Skip to main content

tv   Energy Secretary Granholm Discusses Infrastructure Climate  CSPAN  April 26, 2021 11:01am-11:32am EDT

11:01 am
and no stipulations with a one time bill and biden would be the greatest president ever and he's got a lot of democratic kids in the same vote and they would come over to the democratick party so i thank you. >> host: kenny, thank you. danielle douglas gabriel you've heard both sides of the augments let's go back to our initial conversation. where do things stand connect what is the timeline foror thiso be put in place if approved by the white house? >> guest: were fuzzy on the timeline at the stage because the administration has, for lease last two months, been telling us they are reviewing this and they are reviewing the authorities for the president to cancel this much moneyau. >> believe the last minute or so of the washington journal that you can find online on c-span .org. we take you live to a conversation with energy secretary jennifer granholm on the two chilean dollar info structure and climate plan put forward by the biden administration. the discussion hosted by politico playbook.
11:02 am
>> people like you and me, this seemingly impossible mission falls on our desk. a secretary of energy jennifer granholm will be spearheading this from our or for our energy economy. his biden's climate realistic? or is it aspirational? training us is u.s. energy secretary jennifer granholm discussed the info structure plan in her own proposals for green energy. electric vehicles and new wins of solar technologies. part of biden's call for an energy transition. thank you, secretary granholm for being with us. today's if you're just jeanine into the lifestream you can follow the conversation on twitter using the # politico playbook and ask us questions by tweeting at us at politico life. thank you again for joining us, madam secretary. >> glad to be on, thank you. >> let's start with bidens emissions pledge. he said that, he is made this
11:03 am
promise before his info structure bill passed and it's it passes, it's looking like the republican version they cemented over the weekend so how can the administration achieve these emissions cuts at a promise without the assist from congress? >> i think he's counting on the assistance from congress but if you can achieve it it's just a lot harder but the whole goal here of the american jobs plan is, as you know, is to point us as a nation to the future and to be able to give people the vision of seeing themselves in jobs in the clean energy sector and of getting members of congress to see their districts in the future. the people in the district they want to be able to look to the future and when i think about which again, we had, we had difficulty with our auto industry when it went into bankruptcy but if you give people the notion that your kids
11:04 am
can stay in michigan and can get jobs in michigan and this clean energy sector making the electric vehicles, for example, that gives people and communities hope. you can do it without the american jobs plan and the american jobs plan really positions our nation to put on steroids this new clean energy and that is what the president wants to do. >> you brought up electric vehicles in the republican proposal there is no money set aside for a little electric vehicle and president biden planned the wreck and jobs plan there's $174 billion set aside. so what can you do, what exec of action or federal policy response do you have in your arsenal that can make a big difference if the bill looks more like a compromise bill that the republican has passed? >> again, we are really pushing for people to be thinking about the future because even like bloomberg energy finance which
11:05 am
does the projections of how much uptake there will be a new technology has said that we will see parity between lectern vehicles and internal combustion engines by 2030 and we will see a majority of these cars coming out being not only electric vehicles but then people will take them up but part of that will be at the chicken and egg question is you got to make sure you got to charge infrastructure for people who feel confident about it so you will see a partnership with for the deferment of transportation and having their rights on federal highways and seeing part of the solution for allowing people to be charging long term but the exciting part about it is technology in the private sector are running in the running overseas and they are running here where we just need to make sure that people are able to take advantage of that and the biden administration determines that we get through congress a
11:06 am
component that electrifies our transportation sector for jobs but also because the transportation sector is the one area where we have not done almost anything to address greenhouse gas emissions. we will use every tool we can to make this happen but the megan jobs plan is obviously a big piece of that, a big tool in the toolbox. >> could you actually reach these goals about the american jobs plan? >> you can't do it. it will retake a whole reconfiguring of a lot of what many of these departments already do but really the american jobs plan will allow us to get to the goals and time and will allow us to continue to do the other things that government has been doing. you don't want to take from pot a to move to pot be but you want to grow the pie and so it's really important that the american jobs plan gets passed
11:07 am
and it will get past. the question is what does it look like and we appreciate the fact that the republican came forward with a proposal but they have said, too, that this is the beginning of the conversation. we appreciate that and we got to figure out what are the components that can get enough votes to get us across the finish line and i think both sides are encouraged by at least, the beginnings of this conversation. >> would you say at the very least, congress needs to pass a clean electricity standard? >> well, if that is an important signal to be able to get to our clean energy goals, right? that's important. you can also incentivize states have already begun this conversation as well as many cities so there are other ways of doing it but a clean energy standard has to happen one way or the other. we have to send the message that we will run clean electrons on
11:08 am
our electrician grid in order for us to get to the goal of 100% single electricity by 2035 is watch the president wants and of course, for the overall goal, carbon emissions by 100% by 2050. clean electricity standards are fundamental and is the long goal. >> yet, have you looked at if you can pass through that reconciliation though? >> i think those conversations are being had right now and i think but the bottom line is we want to get bipartisan support and so having republicans see the importance of making this commitment as a nation for local communities and for jobs and i keep saying but it is so true that if you look across the globe this is not just me saying this but these are studies that have said the markets are the three dollars for the products
11:09 am
that were reduce co2 emissions. 23 trillion and that is so big it's mind blowing. you better believe all these other countries are looking at that insane i want a piece of that and i want a free jobs in my country for our people so are we going to be passive as a nation or will we let other countries take this and we've seen what happens when we do and when china cornered the market and critical minerals and when we don't have the ability in the united states anymore to even semi- conduct and we cannot let this opportunity go for our people and so we believe that congress will see that opportunity and we are hopeful and it led to the start of these conversations and then it's a pro america bill and we hope congress will see it that way to. >> the federal government has so little control and oversight over that so how can we energy department force a shift that it
11:10 am
has on a type of energy that has so little control over? >> let me just say this, first of all, the deferment of energy is great work on the technology associated making the decisions and we have a whole building focused on this and ideally you would make the case that this is lower costs and it helps consumers and lower cost for construction and you continue to bring down and then it becomes irresistible but that doesn't often happen in that sequence so having some kind of policy mechanism to reduce costs is important. a lot of the building codes are done at the city level or there is some of the state level as well and there are things one could put out to incentivize the adoption of next-generation building codes also. one would hope that the citizens would say i don't want to buy a house that is causing me to
11:11 am
spend up to and in poor communities up to 30% of my monthly income just on heating the home in the winter and cooling it in the summer were as wealthier communities somebody might spend 3% of their monthly income on it so that energy desert, if you will, the energy stock for poor people is huge. you would think that because these technologies are available now and if you install, for example, energy efficient appliances you will save three and a $20 a year and that would make the case but sometimes you may have to add a little regulatory nugget in there in order for the uptick to be -- >> you talk about retrofit building and -- but, you know, we do a lot of weatherization programs and we have a lot of public housing so for us as a government we can help lead by
11:12 am
example by insisting that the next generation of these technologies are included so that people who benefit from weatherization funds or from, you know, making sure that we are building public housing in a way that demonstrates our commitment to energy efficiency, we can lead by example is a federal government by what response is true in our building and we consume an awful lot of energy at the federal complex and so we will take care of that as well. >> is cold dead? >> well, clearly not because it's not dead and there's a lot of coal plants still out there and the question is for us as a country and certainly as a globe is how you can help those communities reduce their co2 exposure through coal by may be there is fuel switching to natural gas and maybe you had carbon capture and sequestration
11:13 am
but really it's not the government that decides this but the market is already deciding this. you are seen countries move away from coal because of the carbon pollution and so the question is for us all we cannot abandon those workers who have made the choice and for their life have been told that you got to power america but we cannot abandon those communities so if the market is moving in a direction we've got to move to those communities and say, here is how we are going to be a support to you in this transition and that is why this american jobs plan is so great because there been so many hundreds of jobs that a coal miner could do be able to take advantage of the future of energy so you can be, for example, just quickly you can have them be mining still but for critical minerals and you could be mining for geothermal
11:14 am
under and you could have them be installing these carbon capture sequestration technologies. >> that is what i was going to ask you. joe manchin supports carbon capture and to see that being a part of the infra- structure built? >> totally. in fact it is a part of the megan jobs plan a bill they have demonstration projects for hydrogen and for carbon capture, 25 demonstrations and honestly, all of the republicans that i've spoken to have spoken with quite a few, especially on the energy committee, been very supportive of carbon capture technology and hydrogen technologies in order to reduce our carbon pollution but prints. you know what you require is a lot of that hype is to take the carbon co2 from the site to sequester it underground and you have to have pipes to carry the
11:15 am
hydrogen and there's a lot of infrastructure pieces associated with those technologies that help to reduce carbon. >> i will shift over to cars which i know is your specialty and having been. >> that have been in the past but not quite in my lane as energy secretary anymore but i love them. >> a big part of cutting this cost or carbon emissions is basically the carbon icing transportation but let's be honest, we've had this federal incentive of $7500 for years to buy electric vehicle and it's for ten years and only 2% of our vehicles are electric. how much do you think each buyer needs to make that fix or switch? i've got a gasoline vehicle and i just bought it recently and people have used cars and new cars are still gasoline and even if you use hundred and $74 million of the 174 or am sorry, the billion proposed, millions are not even a thing
11:16 am
anymore. [laughter] that might give or to give 20000 per person per year that still only 9000 drivers so how do we get to the point where we actually change -- >> let me ask you, why did you buy a gasoline vehicle? >> it was a good deal. >> so the question is -- people people are motivated by their pocketbooks. >> is a mini cooper and i like mini coopers. >> all right, all right. get a convertible electric vehicle and that is really cool. pardon? >> i bet you the mini cooper is coming because these manufacturers are moving to electrical vehicles and when you get when i'm telling you you will never go back because it's so awesome. it's so awesome. you plug -- this is if you have
11:17 am
a house with a garage and you plug it in a night and you never have to go to the gas station and in my case i lease a chevy volt and i leave solar panels on my garage so i just plug it in and i literally drive on sunshine. how can you not love that? >> but here is an example. a brand-new mini coopers $45000 a year and what is the tax incentive for me to get that car versus my car that i bought used which was a quarter of that? >> the question is what is that delta and what's the incentive that makes them on par with makes an internal combustion engines the same price as an electric vehicle? and telling you over the next two years they will be comparable and the question is used cars are always going to be
11:18 am
a lot cheaper but now we're starting to see used electric vehicles as well and so that will come down but the incentive has to be at the point of sale so that when people see that this is what people will pay for this car in this car and it's the same or less than you figure in the use of the vehicles because you don't have to pay $50 a month for gasoline that the electric vehicle preposition becomes irresistible except for one thing. that is if you want to drive your electric mini cooper which i know it's not but if you had one across the country you would feel rage exide he so how do you get rid of the range anxiety and that's by putting and charging stations that are quick charge as you make those long distant trips and those quick charges, you know, they may be right now
11:19 am
will not be incentive enough for the private sector to do it on their own because there are enough electric vehicles to make money off of those charging stations. this is for government steps in at the beginning of a new technology to make sure that the uptick in it is sufficient so that it doesn't have to do any of that so. >> will be see a higher tax incentive than $7500 a year? >> we will see what it is negotiated but senator schumer has a big bill that provides significant tax incentive and there's a lot of support for that and that could be under the umbrella of the american jobs plan but the bottom line is i know that will be but the point is you got to do enough so that it actually is a tipping point. >> so even republicans are suggesting a user fee for electric vehicles and doesn't that defeat the purpose of the tax incentive? >> yet, the user fee issue is it
11:20 am
has to be enough, the user fee is not going to be enough to pay for the entire road infrastructure when you only have 3% of the vehicle being electric at this point. there's got to be a match between the revenues and, you know, maybe at some point the discussion to have and it just doesn't get to their. >> got it. just to talk more about electric vehicles that the auto unions have said that it requires more costs which means fewer workers, fewer shifts so how do these people who worked on the assembly lines, how will they afford electric vehicles? >> we want to build more electric vehicles in this country and get more factories building electric vehicles rather than seeing them shipped off to mexico or to canada or to anywhere else. we want to attract that
11:21 am
manufacturing back bone back into the rest of the people will have jobs. yes, it takes fewer people and there are fewer moving parts so that means for the consumer that there is much less with 20 moving parts rather than 2000. are you kidding? it will last longer, be more durable and et cetera. there is a whole ecosystem to rounding and creating a manufacturing sector that you got all sorts of suppliers and you have, the batteries for the electric vehicle has to be built and you want to build the battery factories here in the united states and we want to get the supply to the batteries here in the united states so that means mining for the critical materials that are in the batteries and right now batteries largely are made in asia and we got tesla now coming and we just saw them decide to build batteries and that's because there's an uptick in electric vehicles in the united
11:22 am
states so we've got to keep that supply of manufacturing here is the answer to people being concerned that a more comp located internal combustion engine will require fewer manufacturing employees. >> you said during your conversation hearings you would do a [inaudible] recently joe biden did a virtual tour of the facility of sensibly promoting it and the white house says you haven't divested yet. do you plan to divest mac. >> absolutely. i signed an agreement, ethics agreement that requires me to divest of all my individually owned stock of all federal appointees within 180 days and i certainly will do that. >> to see the validity of why it looks improper that he's promoting this? >> well, i have nothing to do with that and i resigned from
11:23 am
pro terra signed an ethics agreement and i will divest of all my stock and this is why you have ethics agreements with federal employees so that these issues do not arise over the before you so i will certainly do that and they understand the prudence of those ethics agreements. >> i want to ask you about exxon mobil and they offered or put into this plan to capture 100 million tons of carbon annually and they say it's the equivalent taking 20 million cars off the road but it requires a lot of government assistance, right? would you support carbon capture plan like this that involves oil company and do you see these oil companies as partners in a fight on climate change and are they even honest brokers or are we just prolonging their power and political clout? >> it's a big question so some of the oil companies have decided that they are going to diversify and become diversified
11:24 am
energy company and the proof will be in the pudding. you don't want to just assume that somebody is greenwashing an effort because they see where the globe is headed but presumably they are smart business people and they do see where we say in michigan where the puck is going and they see the puck is moving towards clean energy. all of the commitments that were made last week even here in the united states as a global energy summit tells them and it's a bullhorn telling them that we will move to clean electric to city so you can be a part of this and maybe biofuels are a piece of it and you can work harder to d carbonized airline travel but the bottom line is you have got to move and you can't hang on and be, you know, be the kodak or, you know, the blockbuster video of the energy
11:25 am
world. you got to diversify. it is the same thing as will be experienced in michigan when we had an internal combustion engine. we saw the threat from imports that had much better fuel economy and the auto industry went bankrupt, suppliers went bankrupt and it was a shakeup so before any oil companies start to go bankrupt you got to diversify. we went to electric vehicles and they need to move to clean energy solutions and so, you know, proof will be in the pudding. it's verified first before you trust. >> how much would you pay for carbon? be a administration has not put a price on it but how we effectively done that through tax incentives and legislation? >> there is a tax incentive called 45q that has a price on carbon and there will be probably adjustment and an
11:26 am
increase in that towards the american jobs plan goes through and that is -- it's important to get the market to move and start to remove carbon from their processes but as you noted joe biden has not put an overall economy wide price on carbon and many other countries have and maybe that is where economies where that is the most efficient thing to do but this administration is not there yet and they want to use the mark in jobs plan using the carrots they have to incentivize and move away from carbon polluting industries so hopefully that gets us where we need to be. >> last question. a lot of questions are around or still a lot of questions about what are the details on the incentives and the tax breaks for the private sector through this american jobs plan to really change the economy. could you give us some details
11:27 am
on what we should expect? >> there is a lot of incentives because you can't do this without partnership with the private sector. right? you have to have the private sector actually deploying these technologies in making sure that they are buying, for example, credits that are generated by renewable energy et cetera so we have tax credits for solar and for wind and there's tax credits associated with moving carbon as you state without public-private partnerships embedded and i will say in that apartment of energy for example with the loan programs office for the private sector has been in the game but we made it easier for them to make a decision by offering lower interest rates or a loan guarantee when the market is not quite ready for new technology but we know it can prove itself out. there is all sorts of incentives
11:28 am
embedded in the american jobs plan to ensure that public and private partnerships are rewarded and are furthered and it must be a piece of how we move forward with what we need to do hand in glove. >> but you do acknowledge that this pace by 2030, is it aspirational or is it achievable? >> it is achievable. they mapped it out, you know, there's multiple paths to be able to achieve the commitment that the president announced on friday and they have gone over it with economists and with stakeholders and you can do it and it's a bit of a moving part, if you don't get it here, you got to answer that over here but there are multiple paths to be able to achieve it but we can't do it without having sector clearly. >> can you do it without the mark in jobs bill? >> as i say, you can do it but it's much harder so we would like to see those commitments be
11:29 am
met as partially true with the emergent jobs plan because that really is about the job and setting us up for the future. >> thank you so much for your time. i really appreciate it and yeah, great to talk with you and i will be in touch about my car decision. [laughter] thank you so much for your time and good luck, we will be watching. >> all right, thanks. >> the senate is back for legislative business this afternoon and it takes up the nomination of jason miller to be deputy director of the office of management and budget. a vote to advance the nomination is set for 5:30 p.m. eastern. more work on nominees continues later in the week.
11:30 am
the senate also plans to work on a bill authorizing $35 billion for drinking water and wastewater treatment projects. no votes are scheduled in the house until next month. you can watch the senate live today starting at 3:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> tonight on "the communicators" a look at social media and content moderation with jessica, director of the center for technology and innovation as a competitive enterprise institute. >> republicans tend to be very upset about the content moderation being too much and that it seems to them to be politically motivated and putting conservative voices at a disadvantage online where a lot of the democratic members of congress seem very upset that more content isn't being taken down. they feel that dangerous or untrue things are being left out
11:31 am
and that's creating all sorts of other problems that is still or spill into our off-line world. you know, while i think a lot of washington can agree that content moderation is something everyone is upset about they come at it from two very separate ways. >> jessica allusion night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "the communicators" on c-span2. as he approaches his 100th day in office president biden will give his first address to a joint session of congress wednesday night, our live coverage begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern with the president's address at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, online at seesmic .org listen live on the c-span radio app. next, new mexico senator on challenges facing the latino community in the u.s. >> welcome to our virtual event on the launch of the axial's


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on