. Neither
section specifies many details of such research activities, so it is unclear from the text how much
program overlap might occur.
Section 1404 would authorize a total of approximately $158 million over FY2021-FY2025 for the
carbon utilization program.
Much of the text of Section 1404 is identical to S. 1201, the EFFECT Act of 2019, as reported by
ENR on September 24, 2019. A key difference is that Section 1404 would require demonstration
programs “to accelerate the commercial deployment of coal-carbon products,” as described in the
section summary above. The EFFECT Act does not include such a program.
92 Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) is discussed in “Section 1402.” Briefly, EOR is a process whereby CO
2 is injected into
oil wells in order to increase oil production. The injected CO2 remains stored underground.
93 Many products can be made from coal (and its component parts), including carbon fibers, medical sensors, and
fertilizers. Historic markets for these products, and options to accelerate U.S. manufacturing of these products, are
discussed in National Coal Council, Coal in a New Carbon Age: Powering a Wave of Innovation in Advanced Products
and Manufacturing, May 2019. The National Coal Council serves as an advisory group to DOE. DOE requested a
study by the National Coal Council on “coal to products” in August 2018.
Congressional Research Service
29
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Section 1404 would authorize appropriations of $4 million more each year than the EFFECT Act.
Further, both bills would require a NAS study, but Section 1404 would include in the study
opportunities for commercialization of coal-derived products. The EFFECT Act does not include
this topic in the scope of the NAS study.
Section 1404 is less specific than the EFFECT Act regarding what kind of carbon- or CO2-derived
products should be studied. Section 1404 mentions “commercial and industrial products and other
products with potential market value” while the EFFECT Act names examples of “commercial
and industrial products.”94
Section 1404 is more specific than the EFFECT Act regarding the scope of research into
alternative uses for coal. Section 1404 would direct DOE to “identify and assess alternative uses
for raw coal and processed coal products in all phases,” and it then provides examples. The
EFFECT Act, though, would direct DOE to “identify and assess alternative uses for coal,” and it
provides the same examples.
Sec. 1405. Carbon removal.
Section 1405 would establish a new research program focused on removing CO2 from the
atmosphere. Carbon removal is seen as an option to address climate change. It is distinct from
preventing the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. DOE is to lead the carbon
removal program in coordination with the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other
“appropriate Federal agencies.” DOE is also to coordinate internally, with participation by the
Office of Fossil Energy, the Office of Science, and the Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
The proposed carbon removal program is to research six specific carbon removal technologies:
direct air capture (DAC) and storage;
bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS);
enhanced geological weathering;
agricultural practices;
forest management and afforestation; and
planned or managed carbon sinks, including natural and artificial.
Section 1405 would also establish an Air Capture Technology Prize Competition, for technologies
that can capture carbon dioxide from “dilute media” (e.g., the atmosphere). DOE is to consult
with the EPA Administrator in establishing the competition. The section authorizes $15 million
for the competition. Section 1405 does not specify how the competition should be implemented
(e.g., performance standards, timeline); these would be left to the Secretary to determine.95
Section 1405 further directs DOE to award competitive grants for the operation of at least one
Direct Air Capture Test Center to “provide unique testing capabilities for innovative direct air
capture and storage technologies.” The center(s) should promote DAC through R&D, developing
engineering design and economic analysis, and supporting pilot and demonstration projects.
94 S. 1201, the EFFECT Act of 2019, states the new carbon utilization program should identify potential products “such
as chemicals, plastics, building materials, fuels, cement, products of coal use in power systems or other applications, or
other products with demonstrated market value.”
95 Various aspects of prize competition implementation are considered critical to the competition’s success in inducing
technology innovation. For further discussion see CRS Report R45271, Federal Prize Competitions, by Marcy E.
Gallo.
Congressional Research Service
30
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Additionally, the center(s) should maintain public records of pilot and full-scale plant
performance. For purposes of the center(s), pilot projects are defined as DAC systems capable of
capturing 10-100 tons of CO2 per year, and demonstration projects are defined as DAC systems
capable of capturing at least 1,000 tons annually. For perspective, an existing DAC pilot plant in
Canada is reportedly capable of capturing one ton a day, or several hundred tons annually.96
Section 1405 would authorize total appropriations of approximately $347 million for FY2021FY2025, including the $15 million for the prize competition.
Much of the text of section 1405 is identical to S. 1201, the EFFECT Act of 2019, as reported by
ENR on September 24, 2019. A few text differences between Section 1405 and the EFFECT Act
would cause minimal differences in implementation. Section 1405 has modified language
directing DOE to coordinate internally among the Office of Fossil Energy, the Office of Science,
and the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The EFFECT Act has identical
language, but further requires the program be “cross-cutting in nature.” The EFFECT Act does
not define what it means to be cross-cutting in nature. Further, Section 1405 removes “grazing
practices” from the list of carbon removal options to be pursued by the new program (compared
to the EFFECT Act). It keeps “agricultural practices.” The EFFECT Act would establish the Air
Capture Technology Prize Competition within one year, but Section 1405 would establish the
competition within two years. Otherwise, the requirements for the competition are the same.
Similarly, the EFFECT Act would direct DOE to award grants for DAC test center(s) within one
year, but Section 1405 gives DOE two years. Section 1405 also simplifies the language
describing the types of projects to be supported by the test center(s). Section 1405 describes these
projects as “large-scale pilot and demonstration projects” while the EFFECT Act describes them
as “pilot plant and full-scale demonstration projects ... that represent the scale of technology
development beyond laboratory testing, but not yet advanced to test under operational conditions
at commercial scale.” Pilot-scale and demonstration-scale projects are generally understood to be
in between the size of laboratory-scale and commercial-scale projects. Specific sizes, operational
characteristics, and other measures vary by technology. Section 1405 would define pilot and
demonstration projects by the amount of CO2 (in tons) they can capture annually. These
definitions are the same as in the EFFECT Act.
Subtitle E—Nuclear97
DOE conducts R&D on two major categories of nuclear energy: nuclear fission, in which heavy
nuclei, such as uranium-235, are split into smaller nuclei, and nuclear fusion, in which light
hydrogen nuclei are forced together under tremendous heat and pressure. Most applied nuclear
energy R&D focuses on fission, within the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy, while basic research
on nuclear fusion is mostly under the DOE Office of Science. Many of the newly authorized
programs in Subtitle E are intended to encourage the commercialization of advanced reactor
technology, generally defined as fission reactors with improvements over existing commercial
reactors, and fusion reactors, which do not currently exist for power production.
Sec. 1501. Light water reactor sustainability program.
Light water reactor sustainability R&D focuses on improving the economics and lifespan of
existing commercial nuclear reactors, which are cooled by ordinary (light) water. Research areas
include materials for reactor components, risk analysis, predictive maintenance, and physical
96 Carbon Engineering, Frequently Asked Questions, accessed March 4, 2020, https://carbonengineering.com/
frequently-asked-questions/.
97 Prepared by Mark Holt, Specialist in Energy Policy.
Congressional Research Service
31
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
security. This program also includes research on flexible plant operation, in which reactors could
switch between producing electricity, hydrogen, and process heat. The program was appropriated
$47 million for FY2020. Section 1501 would authorize DOE’s Light Water Sustainability
Program by name and substantially increase the level of detail about the program over the current
description in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct05, P.L. 109-58). The provisions are the same
as in S. 2368, the Nuclear Energy Renewal Act of 2019, as reported by ENR December 17, 2019.
Sec. 1502. Nuclear energy research, development and demonstration.
DOE’s Advanced Reactor Technologies program conducts R&D on reducing “long-term
technical barriers for multiple reactor technology concepts with a focus on innovative
technologies,” according to the program’s FY2021 budget justification.98 The program was
appropriated $55 million in FY2020. Section 1502 would add an authorization for the “Advanced
Reactor Technologies Development Program” to other nuclear energy research authorizations in
existing law (42 U.S.C. 16272). DOE would be required to carry out the program in consultation
with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This section is the same as language in S. 2368, the
Nuclear Energy Renewal Act of 2019, as reported by ENR December 17, 2019.
Sec. 1503. Advanced fuels development.
Highly radioactive nuclear fuel discharged from reactor cores (called “spent” or “used” nuclear
fuel) consists of most of the original uranium in the fuel, plutonium produced from some of the
uranium, and other radioactive materials. DOE’s Material Recovery and Waste Form
Development program conducts R&D on separation of the uranium, plutonium, and other
materials in spent fuel. Some of this research focuses on recovering high-assay low enriched
uranium (HALEU) for advanced reactors. HALEU is enriched in the isotope uranium-235 in the
range of 5% to just below 20%, in contrast to conventional reactor fuel, which has an enrichment
of between 3%-5%. Appropriations for this program in FY2020 total $30 million. DOE conducts
related R&D programs on accident tolerant fuels and other advanced fuels. Accident tolerant fuels
would use improved cladding and materials that could survive accident conditions longer than
existing commercial nuclear fuel, potentially giving reactor operators more time to react to
accidents. Accident tolerant and other advanced fuels could be used in existing commercial
reactors or advanced reactors, depending on the fuel design. For FY2020, DOE was appropriated
$95.6 million for accident tolerant fuel R&D and $30 million for R&D on tristructural-isotropic
(TRISO) fuel, in which uranium fuel pellets have a triple coating of silicon carbide and other
materials. For FY2021, DOE is requesting $36 million for accident tolerant fuel and $34 million
for TRISO fuel.
Section 1503 would modify the authorization in existing law (42 U.S.C. 16273) to specifically
name Material Recovery and Waste Form Development, with modified program criteria.
Appropriations for the program would be authorized at $40 million per year for FY2021-FY2025.
Section 1503 adds new authorizing provisions for Advanced Fuels R&D. This program would
include fuel for existing commercial reactors that would have improved performance and accident
tolerance, as well as fuel for advanced reactors that could improve the use of fuel resources (such
as through recovery of uranium and plutonium from spent fuel) and nuclear weapons proliferation
resistance (to reduce the potential weapons use of recovered plutonium). Appropriations for the
Advanced Fuels R&D program would be authorized at $120 million per year for FY2021FY2025.
98 DOE, FY 2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 3, part 2, DOE/CF-0164, February 2020, p. 34,
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/02/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-3-part-2_2.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
32
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
This section is the same as language in S. 2368, the Nuclear Energy Renewal Act of 2019, as
reported by ENR December 17, 2019, except the authorization periods are one year later in
Section 1503, reflecting the different dates the legislation was introduced.
Sec. 1504. Nuclear science and engineering support.
DOE’s Radiological Facilities Management Program includes the Research Reactor Infrastructure
(RRI) subprogram, which “provides project management, technical support, quality engineering
and inspection, and nuclear material support to 25 research reactors located at 24 U.S.
universities.”99 The RRI subprogram was appropriated $9 million for FY2020. DOE also provides
nuclear student research fellowships through the Integrated University Program, which is funded
at $5 million in FY2020.
Section 1504 would authorize activities under DOE’s RRI subprogram, using language nearly
identical to the description in the DOE FY2021 budget request, at $15 million per year from
FY2021 through FY2025. This section also would establish a Nuclear Energy Apprenticeship
Subprogram, to provide graduate-level training “aligned with the critical needs of the
Department.” The apprenticeship program would be authorized at $5 million per year from
FY2021 through FY2025.
This section is the same as language in S. 2368 the Nuclear Energy Renewal Act of 2019, as
reported by ENR December 17, 2019, except the authorization periods are one year later in
Section 1503.
Sec. 1505. University Nuclear Leadership Program.
The Integrated University Program, authorized by the Energy and Water Development and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009 (42 U.S.C. 16274a), is a joint program of DOE,
DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), and the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC). The program is authorized to make grants for multi-year university nuclear
research. Appropriations for the program were authorized at $45 million per year from FY2009
through FY2019, evenly divided among the three agencies. For FY2020, the program was
appropriated $21 million, and no funds are requested for FY2021.
Section 1505 would replace the existing authorization language to rename the program the
University Nuclear Leadership Program. It would define the term “advanced nuclear reactor” to
include fission reactors with “significant improvements” over existing reactors and to include
fusion reactors. Funding could be used for scholarships, fellowships, and R&D projects at
institutions of higher education related to advanced nuclear reactors and fuel cycle technologies
and to nuclear science and engineering in general. Annual appropriations would be authorized at
$30 million for DOE (with half for NNSA) and $15 million for NRC for FY2021 and every year
thereafter.
This section is the same as language in S. 903, the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act, as reported by
ENR on September 24, 2019, except that and the findings are omitted and the authorization
periods are one year later, reflecting the different dates the legislation was introduced.
Sec. 1506. Versatile, reactor-based fast neutron source.
The Versatile Test Reactor (VTR) is a nuclear reactor planned by DOE to provide a source of fast
(high energy) neutrons for “accelerated testing and qualification of advanced nuclear fuels,
99 DOE, FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 3, part 2, DOE/CF-0164, February 2020, p. 83,
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/02/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-3-part-2_2.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
33
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
materials, instrumentation, and sensors.” DOE estimates the project will cost between $3 billion
and $6 billion and be completed between 2026 and 2030. The FY2021 funding request for VTR
design, construction, and other project costs is $295 million.100
Section 1506 would amend a provision in EPAct05 (42 U.S.C. 16275(c)) so that it would
authorize DOE to provide a “versatile reactor based fast neutron source,” which is the VTR
project. The provision is identical to language in S. 903, the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act, as
reported by ENR on September 24, 2019.
Sec. 1507. Advanced nuclear reactor research and development goals.
[See Sec. 1508]
Sec. 1508. Nuclear energy strategic plan.
In the explanatory statement on DOE’s FY2020 appropriations, Congress established a new
appropriations sub-account within the DOE Nuclear Energy account for an Advanced Reactors
Demonstration Program. The new sub-account included $160 million for DOE to begin two
advanced nuclear reactor demonstration projects, with a cost-share of at least 50% from
nonfederal sources. Another $30 million was provided for grants to reduce the technical risk of
two to five additional reactor demonstration proposals, with a nonfederal cost-share of at least
20%.101 DOE did not request further funding for the advanced reactor demonstrations for
FY2021.102
Section 1507 would require DOE to demonstrate “different advanced nuclear reactor
technologies,” defined as including improved fission reactors and fusion reactors. DOE would be
required to enter into agreements to complete at least two demonstration projects by the end of
2025 and establish a program for an additional demonstration to become operational by the end of
2035. Section 1508 would require DOE to prepare a 10-year strategic plan for the Office of
Nuclear Energy, including the advanced reactor demonstration program. These sections are the
same as language in S. 903, the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act, as reported by ENR on
September 24, 2019.
Sec. 1509. Advanced nuclear fuel security program.
DOE currently has a program to develop enough HALEU fuel for the development of advanced
nuclear reactor concepts that would require such fuel. Two fuel production approaches are
currently being pursued. First, highly enriched uranium (HEU) contained in certain materials in
DOE inventories could be blended with other uranium to produce HALEU. The other approach
would use centrifuges to enrich natural or other uranium to HALEU levels. DOE received $40
million in FY2020 for the centrifuge program and is requesting the same amount in FY2021.103
Section 1509 would require DOE to establish a program to make HALEU available for advanced
nuclear reactors through sale, resale, transfer, or lease. HALEU containing at least two metric
tons of uranium-235 would be made available by the end of 2022, increasing to at least 10 metric
100 DOE, FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 3, part 2, DOE/CF-0164, February 2020, p. 104,
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/02/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-3-part-2_2.pdf.
101 House Committee on Appropriations, Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Committee Print on H.R.
1865/P.L. 116-94, January 2020, p. 461, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CPRT-116HPRT38679/pdf/CPRT116HPRT38679.pdf.
102 DOE, FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 3, part 2, DOE/CF-0164, February 2020, p. 94,
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/02/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-3-part-2_2.pdf.
103 DOE, FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 3, part 2, DOE/CF-0164, February 2020, p. 50,
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/02/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-3-part-2_2.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
34
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
tons, cumulatively, by the end of 2025. DOE would also be required to develop one or more
HALEU transportation packages that could be certified by NRC. This section is the same as
language in S. 903, the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act, as reported by ENR on September 24,
2019.
Sec. 1510. International nuclear energy cooperation.
DOE maintains nuclear energy relationships with energy agencies in other countries through a
variety of multilateral agreements, such as the International Framework for Nuclear Energy
Cooperation, and numerous bilateral nuclear energy R&D cooperation agreements.
Section 1510 would require DOE to carry out a program to “develop bilateral collaboration
initiatives with a variety of countries” through existing multilateral and bilateral agreements and
through “any other international collaborative effort with respect to advanced nuclear reactor
operations and safety.” DOE would be required to establish a subprogram to support efforts by
countries to develop peaceful nuclear energy programs, focusing on countries “that have
increased civil nuclear cooperation with Russia and China.” The subprogram would be modeled
after the State Department’s International Military Education and Training program.
Appropriations would be authorized at $5.5 million per year from FY2021 through FY2025.
This section is the same as language in S. 2368, the Nuclear Energy Renewal Act of 2019, as
reported by ENR December 17, 2019, except that the authorization periods are one year later.
Sec. 1511. Integrated Energy Systems Program.
DOE has conducted research on integrated energy systems that would allow nuclear technology
to complement other energy technologies, such as through the production of hydrogen for energy
storage, transportation, and industrial uses.104 According to DOE, integrating nuclear energy with
renewable energy could help match renewable electricity generation with grid requirements, and
produce thermal energy at a variety of temperatures.105
Section 1511 would require DOE to establish an Integrated Energy Systems Program that would
conduct R&D on integrating nuclear energy with renewable energy, fossil energy, and energy
storage technologies. This section is the same as S. 2702, the Integrated Energy Systems Act of
2019 as reported by ENR on December 17, 2020, except that the definitions are omitted and a
paragraph was added to specify heat generation as a research area for the program.
Subtitle F—Industrial Technologies
Part I—Innovation106
The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that the industrial sector accounted for 24% of
global CO2 emissions and 37% of total global end-use energy in 2017.107 Domestically, industrial
104 Idaho National Laboratory, “INL Selected to Partner with Three Utilities on First-of-a-Kind Integrated Energy
Systems,” news release, September 11, 2019, https://inl.gov/article/inl-selected-to-partner-with-three-utilities-on-firstof-a-kind-integrated-energy-systems/.
105 DOE Office of Nuclear Energy, “Changing the Game by Linking Nuclear and Renewable Energy Systems,”
December 8, 2016, https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/changing-game-linking-nuclear-and-renewable-energy-systems.
106 Prepared by Corrie E. Clark, Analyst in Energy Policy.
107 International Energy Agency (IEA, 2019), “Tracking Industry,” IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/trackingindustry.
Congressional Research Service
35
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
end-use accounted for 27% of U.S. CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and 35% of total
end-use energy in 2018.108
The DOE’s Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO) administers a research, development,
demonstration, and deployment program focused on energy-related advanced manufacturing
technologies and practices. AMO conducts research across 14 technology areas, supports publicprivate research and development consortia including national manufacturing institutes, and
provides energy efficiency technical assistance to manufacturers.
Subtitle F would authorize a program at DOE to increase U.S. technological and economic
competitiveness and to develop technologies that would reduce emissions of non-power industrial
sectors. The language in Subtitle F is nearly identical to provisions in S. 2300, the Clean
Industrial Technology Act of 2019, which was reported by ENR on October 24, 2019.
Sec. 1602. Coordination of research and development of energy efficient technologies for
industry.
Section 1602 would amend Section 6(a) of the American Energy Manufacturing Technical
Corrections Act (P.L. 112-210, 42 U.S.C. §6351). This provision would replace the “Industrial
Technologies Program” with the “Advanced Manufacturing Office” to be consistent with the
name of the program at DOE that has conducted the majority of the Department’s industrial
energy research.109 The provision would also direct the Secretary to establish collaborative
research and development partnerships with other programs throughout the Department.
The language in Section 1602 is identical to Section 6 of S. 2300, the Clean Industrial
Technology Act of 2019, which was reported by ENR on October 24, 2019.
Sec. 1603. Industrial emissions reduction technology development program.
Section 1603 would amend subtitle D of title IV of EISA (P.L. 110-140) to add a new section after
Section 454 (titled “Sec. 455. Industrial Emissions Reduction Technology Development
Program.”). The section would authorize a crosscutting industrial emissions reduction technology
research, development, demonstration, and commercial application program. 110 The purpose of
the program would be to increase the technological and economic competitiveness of U.S.
industry and manufacturing, increase the viability and competitiveness of industrial technology
exports, and achieve emissions reduction in nonpower industrial sectors. The section would direct
the Secretary to coordinate with other relevant federal agencies, the Industrial Technology
Innovation Advisory Committee that would be established in Section 1604 of S. 2657 (see “Sec.
1604. Industrial Technology Innovation Advisory Committee”), and the energy intensive
industries program, which is established in EISA Section 452.
If implemented, the program as described in Section 1603 would focus on seven areas to achieve
emissions reduction:
108 U.S. EPA, Draft Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2018, p. 14, https://www.epa.gov/
ghgemissions/draft-inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2018; U.S. EIA, (2019) “U.S. energy
consumption by source and sector, 2018,” https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/flow/
css_2018_energy.pdf.
109 The Industrial Technologies Program was renamed the Advanced Manufacturing Office in FY2014; see DOE,
Department of Energy FY2015 Congressional Budget Request, DOE/CF-0098, vol. 3, March 2014, p. 18.
110 “Emissions reduction” would include the reduction of net greenhouse gases with the exception of water vapor
emitted to the atmosphere by energy services and industrial processes; “emissions reduction” would not include the
elimination of embodied carbon in industrial manufacturing products.
Congressional Research Service
36
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
1. Industrial production processes;
2. Alternative materials;
3. Net-zero emissions liquid and gaseous fuels;
4. Shipping, aviation, and long distance transportation;
5. Carbon capture processes for industrial applications;
6. Other technologies that achieve net-zero emissions in nonpower industrial sectors; and
7. High-performance computing to develop advanced materials and manufacturing
processes.
The language in Section 1603 is nearly identical to Section 3 of S. 2300, the Clean Industrial
Technology Act of 2019, which was reported by ENR on October 24, 2019.
Sec. 1604. Industrial Technology Innovation Advisory Committee.
Section 1604 would amend subtitle D of title IV of EISA to add a new section after 455 (titled
“Sec. 456 Industrial Technology Innovation Advisory Committee.”). The section would direct the
Secretary in consultation with the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to
establish an Industrial Technology Innovation Advisory Committee. The section would establish
the duties of the committee, which include advising the Secretary by identifying and evaluating
technology being developed by the private sector related to the focus areas of the Industrial
Emissions Reduction Technology Development Program. The committee would also identify
technology gaps; survey and analyze factors that prevent technology adoption; recommend
technology screening criteria to encourage technology adoption; and develop a strategic plan. The
section would require the committee to periodically submit a report to the Secretary on the
progress of the industrial emissions reduction technology program and for the Secretary to submit
a copy of any report to Congress.
The language in Section 1604 is nearly identical to Section 4 of S. 2300, the Clean Industrial
Technology Act of 2019, which was reported by ENR on October 24, 2019.
Sec. 1605. Technical assistance program to implement industrial emissions reduction.
Section 1605 would amend subtitle D of title IV of EISA to add a new section after 456 (titled
“Sec. 457 Technical Assistance Program to Implement Industrial Emissions Reduction.”). The
section would direct the Secretary to establish a program within 180 days of enactment to provide
technical assistance to an eligible entity to adopt emission reduction technologies, establish
priorities or goals to accelerate development and evaluation of relevant technology, develop
collaborations, review appropriate emissions reduction technologies available, develop a roadmap
to implement emissions reduction technologies, and any other appropriate activity as determined
by the Secretary. An eligible entity would include a state, territory or possession of the United
States, local government, state or local office, tribal organization, institution of higher education,
and a private entity.
The language in Section 1605 is nearly identical to Section 5 of S. 2300, the Clean Industrial
Technology Act of 2019, which was reported by ENR on October 24, 2019.
Congressional Research Service
37
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
Part II—Smart Manufacturing111
While the language in the amendment directs actions by the Secretary of Energy and not a
particular DOE office or agency, the current activities of the AMO are consistent with the Smart
Manufacturing efforts identified in Part II. The AMO supports R&D projects, R&D consortia, and
early-stage technical partnerships with national laboratories, companies (for-profit and not-forprofit), state and local governments, and universities through competitive, merit reviewed funding
opportunities designed to investigate new manufacturing technologies. In particular, AMO is
responsible for the Department’s Clean Energy Institutes, which are part of the larger multiagency Manufacturing USA network of 15 manufacturing institutes. One of DOE’s institutes is
the Clean Energy Smart Manufacturing Innovation Institute (CESMII), which was launched in
2016. The focus of this Institute is R&D to develop technologies and solutions that can capture,
share, and process in real-time the increasing amounts of information available at manufacturing
facilities.
The provisions in these sections largely mirror those in two identical bills, S. 715 and H.R. 1633.
Both bills are titled the Smart Manufacturing Leadership Act. S. 715 was reported by ENR on
September 10, 2019. H.R. 1633 was introduced March 7, 2019, and referred to multiple
committees.
Sec. 1611. Definitions.
This section would provide definitions for a number of terms used in this section: energy
management system, industrial assessment center, information and communication technology,
institution of higher education, North American Industry Classification System, small and
medium manufacturers, and smart manufacturing.
In general, Section 3 of H.R. 1633 and Section 3 of S. 715 are similar to Sec. 1611, except that
they also define the term “National Laboratory.” Section 3 of H.R. 1633 and Section 3 of S. 715
also clarifies that “Secretary” refers to the Secretary of Energy—this definition is included in
Section 2 of the amendment.
Sec. 1612. Development of national smart manufacturing plan.
The Secretary of Energy would be directed to produce, in consultation with the National
Academies of Sciences Engineering, and Medicine, a National Smart Manufacturing Plan, within
three years of enactment. The plan is to focus on smart manufacturing technology development
and deployment to improve the productivity and energy efficiency of U.S. manufacturing. Section
1612 would direct the Secretary to identify areas in which DOE and other federal agencies can
improve the speed of development, deployment, and adoption of smart manufacturing
technologies and processes; improve energy efficiency and reduce environmental impacts; and
improve the competitiveness and strength of the U.S. manufacturing sector. The plan would
include an assessment of previous and current actions by DOE related to smart manufacturing;
the establishment of voluntary interconnection protocols and performance standards; the use of
smart manufacturing for energy efficiency and emissions reductions in supply chains; actions to
improve cybersecurity in smart manufacturing infrastructure; the deployment of existing research
results; the leveraging of existing high-performance computing infrastructure; and consideration
of the impact of smart manufacturing on existing and future manufacturing jobs. The provision
would require the Secretary to produce updates to the plan not less frequently than every two
years. During the development of the initial plan, the Secretary would be required to submit
111 Prepared by John F. Sargent Jr., Specialist in Science and Technology Policy.
Congressional Research Service
38
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
annual progress reports to Congress. The section would authorize the use of unobligated DOE
funds for these purposes.
S. 2657 generally includes the same provisions included in Section 4 of H.R. 1633 and Section 4
of S. 715. In places where H.R. 1633 and S. 715 refer to “grants,” Section 1612 uses the broader
term “financial assistance.” In addition, Section 1612 excludes the term “energy management
assistance” from the list of items for which the financial assistance is authorized. Also, Section
1612 includes a provision that would require consideration of the impact of smart manufacturing
on existing and future manufacturing jobs that is not in H.R. 1633 or S. 715.
Sec. 1613. Leveraging existing agency programs to assist small and medium manufacturers.
DOE currently supports Industrial Assessment Centers (IACs) at 31 universities around the
country. The IACs provide small and medium-sized manufacturers with a no-cost energy
assessment to identify opportunities to improve productivity and competitiveness, reduce waste,
and save energy.
The Secretary of Energy would be directed to expand the scope of technologies covered by the
DOE IACs to include smart manufacturing technologies and practices, and to equip the directors
of IACs with the training and tools needed to provide technical assistance to manufacturers
regarding smart technologies and practices, including energy management systems. Section 1613
would authorize the use of unobligated DOE funds for these purposes.
Section 1613 includes the same provisions included in Section 5 of H.R. 1633 and Section 5 of S.
715.
Sec. 1614. Leveraging smart manufacturing infrastructure at National Laboratories.
The Secretary would be required to conduct a study, within 180 days of enactment, of how DOE
can increase access to existing high-performance computing resources of the National
Laboratories particularly for small and medium manufacturers. The Secretary of Energy would be
directed to focus on increasing manufacturers’ access to the computing facilities of the National
Laboratories while ensuring the information of the manufacturers is protected and the security of
the National Laboratories is maintained. The Secretary would be directed to provide a report to
Congress within a year of enactment describing the results of the study. The Secretary would be
directed to facilitate small and medium manufacturers’ access to the National Laboratories to
allow them to fully use the labs’ computing resources for enhancing U.S. manufacturing
competitiveness.
Section 1614 includes the same provisions included in Section 6 of H.R. 1633 and Section 6 of S.
715.
Sec. 1615. State leadership grants.
The Secretary of Energy would be authorized to provide financial assistance on a competitive
basis to states for the purpose of establishing programs to be used as models for supporting the
implementation of smart manufacturing technologies. To be eligible to receive financial
assistance, states would be required to submit an application to the Secretary at such time and in
such manner as the Secretary may require. Applications for financial assistance would be
evaluated on the basis of merit using criteria developed by the Secretary, including (1) technical
merit, innovation, and impact; (2) research approach, work plan, and deliverables; (3) academic
and private sector partners; and (4) alternate sources of funding. The grants would be authorized
for no more that $2 million over three years; states would be required to provide matching funds
of at least 30%. States could use these funds to facilitate access to high-performance computing
resources for small and medium-sized manufacturers and to provide assistance to small and
Congressional Research Service
39
Summary and Analysis of S. 2657, the American Energy Innovation Act
medium-sized manufacturers to implement smart manufacturing technologies and practices. The
Secretary would be directed to conduct semi-annual evaluations of each award to determine the
effectiveness of the programs funded with the financial assistance and to provide guidance to
states on ways to better execute the program of the state. The program would be authorized $10
million per year for fiscal years 2021 through 2024.
In general, Section 1615 includes similar provisions to those in Section 7 of H.R. 1633 and
Section 7 of S. 715. This section however, provides a different set of criteria for evaluating state
applications for funding excluding “plans for dissemination of results” and “the permanence of
the infrastructure to be put in place by the project” and adding “technical merit, innovation, and
impact” and “research approach, work plan, and deliverables.” In addition, Section 1615 would
cap awards to states at $2 million, whereas H.R. 1633 and S. 715 cap awards at $3 million. This
section also does not include one of the permissible uses of funds—“to fund research and
development of transformational manufacturing processes and materials technology that advance
smart manufacturing”—that is included in H.R. 1633 and S. 715.
Sec. 1616. Report.
The Secretary would be required to submit an annual report to Congress, also made available to
the public, on progress in advancing smart manufacturing in the United States.
Section 1616 includes the same provision included in Section 8 of H.R. 1633 and Section 8 of S.
715.
Subtitle G—Vehicles112
Most of the more than 16.9 million new passenger vehicles sold in the United States in 2018 were
internal combustion engine vehicles.113 In 2017, the transportation sector contributed 1,866
million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent across passenger vehicles, medium- and heavyduty vehicles, aircraft, trains, and ships and boats.114 In part to address concerns of reducing
greenhouse gas emissions, federal programs have been established to support increased
development, production, purchase, and use of alternatives to petroleum-based fuels and internal
combustion engines in transportation. These programs include tax deductions and credits for
vehicle purchases and installation of alternative fueling stations, incentives for manufacturers to
produce alternative fuel vehicles, investment in research and development for alternative fuel
technology, and mandates for the use of biofuels.
Subtitle G would authorize a total of $1,698,379,000 between FY2021 and FY2025 for the DOE
to support research, development, engineering, demonstration, and commercial application
activities for innovative vehicles and related technologies that would improve fuel efficiency and
emissions for all vehicles produced in the United States, as well as reduce reliance on petroleumbased fuels in the transportation sector. Within 18 months from enactment and annually through
2025, the Secretary would be required to report to Congress on technologies developed and
adopted as a result of activities authorized by this subtitle.
112 Prepared by Melissa N. Diaz, Analyst in Energy
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.