U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

90–862 PDF 2014

S. HRG. 113–428 

NEWS Act 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

TO

HEAR TESTIMONY ON S. 1971, THE ‘‘NEXUS OF ENERGY AND WATER 

FOR SUSTAINABILITY ACT OF 2014’’ 

JUNE 25, 2014 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, Chair 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARK UDALL, Colorado 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

ELIZABETH LEOTY CRADDOCK, Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel 

KAREN K. BILLUPS, Republican Staff Director 

PATRICK J. MCCORMICK III, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii, Chairman 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

MIKE LEE, Utah, Ranking 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

MARY L. LANDRIEU and LISA MURKOWSKI are Ex Officio Members of the Subcommittee 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page 

Carter, Nicole T., Ph.D., Specialist in Natural Resources Policy, Congressional 

Research Service .................................................................................................. 16 

Dickinson, Mary Ann, President/CEO, Alliance for Water Efficiency ................. 24 

Iseman, Tom, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, Department 

of the Interior ....................................................................................................... 11 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska ............................................... 2 

Pershing, Jonathan, Principal Deputy Director, Office of Energy Policy and 

Systems Analysis, Department of Energy .......................................................... 4 

Ray, Anda, Vice President for Environment and Chief Sustainability Officer, 

Electric Power Research Institute ...................................................................... 20 

Schatz, Hon. Brian, U.S. Senator From Hawaii ................................................... 1 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 41 

APPENDIX II 

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 49 

(1) 

NEWS Act 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 2014 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:31 p.m. in room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Brian Schatz presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM HAWAII 

Senator SCHATZ. Good afternoon. 

Today we will receive testimony on S. 1971, the Nexus of Energy 

and Water for Sustainability Act of 2014, also known as the NEWS 

Act. Earlier this year Senators Murkowski and Wyden introduced 

S. 1971. I’m pleased to be a co-sponsor along with Chairwoman 

Landrieu and Senator Tom Udall. 

The term energy/water nexus is very popular these days and for 

good reason. Water is necessary to produce many forms of energy. 

Energy is required to move and treat water. The ongoing drought 

in many parts of the country coupled with the need to curtail certain power plants because of insufficient water supplies demonstrates the critical connection between energy and water. 

In my home State of Hawaii we are on the forefront of a changing climate. It may seem counter intuitive but Hawaii is a water 

stressed State that often faces serious drought conditions. Over the 

last several years the Department of Agriculture has listed major 

portions of Hawaii as facing severe and even exceptional drought 

conditions. This means that we, in Hawaii, must think carefully 

about our water use. 

I believe there are a few key steps that are critical to furthering 

the energy/water nexus discussion. 

The first is there’s clearly a need for high quality standardized 

data on both energy and water. 

The second is the need for the Federal Government to act as a 

centralized hub of energy/water knowledge. 

The NEWS Act directly addresses both of these needs. The bill 

promotes information sharing across the public and private sectors 

and creates a Federal interagency coordination committee to help 

the Federal agencies better understand the energy/water nexus and 

begin taking meaningful access, excuse me, action. 

We look forward to hearing from the panel. I will, as you are 

aware, we have 7 votes starting right now. So I will gavel out, re-
2 

cess and then the Ranking Member, Senator Murkowski will come 

back at 3:30 to continue the hearing. 

[RECESS] 

Senator BALDWIN [presiding]. Good afternoon. 

I am delighted to be temporarily chairing and so unexpected was 

I for this that my first line is thank you, Chair Landrieu and Ranking Member Murkowski for holding this important hearing. 

I’m actually going to reserve my opening statement for when we 

begin the question and answer. 

Delighted to have our witnesses here. 

Delighted to have an opportunity to highlight the important 

nexus between energy and water. 

This is something that’s incredibly important to my State of Wisconsin. I’m going to get into that a little bit more when we have 

our chance for questions and answers. 

But I would yield to Ranking Member Murkowski for her opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM ALASKA 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. 

I’m pleased that we are able to have an uninterrupted period of 

time for this hearing. I would agree, Senator Baldwin, this is an 

important one. 

I appreciate the indulgence of the 5 panelists that have joined us 

today. Thank you for appearing here this afternoon. We apologize 

for the somewhat disjointed Senate schedule, but as they say 

around here, it is what it is. 

So I did speak with Senator Schatz on the Floor and he was glad 

to be able to start things off, but indicated that you and I would 

be doing the team here. So we’ll have a good opportunity to visit 

with you and gain your input. 

The energy/water nexus is a very important issue, certainly to 

me, I think to folks everywhere. It’s pretty basic stuff. Water is essential in every aspect of our daily life. In addition to its vital role 

in sustaining life, it’s crucial for the Nation’s economic well being 

and sustained growth. Without water there’s no electricity, no fuel 

to power our industry, our means of transportation and no plants 

to produce biofuels. This is the water for energy that we cannot do 

without. 

When it comes to energy for water we need energy to convey 

water from its source to its consumers. We need the energy to 

pump and treat and increasingly, to reuse our water in the numerous waste water treatment plants that we have around the country. We obviously need water to treat and provide safe and readily 

available drinking water. 

In addition to the legislation that we’re talking about today, S. 

1971, I recently released a white paper on the energy/water nexus 

interlinked resources that are vital for economic growth and sustainability. I did supply a copy of it to all my colleagues here on 

the committee. I would hope that most of you have seen it. 

You know, you always take a little bit of pride in authorship. But 

I do think it is important that, from a policy perspective, we always 

be thinking about where water fits in to our discussion here. The 
3 

paper provides a more detailed description of the nexus issues and 

the linkages between the two resources. In it I also detailed how 

the Federal Government can work with external stakeholders, particularly the private sector to facilitate the technological innovations needed to make a real difference in the efficient and sustainable use of these important resources. 

So the legislation that I’ve introduced which is S. 1971, I introduced with Senator Wyden back in January. It calls for several important actions that the Federal Government can do to initiate and 

sustain public/private partnership on the energy/water nexus 

issues. The legislation further seeks to streamline the government’s 

activities across the various departments and agencies to minimize 

duplicative efforts and hopefully, save taxpayers money. 

I also welcome the report that DOE released just last week, the 

Water/Energy Nexus Challenges and Opportunities. I think that 

this is a good first step as we look to implement constructive energy/water nexus related programs within our Federal Government. But it does leave unanswered, at least one question out 

there. That’s pretty basic, is how we’re going to accomplish that? 

How do we get there? That’s a question that I’m going to be looking forward to, kind of, probing you all on today. I think that my 

legislation can provide a path forward on the implementation. 

This bill is co-sponsored by not only the Chair of the subcommittee, Senator Schatz, but also by Senators Landrieu, Senators Udall and I understand you, which I appreciate that, Senator 

Baldwin. 

I also want to thank a number of organizations for their support 

including the Alliance for Water Efficiency, the Family Farm Alliance, the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical 

Officials, the National Association for Clean Water Agencies, the 

National Electric Manufacturers Association and the Water Reuse 

Association. 

So I’ve got letters of support that I’ve received on this bill that 

I would ask be included in the hearing record. 

But again, I look forward to the comments from witnesses today 

and the time that you’ve given to this very important issue. 

With that, Madame Chair, I thank you. 

Senator BALDWIN. Without objection for the inclusion of the reports. 

I’d like to welcome our witnesses today. I’m going to briefly introduce you by title and then have you present testimony in the order 

that you’re seated and hopefully the order that I will introduce you. 

Dr. Jonathan Pershing is the Principal Deputy Director for Energy Policy and Systems Analysis and Deputy Assistant Secretary 

at the Department of Energy. 

Mr. Tom Iseman is a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and 

Science at the Department of Interior. 

Ms. Nicole Carter is a Policy Expert at the Congressional Research Service. 

Ms. Anda Ray is the Vice President for Environment and Chief 

Sustainability Officer at the Electric Power Research Institute. 

Ms. Mary Ann Dickinson is the President of the Alliance for 

Water Efficiency. 
4 

Thank you all again for being here, for your patience while we 

vote. 

Why don’t we start with your testimony, Dr. Pershing. 

STATEMENT OF JONATHAN PERSHING, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY 

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ENERGY POLICY AND SYSTEMS 

ANALYSIS, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Mr. PERSHING. Thank you very much. Thank you, Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Senator Murkowski and through you, thank you 

to the entire subcommittee. I think it’s a really tremendous opportunity to engage on this critical issue. 

We certainly have a number of views. I’ll share some of them 

here. I have a somewhat longer written testimony which we have 

submitted. 

I think that the point that both of you have made and Senator 

Murkowski, you certainly elaborated on this and your report does 

as well, about the interactions between energy and water. We see 

them in very much the same way that you do and have articulated 

them perhaps in a somewhat more elaborate fashion in a much 

longer report. But your short document, I think, captures some of 

those key intersections. 

But what’s interesting to me is that given the inter linkage it’s 

historically interesting that we have not, for the most part, developed these together. We tend to treat them in stove pipes. They’re 

somewhat separable and unique. 

But recently we think that some of the events out there in the 

world are focusing attention on the inter linkage. In that sense 

there’s also a set of growing vulnerabilities that we have to pay attention to and that are quite critical. 

Let me take some examples. We can start with a look at the 

drought from 2012, (you don’t have to go back very far—I’ll come 

back to the more recent examples in just a minute). In 2012, limited water availability constrained the operation of power plants. 

We’re certainly seeing that. 

This year, now, we have an example of where we are early in the 

season in California. Snow pack is only about 20 percent of normal. 

If you look at the projected consequence we could see the curtailment of something like 1100 megawatts of power. So it’s a huge 

number, very significant playing out at this intersection. 

Neither our energy nor our water systems, of course, are static. 

If we take a look at what things are changing. 

We have changing demand. 

We have new technologies. 

We also have climate change. 

All affecting these systems. 

At the same time the systems are supported by private infrastructure. There is investment that’s not public as well as public 

investment, and also Federal and State and local stakeholders with 

very clear interests. So arguably we’re going to have to have collaboration engaging multiple actors to achieve a resilient system 

over time. 

There are 4 major areas where we see the Department able to 

leverage some of our core competencies. 
5 

First, on integrated data, modeling and analysis. We can inform 

a systems understanding in support of decisionmaking. 

Second, strategic investments in technology research where we 

can address system vulnerabilities and opportunities. 

Third, policy analysis that can illuminate institutional barriers. 

Fourth, stakeholder engagement where we can help streamline 

the pathways for deployment and implementation. 

Building on the core competencies and thinking about these 

areas where we have capacity, we created a cross cutting internal 

group which we call the Water Energy Technology Team or the 

(WETT which is a nice little acronym), in the fall of 2012. It brings 

together over 100 participants from more than 20 different offices 

within the Department. We’re pursuing a variety of cross cutting 

activities. 

We’ve hosted workshops with the National Laboratories, which 

have scoped out data needs and options for future analysis there. 

We’re working with other agencies. For example, we’ve worked 

with EPA to identify areas for collaboration on the efficiency of 

water treatment, the energy demands on water treatment. 

In the Office of Fossil Energy, we have a funding announcement 

which is looking at innovative uses of waste heat from power 

plants and energy efficient water treatment options. 

These are just a few examples. 

One of the major accomplishments was the release of our report 

(and you mentioned it a moment ago) called ‘‘The Water/Energy 

Nexus: Challenges and Opportunities’’. It analyzes physical interconnections between the systems and the complex decisionmaking 

landscape that we see. 

Let me briefly describe some of its key conclusions: 

Energy and water systems are highly interdependent. 

We can’t assume that the future is like the past in terms of climate, technology or decision landscapes. 

Water scarcity, variability and uncertainty are becoming much 

more prominent potentially leading to increased vulnerability in 

the system. 

We need a more integrated approach to addressing the challenges and opportunities at this nexus. 

We think that we, at DOE (and we explain some of this in the 

report), have some key competencies that could contribute to this 

conversation. 

While it’s a lengthy report, it’s only a first step. Senators, you’ve 

also outlined, both of you, some of the needs for moving forward. 

We have to engage others outside the Department, stakeholders in 

other agencies and outside the government in successes. In this 

spirit we very much look forward to the discussion with you. 

Before I conclude let me just say a few words on S. 1971. 

The Administration is still reviewing the bill and doesn’t yet 

have a formal position. But I’d note that we very much applaud the 

committee’s efforts to address this really important issue. We’re in 

agreement that a close level of communication and coordination 

among agencies is important to advance our work. 

We think that DOE can make a contribution. Moving ahead we 

look forward to working with the committee as we take next steps. 

Thank you very much. 
6 

I look forward to any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Pershing follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JONATHAN PERSHING, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, 

OFFICE OF ENERGY POLICY AND SYSTEMS ANALYSIS, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Chair Landrieu and Chairman Schatz, Ranking Members Murkowski and Lee, 

and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) on S. 1971, Nexus of Energy and 

Water for Sustainability Act of 2014. The Administration has not completed its review of the bill. 

Last week, the Administration released a report entitled The Water-Energy 

Nexus: Challenges and Opportunities (U.S. Department of Energy 2014). This report 

provides a comprehensive analysis of the water-energy nexus and its many dimensions. Energy and water systems interact physically in many settings, including 

electricity generation, oil and gas production, bioenergy production, water treatment, and commercial and industrial facilities. Energy and water systems collectively include private infrastructure and investment, as well as Federal, state and 

local interests. Continuing analysis will be necessary to prioritize the appropriate 

collective approach, including the agencies (private, state, local, or Federal) and 

shares of any costs and responsibilities. 

The effort to date demonstrated by the extensive research and comprehensive nature of this report illustrates the Administration’s attention to this issue. In my testimony, I will provide an update on the Department’s activities in this area—one 

where I believe we share a mutual interest and concern. As we pursue our important mission areas of climate change, energy security and environmental responsibility, we must take into account dynamic interactions among our energy system, 

the population, the economy, other infrastructure systems and natural resources. 

One crucial interaction is that between our present-day energy and water systems. 

THE ENERGY-WATER SYSTEM

Action is required by private industry, as well as Federal, state, and local governments to ensure the development of the resilient, coupled energy-water systems of 

the future. We believe that the Energy Department, working in close cooperation 

with our interagency colleagues, is well positioned to help address the issues surrounding the energy-water nexus. 

In particular, the Department can leverage its core competencies around four 

major strategic elements, including: user-driven, integrated data, modeling and 

analysis (DMA); strategic technology development; policy analysis; and stakeholder 

engagement. 

Ultimately, we seek to: 

• Advance next-generation, user-driven toolsets for deeper insights and planning, 

drawing on leading capabilities at our national laboratories while working in 

concert with the Nation’s university community; 

• Develop options for new solutions through strategic investments in technology 

research that target high priority opportunity areas; 

• Analyze the policy space and ways to overcome institutional barriers that are 

preventing efficient and effective evolution of more resilient coupled energywater systems; and 

• Engage stakeholders in continuing discussions about alignment of these activities, pathways to implementation, and ways to create flexibility and institutional incentives in a rapidly changing decision landscape. 

Our rationale for such action is clear: energy systems depend on water for nearly 

all phases of energy recovery, production, and electricity generation. Although some 

forms of renewable energy use very little water, overall, the dependency of the Nation’s energy system on water is profound. Similarly, energy is essential to extract, 

convey, and deliver water of appropriate quality and quantity for diverse human 

uses, and then again to treat wastewaters prior to their return to the environment. 

Many operations in the energy sector rely on water, and many operations in the 

water sector rely on energy. They are inextricably linked. Developing ways to make 

our Nation’s energy system less dependent on water will reduce stress on the available water supply and, as the Nation’s energy system evolves, make sure that the 

needs of the newly configured system can be met. 

Given this tight inter-linkage, it is noteworthy that historically, energy and water 

systems have for the most part, been developed, managed, and regulated independently. However, recent events have focused attention on emerging stresses and 
7 

* Figure has been retained in subcommittee files. 

growing vulnerabilities at the energy-water nexus, raising concerns about how we 

think about and engineer this interconnection. To list only a few: 

• When severe drought affected more than a third of the United States in 2012, 

limited water availability constrained the operation of power plants and other 

energy production activities. Under such conditions, thermal efficiency decreased (meaning less power from each affected facility), water discharge temperatures increased, and with the latter there is increasing probability for 

compounding the problem through de-rating (reducing operations from full capacity) to manage discharge within acceptable limits. It is significant that approximately 40 percent of all freshwater withdrawals (and 49 percent of all combined fresh and saline water withdrawals) in the U.S. are for thermo-electric 

cooling. Energy and agriculture often compete for scarce water resources, a dynamic only partially offset by the fact that energy demands are largely non-consumptive uses (meaning water is returned) whereas agriculture are largely consumptive. • Hurricane Sandy demonstrated, in very real terms, the implications of another 

extreme weather event and the stresses encountered by the coupled system, 

such as power losses preventing the delivery of clean water as well as the treatment of wastewater and basic sanitation. • The recent rapid expansion of unconventional oil and gas development facilitated by hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling has also highlighted issues 

and catalyzed national discussions about energy and water interdependencies. 

There are implications not only for water quantity, but water quality as well. 

It is noteworthy that many productive fields are in arid and semi-arid regions. • Increasing water demands in arid areas can lead to increasing energy demands, 

with the trend toward increasing vulnerability. Figure 1* and Table 1 (included 

at the end of this text) reflect some of these growing demands for energy to 

manage water supplies in select western states. 

The water-energy infrastructure is long-planned and long-lived. Many factors influence our decisions on the coupled energy-water system, including changing 

weather patterns, population growth and migration, shifting patterns in economic 

development, changes in land use and land cover, technology development and deployment, and policy and institutional changes. This complex planning environment 

presents both challenges and opportunities. At the Department, and throughout the 

government, we need to better understand the system to ensure it is robust and resilient in the long term. 

With that goal of better understanding the system, I would now like to turn to 

current efforts of the Department on two fronts. The first is the creation within the 

Department of a cross-cutting organization, the Water Energy Technology Team 

(WETT) and its accomplishments to date. 

The second is last week’s release of the major report entitled The Water-Energy 

Nexus: Challenges and Opportunities that I touched on at the beginning of my testimony. 

WATER-ENERGY TECHNOLOGY TEAM

While DOE has been conducting research and development (R&D) related to the 

energy-water nexus for more than a decade, the formation of the WETT was 

prompted primarily by the Fall 2012 release of the fifth in a series of related reports 

from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) (GAO 2012). Following the GAO’s 

recommendations, the DOE conducted a series of internal workshops in the fall of 

2012 focused on power plant cooling, water in energy production, and DMA. 

This effort also leveraged two significant and related activities undertaken by 

DOE’s basic research program, the Office of Science. The first was a research community workshop involving representatives from many ‘‘water-interested’’ agencies. 

The resulting report, Community Modeling and Long-Term Predictions of the Integrated Water Cycle (DOE Office of Science 2012), has had impact on the conceptual 

framing of this topic. 

The second was a study on Climate and Energy-Water-Land System Interactions 

(PNNL 2012), summarizing results of a second workshop and follow-up analyses 

that similarly involved other agencies and agency-designated scientists. This activity was coordinated through two working groups of the U.S. Global Change Research Program. These two workshops and corresponding reports helped inform the 

scope of the problem, the research needs, and the range of tools and capabilities that 

would be required to address the integrated DMA challenges. They helped to broad-
8 

en our vision of important, complex dynamics. For example, and particularly for the 

second report, they informed our understanding of the increasing energy demands 

in arid areas, issues associated with thermal discharge restrictions, and, more generally, variation and characteristic differences spanning regions. Additionally, the 

latter report made a strong case for the need to consider land-use and land-cover 

change as a key element when exploring the energy-water nexus. 

As a result of the findings from these workshops and analyses, DOE formed the 

Water-Energy Technology Team that now includes well over 100 participants from 

more than 20 offices within the Department. It also includes representation from 

the national laboratories. It is currently organized into four working groups: (1) 

Data, Modeling, and Analysis, (2) Policy Frameworks and Analysis, (3) Stakeholder 

Coordination and Outreach, and (4) Technology Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment. These working groups, and the topics they address, are seen 

as part of an integrated systems approach. 

A sampling of current cross-cutting activities includes, but is not limited to: 

• The Data, Modeling, and Analysis team, which has: 

—Gathered more than 30 representatives from 11 national laboratories in early 

May of 2014 to begin considering options for future energy-water analysis 

strategies; 

—Instituted mechanisms to improve connections and synergies between offices; 

—Engaged other agencies for DMA, including the formation of a new ad hoc 

interagency working group for climate model downscaling to gain deeper, 

more consistent, and scientifically rigorous insights into U.S. regional climate 

outlooks for parameters of particular interest at the energy-water nexus; 

—Developed an extensive inventory of DOE and national laboratory core capabilities; and 

—Engaged the research community in various workshops and related venues. 

• The Office of Fossil Energy recently released a Funding Opportunity Announcement that includes requests for innovative uses of waste heat from power 

plants, low-cost water treatment options, and novel concepts for high-temperature heat exchange, all of which have water-energy implications. 

• ARPA-E recently held a workshop on breakthrough possibilities for air cooling 

of power plants (and other applications). 

• Through their most recent open solicitation, ARPA-E has invested in a project 

that takes a novel approach to the recovery of energy from waste heat via a 

closed-loop salt water/electricity generation cycle. 

• The Bioenergy Technology Office within the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) put out a Request for Information on the general topic 

of bio-waste-to-energy in FY 2014, and is planning a workshop on the topic in 

preparation for possible solicitations in FY 2015. Plans are to include both the 

EPA and external stakeholders in this effort. 

• The Advanced Manufacturing Office within EERE is supporting a project that 

was competitively awarded under the Innovative Manufacturing Initiative FOA 

and that proposes a unique combination of forward osmosis, membrane distillation, and anaerobic membrane bioreactors in order to achieve dramatic reductions in the energy requirements of industrial and municipal wastewater treatment. 

• The EPA and DOE are working closely together to identify potential areas for 

collaboration in improving the energy efficiency of water treatment, including 

the possibility of distributed generation of electricity from wastewater treatment 

plants. 

• The Energy Policy and Systems Analysis office has planned to target strategic 

areas of policy analysis interest, including issues related to the energy-water 

nexus in the Quadrennial Energy Review (QER). Just last week, at one of our 

scheduled public listening sessions on the QER, we focused specifically on energy and water. The two panels, with experts from state and local government, 

academia, the private sector and civil society, underscored the nature of this 

nexus—not least given the extreme drought facing the West, and their collective 

expectations that such extreme events would become more frequent as the climate changes. Both a background paper prepared for that meeting, as well as 

the full transcript of the session itself are available on the DOE website at: 

http://www.energy.gov/epsa/events/qer-public-meeting-san-francisco-water-energy-nexus. 

• DOE has participated in various national and international dialogs on this topic 

as part of focused and broader engagement efforts. 
9 

WATER-ENERGY REPORT

One of the major WETT accomplishments has been the preparation and June 18, 

2014 release of the report entitled The Water-Energy Nexus: Challenges and Opportunities. 

Overarching conclusions of the report include: 

• Energy and water systems are highly interdependent; • We cannot assume the future is like the past in terms of climate, technology, 

and the evolving decision landscape; • Water scarcity, variability, and uncertainty are becoming more prominent, potentially leading to vulnerabilities of the U.S. energy system; • We need a more integrated approach to address the challenges and opportunities of the water-energy nexus; • DOE has strong expertise in technology, modeling, analysis, and data that can 

contribute to understanding the issues and solutions across the entire nexus; 

and • Collaboration with DOE’s many current and potential partners is crucial. 

The report itself identifies six strategic pillars that inform approaches for addressing challenges across the water-energy nexus: 

1. Optimize the freshwater efficiency of energy production, electricity generation, and end use systems. 

2. Optimize the energy efficiency of water management, treatment, distribution, and end use systems. 

3. Enhance the reliability and resilience of energy and water systems. 

4. Increase safe and productive use of nontraditional water sources. 

5. Promote responsible energy operations with respect to water quality, ecosystem, and seismic impacts. 

6. Exploit productive synergies among water and energy systems. 

In context of these pillars, and in the area of DMA, DOE seeks to pursue advances for robust projections, scenarios, analyses at decision-relevant scales; characterization of uncertainty and risks; modeling and analysis of extreme events with 

insights into potential system shocks; interoperable DMA platforms, including a layered, integrated data system; and improvements in evaluation of models with observations, as well as more effective and direct use of observations to improve projections. Data and information needs span a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, 

requiring improved capacity for ‘‘telescopic resolution.’’ 

Technology R&D in areas such as the recovery of dissipated energy, advances in 

cooling systems, alternatives to freshwater in unconventional oil and gas, desalination, net-zero wastewater treatment, and efficient equipment and appliances can increase the options available to meet challenges. More generally, improvements in 

sensors, data collection, analysis, and reporting could yield benefits to multiple decision-makers. Addressing energy and water systems as an integrated whole can stimulate additional innovations. 

While the report seeks to outline some of the opportunities and risks in the energy-water system, it is clearly only a first step in a process that will need to engage 

many others outside the Department. It is thus intended as an opening to a much 

larger collaboration that will bring together many partners in the energy-water 

arena. Federal agencies have a role in the energy-water nexus, as do regional, state, 

tribal, and local authorities. Importantly, a diverse array of non-governmental organizations, including private companies, national non-governmental organizations 

(NGOs), foreign governments, universities, and municipal facilities must all be involved if we are to make adequate progress on these issues. It is in the interest of 

private firms to improve efficiency and continue to deliver their energy products reliably. Local and State governments that have primary regulatory jurisdiction in 

many of these areas will need and want to participate in prioritization of issues and 

seeking flexible solutions. If activities related to the energy-water nexus receive appropriations in future budgets, these activities could reside at multiple federal agencies that have authorities to undertake such activities, including DOE. We look forward to your reactions to this work. 

S.1971

Before I conclude, let me comment briefly on S.1971, the Nexus of Energy and 

Water for Sustainability Act of 2014. While the Administration is still reviewing this 

bill and does not have a formal position at this time, we appreciate the Committee’s 

efforts to address this issue. I can say that broadly we are in agreement that a close 

level of communication and coordination among federal agencies is important to ad-
10 

vancing our work on this increasingly vulnerable intersection of our energy and 

water systems. Moving forward, we would like to continue working with the Committee on preliminary concerns regarding the details of the collaborative structure 

and reporting provisions on issues related to the nexus of energy and water. 

CONCLUSION

DOE has undertaken an ambitious effort to respond to the challenge of the energy-water nexus. Strategic partnerships to advance and accelerate progress toward 

a robust and resilient energy and water system at the nexus of energy and water 

are important. 

Ultimately, the Energy Department’s longstanding leadership in modeling and 

technology research and development makes it well suited to contribute to the need 

for data-driven and empirical solutions to address energy system vulnerabilities 

arising from the coupled energy-water system. Forming the WETT, and the various 

accomplishments of our work to date, including our newly released report, are important. 

Thank you and I look forward to any questions you may have. 

REFERENCES

DOE Office of Science. ‘‘Community Modeling and Long-Term Predictions of 

the Integrated Water Cycle: Report from the September 2012 Workshop’’. September 2012. http://climatemodeling.science.energy.gov/f/2013/ 

WaterlCyclelReportlHighlRes.pdf 

Government Accountability Office (GAO). ‘‘Energy-Water Nexus: Information 

on the Quantity, Quality, and Management of Water Produced During Oil and 

Gas Production’’. January 2012. http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/587522.pdf 

Skaggs, Hibbard, Janetos, Rice. ‘‘Climate and Energy-Water-Land System 

Interactions’’ PNNL-21185. March 2012. http://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/ 

external/technicallreports/PNNL-21185.pdf 

U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘The Water-Energy Nexus: Challenges and Opportunities’’. June 2014. http://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/06/f16/ 

Water%20Energy%20Nexus%20Report%20June%202014.pdf 
11 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Dr. Pershing. 

Next we’ll hear from Dr. Iseman. Mr. Iseman. 

STATEMENT OF TOM ISEMAN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR WATER AND SCIENCE, DEPARTMENT OF THE 

INTERIOR 

Mr. ISEMAN. Mr. Iseman. 

Senator BALDWIN. Sorry. 

Mr. ISEMAN. I noticed I was between two Doctors. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. ISEMAN. Thank you, Senator Baldwin and Senator Murkowski. I’m Tom Iseman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water 

and Science at the Department of the Interior. Thanks for the opportunity to provide the views of the Department on S. 1971, the 

Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability Act of 2014. 

I would also like to thank the committee for the tremendous outreach to the Department as this legislation was developed. We appreciate the committee’s leadership on the energy/water nexus and 

the opportunity to work with you and your staff to address these 

issues. 
12 

In light of the Department of the Energy’s newly released report 

the Administration would like to conduct additional review of the 

bill. The Department is very supportive of the committee’s efforts 

and would like to work with you as this bill moves through the legislative process. 

The Department has a number of existing programs in place that 

are consistent with the goals of S. 1971 which I will summarize 

today, specifically as they relate to the Bureau of Reclamation and 

the U.S. Geological Survey. 

The USGS provides impartial scientific information on the health 

of our ecosystems and environment, the water and energy resources we rely on and the impacts of climate and land use change. 

Reclamation is the largest wholesaler of water and the second 

largest producer of hydropower in the United States. 

Interior has unique capabilities to understand and address the 

energy/water nexus. 

I want to provide several examples that illustrate how these 

agencies are conducting research and implementing strategies that 

address the important interconnections between energy and water. 

Understanding the value of interagency coordination, Interior 

has partnered with the Department of Energy and the Department 

of the Army through a 2010 memorandum of understanding to collaboratively address a host of energy/water nexus issues related to 

hydropower. By coordinating efforts these agencies have completed 

a number of projects that promote sustainable hydropower development. 

For example, as a result of the MOU Reclamation has completed 

hydropower resource assessments, updated policies to encourage 

non-Federal development of hydropower and partnered with DOE 

to test the impacts of a hydrokinetic device on open channel hydraulics. 

Earlier this month the Department announced that Reclamation will make a $17.8 million investment in WaterSMART and water 

and energy efficiency grants available to 36 new and ongoing 

projects in the Western United States for activities such as conserving and using water more efficiently, increasing the use of renewable energy, improving energy efficiency and carrying out activities to address climate related impacts on water. 

The USGS has been working with the Energy Information Administration since 2010 to improve estimates of water withdrawals 

and consumptive use associated with cooling water at thermoelectric generating plants across the Nation. Cooling water for such 

plants is the largest sector of water withdrawals in the United 

States. USGS with the assistance of the EIA developed a model 

that incorporates the heat budget of the thermoelectric generating 

plants that rely on water for cooling. 

The model can be used both to estimate current and historical 

water use and to forecast future water use with different plant configurations and cooling water technologies. 

Ultimately this information on thermoelectric water use can be 

incorporated into the USGS water census. As the energy sector is 

a primary user of water increased availability of water use information related to energy will be an important part of the water 

census. 
13 

Water availability, severe drought and long term climate trends 

have always posed a significant threat to energy development and 

electric generation. This is one of the broad systemic risks at the 

core of the energy/water nexus and a place where Interior would 

like to focus going forward. 

In conclusion the Department shares the committee’s goals to 

promote coordination between Federal agencies as it relates to the 

energy/water nexus. We appreciate the leadership of this committee in engaging Federal agencies to address these issues. 

I would be pleased to answer questions at the appropriate time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Iseman follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TOM ISEMAN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR WATER

AND SCIENCE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Chairman Schatz, Ranking Member Lee and members of the Subcommittee, I am 

Tom Iseman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Science at the Department 

of the Interior (Department). Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 1971, 

Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability Act of 2014. The Administration has 

not completed its review of S. 1971 in conjunction with the report issued by the Department of Energy last week, entitled The Energy-Water Nexus: Challenges and 

Opportunities (U.S. Department of Energy 2014). The bill would create a Committee 

or Subcommittee on Energy-Water Nexus for Sustainability under the National 

Science and Technology Council (NSTC), co-chaired by the Secretary of Energy and 

Secretary of the Interior. The Department has a number of existing programs that 

address many of these energy-water nexus issues, some of which are summarized 

below. 

Founded in 1879, the USGS is the Nation’s largest water, earth, and biological 

science and civilian mapping agency. The USGS collects, monitors, analyzes, and 

provides scientific understanding about natural resource conditions, issues, and 

problems. The USGS provides impartial scientific information on the health of our 

ecosystems and environment, the water and energy resources we rely on, and the 

impacts of climate and land-use change. With a diversity of scientific expertise, the 

USGS carries out large-scale, multi-disciplinary investigations and provides scientific information to resource managers, planners, and other customers. 

Reclamation owns and operates water projects that promote and sustain economic 

development within the 17 western States. The mission of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and 

economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Since it was established in 1902, Reclamation has constructed more than 600 dams and reservoirs 

including Hoover Dam on the Colorado River and Grand Coulee on the Columbia 

River. Reclamation is the largest wholesaler of water in the country, delivering 

water to more than 31 million people, and providing one out of five western farmers 

with irrigation water for 10 million acres of farmland across the United States. Reclamation is also the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United 

States, and provides significant amounts of renewable energy to customers throughout the West. 

EXISTING PROGRAMS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

The Department recognizes the importance of the energy-water nexus and supports a closer level of communication and coordination between the Department of 

the Interior, Department of Energy and the broader federal community. The Department of the Interior appreciates the Committee’s leadership on the energy-water 

nexus issue. Energy and water issues intersect across a range of Interior activities, 

including hydropower generation, energy development, electricity generation, and 

water treatment, distribution, and conservation. Interior has a variety of programs 

that address the energy-water nexus, including USGS monitoring systems and research programs (including the National Water Census), Reclamation Basin Studies, 

and WaterSMART Grants. Understanding the value of interagency coordination, Interior has partnered with the Department of Energy and the Department of the 

Army (working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) through a 2010 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to collaboratively address a host of energy-water 

nexus issues related to hydropower. By coordinating efforts, the signatory agencies 

have completed a number of projects that promote sustainable hydropower development, including hydropower resource assessments, unit-dispatch optimization sys-
14 

1Withdrawals are defined as water removed from the ground or diverted from a surface-water 

source for use. 

tems, climate change studies, integrated basin-scale opportunity assessments, and 

funding opportunities to demonstrate new small hydropower technologies. 

The Department is committed to integrating energy and water policies to promote 

the sustainable use of all resources, including incorporating water conservation criteria and the water/energy nexus into the Department’s planning efforts. On June 

9, 2014, the Department announced that Reclamation will make $17.8 million in 

WaterSMART Water and Energy Efficiency Grants available to 36 new and ongoing 

projects in the Western United States for activities such as conserving and using 

water more efficiently, increasing the use of renewable energy, improving energy efficiency, encouraging water markets, and carrying out activities to address climaterelated impacts on water. Reclamation also announced that it will make $1.8 million 

available for comprehensive water basin studies conducted jointly with state and 

local partners in the Upper Red River Basin in Oklahoma, Upper Deschutes River 

Basin in Oregon, and Missouri River Headwaters Basin in Montana. These announcements support the President’s Climate Action Plan by providing tools for 

states and water users to create water supply resilience to meet future water and 

energy demands in the face of a changing climate. 

Water and Energy Efficiency Grants and Basin Studies are part of the Department’s WaterSMART Program. WaterSMART Grants provide cost-shared funding to 

States, tribes, and other entities with water or power delivery authority for water 

efficiency improvements, with additional consideration given to proposals that include energy savings as a part of planned water efficiency improvements. Water 

management improvements that incorporate renewable energy sources are also 

prioritized for WaterSMART Grant funding. These grants directly address the energy-water nexus and provide a concrete means of implementing on-the-ground solutions to energy-water issues. The FY 2014 Water and Energy Efficiency Grant 

projects are expected to conserve more than 67,000 acre-feet of water annually and 

22.9 million kilowatt-hours of electricity—enough water for more than 250,000 people and enough electricity for more than 2,000 households. Basin Studies are collaborative studies, cost-shared with non-Federal partners, which analyze how climate change may affect water supply, demand and operations in the future and 

identify adaptation strategies to address imbalances in water supply and demand. 

In addition to long-standing USGS efforts in water supply and availability and in 

energy resource assessments and research, which provide an essential foundation 

for understanding issues related to the energy-water nexus, the USGS participates 

in a number of interagency efforts. The USGS has been working with the Energy 

Information Administration (EIA) since 2010 to improve estimates of water withdrawals1 and consumptive use associated with cooling water at thermoelectric generating plants across the Nation. Cooling water for such plants is the largest sector 

of water withdrawals in the United States, at 49% of all water withdrawals nationwide, according to USGS Circular 1344, Estimated Use of Water in the United 

States in 2005. A recent USGS report, Methods for Estimating Water Consumption 

for Thermoelectric Power Plants in the United States (Scientific Investigations Report 2013-5188), documents the model that the USGS developed with the assistance 

of the EIA for estimating electric generating plant water withdrawals and consumptive use, which are currently not consistently reported. This ground-breaking model, 

which incorporates the heat budget of each of the approximately 1,300 thermoelectric generating plants that rely on water for cooling, can be used both to estimate current and historical water use and to forecast future water use with different plant configurations and cooling water technologies. 

In addition to the efforts above, the FY 2015 President’s Budget requests an addi- tional $2 million for the USGS to provide water use grants to States that will increase availability and quality of water use data—including data related to water 

used for energy. These grants would provide financial resources, through State 

water resources agencies, to improve the availability and quality of water use data 

that they collect and would integrate those data with the USGS Water Census. 

Funding provided to States through these grants would be targeted at improvements to water use data collection and integration that will be of the greatest benefit to a national assessment of water availability and use. As the energy sector is 

a primary user of water, increased availability of water use information related to 

energy will be an important part of this effort. 

In mid-April 2014, the USGS released an expanded and updated version of the 

USGS oil, gas, and geothermal Produced Waters Database and Map Viewer; the revised database contains nearly 100,000 new samples from conventional and unconventional well types, including geothermal. The availability of more samples and 
15 

more types of analyses will help farmers determine the quality of local produced 

water available for possible remediation and reuse, will enable local and national 

resource managers to track the composition of trace elements, and will help industry 

plan for waste-water injection and recycling. 

The Powder River Basin in northern Wyoming and southern Montana has experienced a rapid expansion in the development of coalbed natural gas. About 90 billion 

liters of water were produced annually in the Wyoming portion of the Basin between 

2002 and 2011 as part of the extraction process. The produced waters are moderately saline and have high proportions of sodium relative to calcium and magnesium, thus rendering the waters unsuitable for irrigation without treatment. USGS 

studies have examined the environmental impacts of different disposal options. Results indicated that infiltration impoundments had the potential to contaminate underlying fresh groundwater supplies, but that with specific treatment the produced 

waters could be used in subsurface drip irrigation operations that minimized potential for groundwater contamination and provided beneficial use of the waters to enhance agricultural production in this semiarid region. 

Other Departmental programs and activities relate directly to the energy-water 

nexus, including hydropower development, water treatment and desalination, pumping and water delivery, BLM energy permitting, and USGS research on energy resources and induced seismicity. We are happy to provide the Committee with additional information on these programs as needed. 

S. 1971, NEXUS OF ENERGY AND WATER FOR SUSTAINABILITY ACT OF 2014

Section 3 of S. 1971 requires the Director of the Office of Science and Technology 

Policy to establish either a Committee or Subcommittee on Energy-Water Nexus for 

Sustainability under the NSTC, co-chaired by the Secretary of Energy and Secretary 

of the Interior. The Committee or Subcommittee is directed to: (1) serve as a forum 

for developing common federal goals and plans on energy-water nexus issues; (2) 

promote coordination of the related activities of several federal departments and 

agencies identified in the bill; (3) coordinate and develop capabilities for data collection, categorization, and dissemination of data from and to other federal departments and agencies; and (4) engage in information exchange between federal departments and agencies. 

Section 4 of S. 1971 requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget 

to submit to Congress a report that includes an interagency budget crosscut that: 

(1) displays the budget proposed for the upcoming fiscal year, including any interagency or intra-agency transfer, for each of the federal agencies that carry out energy-water nexus projects and (2) identifies all federal and state expenditures since 

2011 on energy-water nexus projects. The report to Congress would also provide a 

detailed accounting of all funds received and obligated by all Federal and State 

agencies with energy-water implementation responsibilities during the previous fiscal year and list all energy-water nexus projects to be undertaken in the upcoming 

fiscal year, with the federal portion of funds for those projects. 

The Department appreciates the Committee’s leadership and the opportunity to 

strengthen capabilities to address the energy-water nexus. Given the breadth and 

many facets of this issue, we support close collaboration with the DOE and other 

Federal agencies. Moving forward, we would like to continue working with the Committee on preliminary concerns regarding the details of the collaborative structure 

and reporting provisions on issues related to the nexus of energy and water. The 

Department supports interagency collaboration and information sharing to support 

sound decision-making, leverage resources, and reduce duplication. But, the Administration believes this can be done through more effective and efficient collaboration 

and program management, rather than an unduly and potentially ineffective reporting requirement. 

If enacted, it is the Department’s view that the committee or subcommittee created under S. 1971 should focus its attention on key vulnerabilities where there is 

an appropriate federal role and capability to have a positive impact. It is the Department’s view that that focus should be on data gaps associated with water use 

and availability. 

Water availability, severe drought, and long-term climate trends have always 

posed a significant risk to energy development and electric generation. This is one 

of the broad, systemic risks at the core of the energy-water nexus. Decreased water 

availability, prolonged drought, and more pronounced climate trends could increase 

that risk and require the use of accelerated adaptation strategies. 

The Department supports the type of coordination and data exchange encouraged 

under S. 1971 and is already undertaking a number of steps to do so as discussed 

in the testimony above. Such efforts could help close existing gaps, increasing our 
16 

understanding of water supply availability to benefit water and energy decision 

makers. 

If enacted, S. 1971 may present challenges to the Department. The Department 

would need to evaluate whether the commitments and reporting requirements in the 

bill may require additional resources to carry them out. Additionally, while S. 1971 

allows for the coordination of federal activities, the Department would like to stress 

the importance of providing the scientific community with autonomy to design and 

execute studies. Finally, States play the key role in allocating and administering 

water, and they must be a partner in energy-water efforts. S. 1971 does not address 

the important relationships with states and the private sector, where significant 

work on energy-water nexus projects is accomplished. Finally, as drafted, it is unclear to the Department what qualifies as an ‘‘energy-water nexus project’’ under S. 

1971. 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the Department shares the Committee’s goals to promote coordination between Federal agencies as it relates to the energy-water nexus. We appreciate the leadership of this Committee in engaging Federal agencies. The Department has numerous programs in place that encourage coordination not only within 

the Federal Government, but as public-private partnerships. The Federal Government has a role in providing leadership and tools to address the challenges of imbalance between supply and demand. Sustainable water supplies and energy use are 

important parts of a stable economic base, employment continuity, and smart 

growth. 

I would be pleased to answer any questions the Subcommittee may have. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Iseman. 

Dr. Carter. 

STATEMENT OF NICOLE T. CARTER, PH.D., SPECIALIST IN 

NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH 

SERVICE 

Ms. CARTER. Thank you, Senator Baldwin and Senator Murkowski. My name is Nicole Carter. I’m a specialist in natural resources policy at the Congressional Research Service. Thank you 

for inviting CRS to testify on S. 1971, the NEWS Act. 

In serving the U.S. Congress in a non partisan and objective 

basis, CRS takes no position on this legislation. We have been 

asked to provide background and analysis. 

S. 1971 would require the Director of the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy to establish within the National Science and 

Technology Council a committee or subcommittee on energy/water 

nexus for sustainability. Here and after referred to as the NEWS 

Committee. 

This cabinet level council and its committees are the principle 

means for the executive branch to coordinate science and technology policy across the Federal Government. The NEWS Committee would be co-chaired by the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of the Interior. It would be tasked with coordinating Federal 

investments in science and technology to address energy/water 

nexus issues. This effort would cover at least 13 Federal departments, agencies and offices. 

S. 1971 identifies duties of the NEWS Committee. 

Providing a forum for developing Federal energy/water nexus 

goals and plans. 

Identifying opportunities to advance nexus science and technologies including through public/private partnerships. 

S. 1971 also would require annual energy/water cross cut budget 

of Federal and State funding. 
17 

Delivering water to communities, industries and agriculture and 

treating municipal waters and waste waters consumes energy. 

Similarly population distribution, electricity demand and domestic energy development influences how much and where the energy 

sector relies on water to cool power plants, to generate hydropower 

and to produce conventional and unconventional fuels. 

In a 2013 review of global corporations 45 percent of energy companies indicated that water stress or scarcity represented a direct 

risk to their business operations. While many Federal entities collect data and support research relevant to the energy/water nexus 

and in the case of the Department of Energy there’s a recently released departmental strategy. 

Actions to coordinate and strategically plan Federal energy/water 

nexus efforts have been limited. A few Federal entities have attempted to have a collaboration, like we just heard from Tom, and 

while some of these have produced results the impacts of others remain to be seen. For example, significant data gaps persist. The 

water use data for oil extraction and refining that are commonly 

cited are decades old, poorly documented, lack verification and represent limited samples. Such data gaps persist in part because the 

energy sector is largely private, dispersed and quickly evolving. 

Ensuring data consistency, accuracy and currency can require investment of effort and resources. S. 1971 would task the NEWS 

Committee to engage in information exchange as well as promote 

data collection and dissemination. 

Regarding the impact of S. 1971. 

The bill would provide the executive branch with Congressional 

direction to coordinate Federal energy/water science and technology 

investments and provide both the forum and budget information to 

strategically ameliorate energy/water issues through targeted results from Federal research and science programs across the Federal Government. 

The annual cross cut budget requirement in S. 1971 may pose 

some implementation challenges. 

First, a key term for the cross cut, the energy/water nexus 

projects is not defined. 

Second, the requirement to include State government expenditures from all 50 states and expenditures back to FY2011 may be 

difficult to assemble. 

Except for the cross cut budget, S. 1971 requires no specific deliverable and limits its direction to the NEWS Committee on how 

to accomplish its duties and measure its success. That is, the legislation provides the NEWS Committee with implementation flexibility. 

While implementing S. 1971 would require an investment of resources and staff it also has the potential to produce benefits. 

It may assist in focusing Federal research on priority nexus challenges. Thereby fostering the technology, science and data to mitigate energy/water nexus related business risk and to more reliably 

deliver affordable energy and water. 

Thank you. I’m happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Carter follows:] 
18 

1 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Energy-Water Nexus: Coordinated Federal 

Approach Needed to Better Manage Energy and Water Tradeoffs, GAO-12-880, September 2012, 

http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/648306.pdf. 2 Carbon Disclosure Project, Moving beyond business as usual: A need for a step change in 

water risk management, CDP Global Water Report 2013, 2013. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF NICOLE T. CARTER, PH.D., SPECIALIST IN NATURAL

RESOURCES POLICY, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE

Chairman Schatz, Ranking Member Lee, Members of the subcommittee, my name 

is Nicole Carter. I am a Specialist in Natural Resources Policy at the Congressional 

Research Service (CRS). Thank you for inviting CRS to testify on S. 1971, The 

Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability Act (the NEWS Act). In serving the 

U.S. Congress on a non-partisan and objective basis, CRS takes no position on this 

legislation, but has been asked by the Subcommittee to provide background and 

analysis of the legislation and its context. CRS remains available to assist the Subcommittee in its consideration of this legislation, related issues, and potential concerns among affected stakeholders. 

DESCRIPTION OF LEGISLATION

S. 1971 would require the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy 

to establish a Committee or Subcommittee on Energy-Water Nexus for Sustainability (hereinafter referred to as the NEWS Committee). The NEWS Committee 

would be within the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). The NSTC 

was established by Executive Order 12882 on November 23, 1993. This Cabinetlevel council is the principal means within the executive branch to coordinate 

science and technology policy across the federal research and development enterprise. A primary objective of the NSTC is the establishment of clear national goals 

for federal science and technology investments; the NSTC also prepares research 

and development strategies coordinated across federal agencies to form investment 

packages aimed at accomplishing these goals. 

The NEWS Committee would coordinate federal energy-water nexus efforts, which 

the bill defines as the link between (1) energy efficiency and the water quantity 

needed to produce fuels and energy and (2) the energy needed for transporting and 

treating water. It would be co-chaired by the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary 

of the Interior and include at minimum 11 other identified federal departments, 

agencies, or offices. The duties of the NEWS Committee would include the following: 

• providing a forum for development of federal energy-water nexus goals and 

plans, • promoting coordination of energy-water nexus activities across federal agencies, • supporting federal energy-water nexus data capabilities and dissemination, and • identifying opportunities to advance energy-water nexus science and technologies, including through public-private partnerships and innovative financing. 

S. 1971 also would require an annual energy-water crosscut budget of federal and 

state funding of energy and water nexus projects to be transmitted within 30 days 

of the President’s budget submission to this Committee and two House Committees. 

Currently, few activities are identified as energy-water nexus related in federal 

budget and appropriations documents, although we know that numerous federal 

programs, activities, and grants support energy-water nexus research and data, 

often as part of their broader missions. 

FEDERAL ENERGY-WATER NEXUS EFFORTS

A 2012 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report provides some context for 

this legislation. It described how the lack of comprehensive energy-water data and 

research hampers effective policy choices; the report stated: ‘‘Congress and federal 

agencies may be making decisions that affect energy and water supplies without 

fully understanding the impact of these decisions.’’1 In a 2013 review of global corporations’ disclosures, 45% of energy companies indicated that water stress or scarcity represented a direct risk to their business operations.2

Domestic energy development, electricity demand, and population distribution affect how much and where the energy sector relies on water to cool power plants, 

to produce conventional and unconventional fuels, and generate hydropower. Similarly, delivering water to communities, industries, and agriculture and treating municipal and industrial wastewaters consumes energy. While many federal entities 

collect energy-water nexus relevant data, support related research, and in the case 

of the Department of Energy have a departmental strategy, the coordination and 
19 

3See, for example, crosscut budget provisions for Great Lakes restoration (P.L. 113-76, Division E, Title VII, Section 738; 128 Stat. 238); and proposed crosscut budget provisions in H.R. 

2773 (Great Lakes Ecological and Economic Protection Act of 2013, as introduced) and H.R. 

2954 (Title X of the proposed Public Access and Lands Improvement Act, 113th Congress, 

Chesapeake Bay Accountability and Recovery Act, House-passed). 

strategic planning of federal energy-water nexus efforts have been limited and of 

limited impact in guiding research and improving investments and policy choices. 

Some agencies have taken steps to improve energy-water nexus data collection and 

dissemination of research results and attempted some targeted collaboration. However, the results and impact of these efforts to date remain to be seen. For example, 

the Multi-Agency Collaboration on Unconventional Oil and Gas Resources consisting 

of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),targeted release of a multi-year research plan by January 2013; the plan has yet to be made public. Another example 

of mixed results is the availability of reliable data for informing policies and public 

debates. Significantly more data and analysis are available today than five years 

ago on the water use associated with different thermoelectric power generation technologies and fuels; however, significant data gaps remain regarding water use associated with fuels, especially on a water use per unit of energy produced basis. For 

example, the water use data for oil extraction and refining that are often cited are 

decades old, poorly documented, lack verification, or represent limited samples. Energy-water data gaps persist in part because improving available data is challenging: much of the energy sector is private, dispersed, and quickly evolving; and 

ensuring data consistency, accuracy, and currency is challenging and can require an 

investment of resources and effort. 

S. 1971 would assign the NEWS Committee to engage in information exchange, 

collaboration, and promote data collection and dissemination. The legislation also 

calls for the NEWS Committee to identify opportunities for public-private partnerships and collaborations. Together these efforts may stimulate innovation in related 

science and technologies and assist in addressing in the long-run some of these persistent data and knowledge gaps that remain for the United States and internationally. 

As previously noted, S.1971 would require an annual crosscut budget of nexus activities. The U.S. Department of Energy’s activities can illustrate how crosscuts may 

provide federal funding information that otherwise would not be available. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 directs the Secretary of Energy to carry out a program to 

address the energy-water nexus and assess the effectiveness of existing programs 

at DOE and other federal agencies. To date, DOE has neither received nor requested any funding specifically designated to carry out this provision; however, the 

department has been active in various energy-water research efforts. A crosscut 

budget would presumably document any federal spending on energy-water related 

activities such as this, even if they do not appear as appropriations line-items. The 

energy-water crosscut budget could be of use to Congress, the executive branch including the NEWS Committee, and non-federal stakeholders. 

IMPACT OF LEGISLATION

Regarding the impact of S. 1971, the bill would provide congressional direction to 

the Administration on how to accomplish federal energy-water nexus coordination, 

and provide the forum and budget information for development of integrated multiagency research plans. 

The crosscut budget requirement in S. 1971 may pose some implementation challenges. First, while S. 1971 defines ‘‘energy-water nexus,’’ the term ‘‘energy-water 

nexus project’’ is not defined. In particular, the bill does not clarify whether this 

term is limited to research, development, and demonstration or includes infrastructure and other larger-scale investments. Second, the requirement to include state 

government expenditures from all 50 states and expenditure data back to FY2011 

may be difficult to accomplish. It is unclear if state governments would have incentives to cooperate, and if the aggregated data state data would be sufficiently consistent to be useful to the crosscut budget effort. In the face of challenges like these, 

other existing and proposed federal crosscut budget provisions have utilized joint 

federal-state institutions or narrowly limited the nature of state-level information 

to be compiled.3 For crosscut budgets to be most useful they need to be accurate 

and targeted at the most pertinent information for decision-making in order to reduce unnecessary effort and cost associated with their compilation. 

Except for the annual crosscut budget, S. 1971 requires no specific deliverable and 

provides little direction to the Administration on how the NEWS Committee should 

accomplish its duties or measure its success. S. 1971 does provide the OSTP Direc-
20 

tor discretion to terminate the NEWS Committee after 10 years based on a determination of its relevance and effectiveness. The flexibility S. 1971 provides to the 

NEWS Committee may allow it to anticipate and respond to developments affecting 

the energy-water nexus as they arise (which can be rapid, as illustrated by the 

quick rise of unconventional oil and gas development since the late 2000s), to be 

innovative in how it coordinates, and how participating federal agencies engage nonfederal and private entities. 

While S. 1971’s implementation would likely require an investment of resources 

and staff (e.g., to accomplish the coordination, prepare plans, and assemble data and 

crosscut budgets), it also has the potential to produce benefits. It may result in research plans that reduce duplicative research efforts, knowledge to help avoid unintended policy outcomes, and technologies to more reliably deliver affordable energy 

and water, efficiently use and conserve natural resources, and mitigate energywater nexus related business risks. 

This concludes my statement. Thank you. I am happy to answer any questions 

you may have at the appropriate time. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Dr. Carter. 

Next we’ll call on Ms. Ray. 

STATEMENT OF ANDA RAY, VICE PRESIDENT FOR ENVIRONMENT AND CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER, ELECTRIC 

POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 

Ms. RAY. Thank you, Ranking Member Murkowski, Senator 

Baldwin and all the members of the committee. I am Anda Ray. 

I’m the Vice President and Chief Sustainability Officer for the Electric Power Research Institute, often referred to as EPRI. We really 

thank you for letting us testify here today. 

For over 40 years EPRI has conducted research and development 

relating to the generation, delivery and use of electricity to benefit 

the public. EPRI is a non-profit, independent organization which 

brings together scientists and engineers, along with experts in academia and industry to address the challenges associated with electricity, be it reliability, environmental issues, safety issues, efficiency, affordability. 

EPRI’s members represent about 90 percent of all of the electricity generated in the United States. We have about 700 staff and 

an annual budget of about $400 million. 

So one of the most important areas of research for EPRI is water. 

Water availability is clearly and we’ve all identified this, a critical 

issue for the power sector. Many of the power plants and the thermoelectric plants were designed to take advantage of the plentiful 

water resources. 

Water is used for cooling in all types of thermoelectric plants, be 

it nuclear, oil, coal, gas, biofuels and even solar thermal. It’s used 

in those same plants as well for fuel processing, ash handling, 

scrubbing of emissions and of course, the potable water requirements for the work force. 

It’s important to note that while the electric sector is responsible 

for approximately 40 percent of the fresh water withdrawal in the 

United States, it represents about 5 percent of the actual consumption because most of the water that is used for cooling is actually 

returned to the source. 

Now while water is critical to the electric power industry, we’ve 

all identified that the reverse is true as well. Without electricity 

most Americans would not have access to clean water or effective 

waste water treatment. EPRI’s research on electricity needed to 
21 

transport and treat water has focused mainly on the characterization and conservation of electricity used for those purposes. 

Our analysis shows that the amount of electricity used for drinking water which is primarily pumping and for waste water for 

treatment which is primarily for aeration to remove the organic 

matter and nutrients, accounts for approximately 2 percent all of 

the Nation’s electric usage. With the increase in the desalination 

process, electricity is going to increase proportionately as well. 

So it’s clear that the economic viability of the Nation’s communities is very dependent on getting both reasonably priced fresh 

water and having affordable electricity. 

Now since the 1970s EPRI has been using its collaborative research model to focus on 3 primary areas of the energy/water 

nexus. 

The first is the cooling of thermal power plants. 

The second is on water availability. 

The third is reducing energy used in the transportation and 

treatment of water. 

All of these are encompassed in the proposed NEWS Act. 

If I may I’d like to give you two examples of research that address some of the issues associated with the energy/water nexus. 

Starting with EPRI’s water analytics research. 

This research includes the development of methodologies and 

tools to help us better understand and sustainably manage our 

water resources. This tool compares regional watershed uses from 

all industry sectors with that same region’s watershed availability 

of water, both ground water and surface water. You can see that 

comparing those, what’s taken out and what goes in, is very obviously a regional specific type of analysis. 

The second example is on EPRI’s collaborative research for thermoelectric cooling. EPRI and along with the National Science Foundation have joined to launch a joint—have joined together to 

launch a research program to develop advanced cooling technologies. Some of these technologies also show promise for application in other industries as well such as the data management and 

refrigeration industry. 

So EPRI and the National Science, excuse me, National Science 

Foundation have funded approximately $6 million over a period of 

3 years. We’ve identified in our funding 10 different projects. 

So the NEWS Act would also serve to coordinate and develop capabilities associated with the dissemination and collection of data 

with other Federal agencies. We want to encourage you that we 

think it’s important as well to encourage the public/private partnerships and synergies with sharing with that data. EPRI already 

works with Federal agencies to exchange information in many 

ways. For example EPRI serves as a member of the Federal Advisory Committee on Water and Information providing data to both 

the EPA, Department of Interior and others. 

So in summary, I just want to mention that over 4 decades of research EPRI has identified very similar gaps as noted in the 

NEWS Act. There is clearly a need for better coordination of energy/water activities among Federal agencies as well as the public/ 

private entities. There is clearly a need for more consistent and accessible, high quality data and of course, there is clearly a need to 
22 

identify and conduct appropriate research to support the adoption 

of efficient technologies. 

In closing I’d like to thank Senator Murkowski and her staff, especially Ron Falbish, for devoting so much attention to an issue 

that is not only critical to the power sector, but for the well being 

of the Nation. 

I’d like to also acknowledge the Department of Energy’s increased focus on leadership under Secretary Moniz and the Department of the Interior’s work, especially through the USGS, in providing important data related to the energy/water nexus. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before the committee 

today. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Ray follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ANDA RAY, VICE PRESIDENT FOR ENVIRONMENT AND CHIEF

SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER, ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Chairman Schatz, Chairman Landrieu, Ranking Member Murkowski, Ranking 

Member Lee: My name is Anda Ray, and I am Vice President for Environment and 

Chief Sustainability Officer for the Electric Power Research Institute, frequently referred to as EPRI. 

Thank you for inviting me to testify before the Water and Power Subcommittee 

of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on the subject of the energy-water nexus and S.1971, the Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability 

(NEWS) Act of 2014. This is certainly a critical issue not only for the power sector, 

but also the long-term well being of the Nation. 

EPRI conducts research and development relating to the generation, delivery and 

use of electricity for the benefit of the public. An independent, nonprofit organization, EPRI brings together its scientists and engineers as well as experts from academia and industry to help address challenges in electricity, including, reliability, 

efficiency, affordability, health, safety and the environment. EPRI’s members represent approximately 90 percent of the electricity generated in the United States. 

EPRI has some 700 staff and an annual budget of nearly $400 million. EPRI’s principal offices and laboratories are located in Palo Alto, CA; Charlotte, NC; Knoxville, 

TN and Lenox, MA. 

Water availability represents a growing concern for meeting future power generation needs. Thermoelectric plants of all types, including nuclear, coal, oil, gas, solar 

thermal and biofuels were designed to use the once plentiful water resources as 

their primary cooling component. And the need for cooling water continues today, 

at a time of declining supply, both globally and domestically. In the United States, 

projected population growth rates, energy consumption patterns, and demand from 

competing water use sectors will increase pressure on power generators to reduce 

water use. Water is critical to the electric power industry. It is also used for such 

things as fuel processing, ash handling, scrubbing, landscape integration, and potable requirements for power plants. In addition, the economic viability of the nation’s 

communities served by the electric power sector depends on the availability of reasonably priced freshwater. 

Approximately 40% of all fresh water withdrawals in the United States are by the 

electric sector. However, the electric power sector is responsible for only approximately 5% of the nation’s total freshwater consumption, making it one of the least 

‘‘consumptive’’ industry sectors. That is because, most of the water withdrawals are 

not consumed, but returned to its source. 90% of the water withdrawn is used for 

cooling purposes, primarily for condensing steam exhaust from the turbines that 

drive the generators. 

While water is critical to the electric power industry, the reverse is also true: electricity is critical to water. Without electricity, most Americans would not have access to clean water. Approximately 2% of electricity in the United States is used to 

transport and treat water and wastewater. 

EPRI is founded on a collaboration model and water resource research has been 

an important body of work since the 1970s. EPRI has focused on thermal power 

plant cooling, water availability and reducing energy use for the transportation and 

treatment of water. All of which are encompassed in the scope of the proposed 

NEWS Act. 
23 

I will briefly describe some of EPRI’s work related to energy conservation for 

water, and water conservation for energy research as relevant to informing this 

hearing. 

I’ll start with an example of the need for consistently reported, high quality data. 

EPRI’s water analytics research includes development of methodologies and tools to 

better understand and sustainably manage water resources and risk management 

needs at national, regional and local levels. EPRI’s ‘‘Water PRISM’’ model can be 

used to evaluate water allocations for all sectors, including energy, municipal, agricultural, industrial and ecosystem requirements. The model can be used to project 

water needs for the next 30-50 years, including conservation efforts in each sector, 

and to assist in determining whether use of the available finite water resource can 

be sustained and maintained. Water Prism focuses on modeling at the watershed 

level, since there are significant regional variations in water use and availability. 

The model relies on data that is often provided by federal agencies such as the 

United States Geological Survey (USGS) and United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), state and local governments, and industry. You can see where access to high quality data sets is imperative to attain accurate modeling of future 

conditions. 

Another example is where the adoption of innovative technologies can lead to 

more efficient energy utilization practices for water use. EPRI’s research on energy 

use for water work focuses on characterization and conservation of electricity used 

for transport, treatment and distribution of water and wastewater. U.S. public 

drinking water systems use roughly 39.2 billion kWh per year, which corresponds 

to about 1% of total electricity use in the U.S. Most of the energy use is related 

to pumping. A small percentage of water is supplied from the desalination of sea 

water and brackish water (less than 4%), but this is growing. Desalination is the 

most energy intensive process with respect to water supply. Municipal wastewater 

treatment systems in the U.S. use approximately 30.2 billion kWh per year, or 

about 0.8% of total electricity use in the U.S. There exist various technologies ready 

for pilot testing or proof of concept research that have the potential to increase energy efficiencies both for water delivery and waste water treatment such as advanced microbial deammonification and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition 

(SCADA) systems. Collaborative and synergistic research is going to be key to 

leveraging the finite resources that are dedicated to research and development. 

The final area of research I’d like to mention, specifically addresses thermoelectric 

generation. I have saved this for last because it is perhaps the most central to the 

hearing today. Since most of the water withdrawn by the power sector is used for 

cooling purposes, it is understandable that much of EPRI’s research on water is directed towards improved options for thermoelectric cooling. Since one technology 

cannot meet all of the requirements for every power plant, EPRI has funded a suite 

of research projects on multiple fronts. Each technology has benefits and tradeoffs, 

with initial barriers such as initial cost, operating and maintenance issues, efficiency penalties, environmental impacts, reliability and safety. Our collaborative research programs have targeted these issues by addressing the following: 

• Reducing the cost and energy penalties associated with dry cooling 

• Developing new water saving wet, dry and hybrid cooling technologies 

• Identifying and characterizing degraded water sources such as municipal wastewater treatment plant effluent, agricultural discharges, storm water runoff, 

water produced in association with oil and gas extraction, and brackish groundwater, and 

• Researching more efficient treatment technologies to reduce the cost of wastewater and degraded water treatment and reuse. 

A collaborative, public-private industry-wide effort is needed to evaluate the performance of a number of innovative new ideas, lab prototypes, and early stage commercial technologies that have the potential to reduce plant water use anywhere 

from 15% to 100% while substantially limiting adverse impacts on power production. Research to develop the design basis for the technologies and to demonstrate 

them in actual power plant environments is necessary. To help advance this research agenda, EPRI has actively pursued partnerships with the National Science 

Foundation and the Department of Energy, and partnered with industry and academia to leverage research funding and results. As an example industry partnership, EPRI is collaborating with Georgia Power Corporation (GPC) and Southern 

Company Services (SCS) to support the Water Research Center (WRC), located at 

Plant Bowen in Cartersville, GA. The WRC is an important option in the Water 

R&D ‘‘pipeline’’ to accomplish the advanced cooling and water treatment research 

objectives described above. 
24 

The NEWS Act would encourage information exchange between Federal Departments and agencies ‘‘to leverage existing programs by encouraging joint solicitation’s, block grants, and matching programs with non-Federal entities,’’ and ‘‘to 

identify opportunities for public-private partnerships, innovative financing mechanisms, and grant challenges.’’ EPRI’s collaborative business model has long found 

such partnerships to be productive in advancing science and technology for the benefit of the public, the industry and government. There is always room for greater 

collaboration to increased opportunities to leverage scarce resources 

For example, EPRI and the National Science Foundation have joined together to 

launch a joint research program to develop advanced cooling technologies. Each organization has contributed funds totaling $6M over 3 years, and EPRI and the NSF 

have funded 10 promising cooling projects. EPRI and the NSF recently held a joint 

workshop to review these 10 projects. This public-private partnership is leveraging 

both industry money and federal money to develop technologies with the promise 

of providing novel ways of cooling with substantially less water consumption. Some 

of these technologies show promise not only for power plant cooling, but for many 

other types of cooling application as well. 

EPRI has also explored developing a collaborative research arrangement with the 

Department of Energy (DOE) on thermoelectric cooling research. EPRI has experience coordinating research programs with DOE in other areas. For example, in 2010 

EPRI and DOE executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with DOE in the 

area of Nuclear Plant Long Term Operations research. This MOU calls on EPRI and 

the DOE to periodically map the related research of each organization, helping ensure that EPRI and DOE take advantage of each other’s scientific findings, avoid 

duplication of effort, and advance joint objectives. Should DOE ramp up its cooling 

technology efforts, such an arrangement with energy-water nexus research could be 

helpful as well. 

The NEWS Act would also serve to ‘‘coordinate and develop capabilities for data 

collection, categorization, and dissemination from and to other Federal departments 

and agencies.’’ I would note that coordinating and disseminating data to and within 

the private sector is important as well, to encourage public-private partnerships and 

synergies. 

Since a major focus of the NEWS act is coordination of energy-water nexus efforts 

within the federal government and engagement with the private sector, it is appropriate to mention some of the ways EPRI can already see the many facets of government that are already engaging, in some way, in the Energy-Water nexus. EPRI, 

along with other organizations representing diverse public and private water resource stakeholder groups, serves on the Federal Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI). Through ACWI, EPRI provides technical advice to USEPA, 

USDI, USDA, USACE, TVA and NOAA. EPRI belongs to the Energy/Water Nexus 

Group, a consortium of national energy laboratories actively engaged in studying 

the energy/water nexus. EPRI also partnered with national energy laboratories and 

the University of Texas on an investigation of the Water Constraints on Western 

Energy Interconnects, funded by USDOE on behalf of WECC and ERCOT. In addition, EPRI co-authored, along with Sandia, Los Alamos and NETL, the USDOE report, Energy Demands on Water Resources, Report to Congress on the Interdependency of Energy and Water (2006). 

In summary, with almost 4 decades of research in this area, EPRI has identified 

some similar gaps as those in the NEWS Act. There is a need for better coordination 

of energy-water activities among federal entities, as well as the public and private 

sectors. There is a need for more consistent, transparent and high quality data. And 

of course, there is ongoing need to identify and conduct appropriate research to support the adoption of effective, efficient and affordable innovative technologies. 

EPRI looks forward to continued growth in public/private cooperation to address 

this strategic research need. With your assistance, the United States can become a 

leader in water stewardship and provide the technologies needed for conservation 

of this vital resource. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before the committee today. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Ms. Ray. 

Next we hear from Ms. Dickinson. 

STATEMENT OF MARY ANN DICKINSON, PRESIDENT/CEO, 

ALLIANCE FOR WATER EFFICIENCY 

Ms. DICKINSON. Thank you. 
25 

I represent today the Alliance for Water Efficiency. We are very 

pleased to be here today to speak in support of S. 1971, the NEWS 

Act of 2014. We believe that passage of this bill will be a critically 

important first step in promoting better joint management of two 

important natural—national resources, water and energy and beginning at the Federal level. 

On May 15, 2014 we filed with you an official support letter but 

it was signed not only by us, but by 30 different organizations, 

clearly showing strong support for this important issue. 

We have been interested in the relationship between water and 

energy since we were founded 7 years ago. A project of which we’re 

particularly proud is a joint effort we undertook with the American 

Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, ACEEE, in 2010 to coalesce the views of 75 organizations involved in the water/energy 

arena. The resulting work product, A Blueprint for Action, contains 

numerous recommendations for national and State action in the 

areas of policy, standards and codes, programs and research. 

Of particular importance to this hearing and to us at the Alliance 

for Water Efficiency is the recommendation in the Blueprint that 

we accurately determine on a national basis how much water is 

needed or embedded in the generation of electricity and how much 

energy is needed or embedded in drinking water pumping and 

treatment as well as waste water treatment. 

With a fuller understanding of the significant relationship Federal policies and funding programs can be developed which will cost 

effectively and collectively save the most amount of energy and 

water for the United States. We believe that S. 1971 provides the 

perfect vehicle for obtaining this information on a national level 

and beginning to develop regional and national data bases of energy and water use. 

Subsequent to publication of our Blueprint for Action and following one of the report’s specific recommendations we created, in 

2001, a water/energy research committee composed of 43 energy 

and water experts from all over the U.S. This group convened regularly to share reports on the latest water/energy research work. 

In June 2013 we cataloged the available primary research that 

had already been undertaken and assembled links to over 200 publicly available primary research documents that are now posted in 

a 44 page, online data base and summarized in a final report which 

we published in June with ACEEE. Both the report and the data 

base are online and the links are in the testimony. 

There are 38 findings about the existing research. 

Overall, we found that few detailed studies exist that audit embedded energy and water and waste water systems. No such assessments have been done at a regional or national level. 

What do exist are very high level assessments. Most of the research has been published within the past 10 years. So it’s relatively recent. But we do believe that public funding of research is 

also needed to spur additional investigations of alternative clean 

sources of energy and water. 

So the report concluded with 13 recommendations for new research and policy actions which are in the testimony, but which I 

won’t go and read now. 
26 

I’d like instead to conclude with making 3 basic points to end my 

testimony. 

Water efficiency, No. 1, is successfully saving the Nation’s water 

and energy resources and helping to defer expensive new capacity 

infrastructure. This has been a 20 year effort beginning with the 

Federal Energy Policy Act of 1992 and subsequent legislative 

changes. We estimate that for toilets alone, 18.2 trillion gallons of 

water have been saved over the past 20 years of implementation 

of this act, equivalent to the water use of Chicago, Los Angeles and 

New York combined for a 20-year-period. 

EPA’s WaterSense label launched in 2006 has labeled nearly 

11,000 products. The sales of which have resulted in 757 billion 

gallons and 101 billion kilowatt hours saved. EPA’s work in this 

area is a significant achievement in a very short time. We believe 

the program deserves Congressional authorization and funding. 

Saving water saves energy. The benefits are documentable. California has done terrific work in this area which is all in the public 

record. 

Now we believe that the work that’s been undertaken in California can be productively used to estimate energy savings from future water efficiency programs which include a wide variety of 

measures and not just limited to hot water efficiency programs. 

An examination of how Federal actions can promote research and 

program incentive funding into this area is desperately needed and 

could be part of S. 1971. 

Last, research should be undertaken to examine the energy and 

water benefits from integrated approaches at the local level. 

In Boston, the Charles River Watershed Association is leading a 

highly innovative project to build new waste water treatment 

plants that generate electric energy, capture thermal energy from 

the waste water to heat and cool surrounding buildings and reuse 

the treated water ultimately returning the treated water to the 

ground to restore lost urban streams. This approach is truly transformative providing renewable energy, reducing water consumption 

and building community resilience. The potential for energy savings is significant. CRWA estimates, at a minimum, one megawatt 

of electricity each day for each million gallons of waste water treated. 

These types of innovative projects should certainly be researched 

and incentivized so that they can be replicated across the country. 

To conclude, we strongly support the passage of S. 1971 as a 

needed first step in coordinating Federal activities in this important energy/water nexus area. 

We further recommend that a national policy be instituted to 

allow energy efficiency funding to be used for cold water conservation programs as well as hot water programs because of the clear, 

embedded energy benefits that this investment would provide. 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Dickinson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARY ANN DICKINSON, PRESIDENT/CEO, ALLIANCE FOR

WATER EFFICIENCY

The Alliance for Water Efficiency is pleased to speak in support of S. 1971, The 

Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability Act of 2014. This bill would provide 

direction for federal coordination of water and energy programs within the National 
27 

Science and Technology committee, specifically to coordinate and streamline federal 

activities related to the management of the energy-water nexus. Passage of this bill 

will be a critically important first step in promoting better joint management of 

these two important national resources, beginning at the federal level. On May 15, 

2014 we filed with you a support letter on the bill signed by 30 different organizations. 

The Alliance is a non-profit organization of diverse stakeholders with experience 

in water conservation programs and policies, and dedicated to furthering the efficient and 2 sustainable use of water in North America. It is the only non-profit organization devoted solely to this purpose. 

We have been interested in the relationship between water and energy since we 

were founded seven years ago. A project of which we are particularly proud is a joint 

effort we undertook with the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy 

(ACEEE) in 2010, to coalesce the views of 75 organizations involved in the waterenergy arena. The resulting work product, A Blueprint for Action, contains numerous recommendations for national and state action in the areas of policy, standards 

and codes, programs, and research. Of particular importance to this hearing and to 

us at the Alliance for Water Efficiency is the recommendation in the Blueprint that 

we accurately determine on a national basis how much water is needed (or ‘‘embedded’’) in the generation of electricity, and how much energy is needed or ‘‘embedded’’ 

in drinking water pumping and treatment as well as waste water treatment. With 

a fuller understanding of this significant relationship, federal policies and funding 

programs can be developed which will cost-effectively and collectively save the most 

amount of energy and water for the United States. We believe that S. 1971 provides 

the perfect vehicle for obtaining this information on a national level and beginning 

to develop regional and national databases of energy and water use. (Electronic copies of A Blueprint for Action can be downloaded at the following link: 

www.allianceforwaterefficiency.org/blueprint.aspx.) 

Subsequent to the publication of A Blueprint for Action and following one of the 

report’s specific recommendations, the Alliance for Water Efficiency created in 2011 

a water-energy research committee composed of 43 energy and water experts from 

all over the US, and this group convened regularly to share reports on the latest 

water-energy research work. In 2013, the Alliance for Water Efficiency catalogued 

the available primary research that had been already been undertaken, and assembled links to over 200 publicly-available primary research documents that are now 

posted in a 44-page online database and summarized in a final report which we copublished in June, 2013 with ACEEE. (Both the database and the final summary 

report are at: www.allianceforwaterefficiency.org/Water-Energy-ResearchGroup.aspx.) 

The published report listed 38 findings about the existing research as of June, 

2013. Overall we found the following: 

• Few detailed studies exist that audit embedded energy in water and wastewater 

systems, and no such assessments have been done at a regional or national 

level. What do exist are very high level assessments. 

• Most of the available research has been published within the past 10 years. 

• Public funding of research is needed to spur additional investigations of alternative clean sources of energy and water. 

The report concluded with 13 recommendations for new research and policy actions on a national level which could be addressed with the passage of S. 1971: 

1. Develop comprehensive studies and associated guidelines to conduct a detailed audit of embedded energy demands for an entire local, regional or national water/wastewater system for purposes to determining system optimization. 

2. Assess technical and economic energy efficiency and demand response potential in water and wastewater systems and develop industry accepted guidelines for such studies on individual systems. 

3. Identify and eliminate regulatory barriers to co-implementation of efficiency programs in the water and energy sectors. 

4. Develop water AND energy industry-accepted Evaluation, Measurement 

and Verification (EM&V) protocols for use in efficiency programs. 

5. Develop industry standards, protocols and business models for advanced 

biogas development programs and net zero facilities at wastewater treatment 

plants. 

6. Conduct landscape irrigation equipment efficiency potential studies to support establishment of efficiency standards. 
28 

* Figure has been retained in subcommittee files. 

7. Identify rate structures, price constructs, and financing mechanisms that 

eliminate the disincentives of efficiency programs and alternative supplies use 

in the water sector. 

8. Evaluate technologies and practices that can reduce the energy demand of 

desalination and lower its costs. 

9. Continue investigations into the water energy tradeoffs of differing resource development & management choices that can better inform multi-sectoral integrated resource planning. 

10. Develop technologies and protocols that can increase water use efficiency 

and reuse, support water supply switching, and reduce water quality impacts 

of power generation facilities and other energy fuels development. 

11. Assess potential impacts to water supplies and quality of energy resource 

development, such as fracturing for natural gas and biofuels development; identify methods, practices and technologies that reduce or eliminate these impacts 

12. Develop supply chain and product embedded water-energy evaluations 

that inform consumers of the energy and water intensity of the products or 

services they buy 

13. Identify effective methods, forums, practices and other mechanisms for 

communication and engagement by the research and policy communities to ensure commercialization and adoption of research results and technological developments. 

We wish to conclude our testimony by making three basic points: 

1. Water efficiency is successfully saving the nation’s water and energy resources and 

helping to defer expensive new capacity infrastructure 

Federal plumbing product and appliance standards, in effect since the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and refined in subsequent legislation, have produced significant savings (see Table 1). The Alliance for Water Efficiency estimates that at least 18.2 trillion gallons of water savings for just toilets alone, equivalent to the 20 years of combined water use of the cities of New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. EPA’s 

WaterSense label, launched in 2006, has labeled nearly 11,000 products, the sales 

of which have resulted in 757 billion gallons and 101 billion kWh hours saved. 

EPA’s work in this area is a significant achievement in a very short time, and the 

program deserves Congressional authorization and adequate funding. 

2. Saving Water Saves Energy—and the benefits are documentable 

California has been a leader in this area, having done the seminal research in 

2005 which the Blueprint for Action recommends be duplicated nationwide. This 

work by the California Energy Commission showed that the amount of embedded 

energy in water and wastewater was in the range of 2,000 kWh to 20,000 kWh per 

million gallons of water produced (see Figure 1)*. Further studies completed by the 

California Public Utilities Commission clarified in more detail the extent of embedded energy in a variety of different water supply sources (see Table 2). Energy intensities for drinking water and wastewater treatment technologies were documented in pilot projects. Now these values can be productively used to estimate energy savings from future water efficiency programs which include a wide variety of 

measures, and which should not be limited to just hot water efficiency programs. 

An examination of how federal actions can promote research and program incentive 

funding into this area is desperately needed. 

3. Research should be undertaken to examine the energy and water benefits from integrated approaches at the local level 

In Boston, Charles River Watershed Association is leading highly innovative work 

to build new wastewater treatment plants that generate electric energy, capture 

thermal energy from the wastewater to heat and cool surrounding buildings, and 

reuse the treated water, ultimately returning the treated water to the ground to restore lost urban streams. CRWA anticipates using restored urban streams to spike 

housing and commercial development while actually providing new storage in the 

City for floods and droughts. The approach is truly transformative, providing renewable energy, reducing water consumption, and building community resilience. The 

potential for energy savings is significant: CRWA estimates at a minimum one 

megawatt of electricity each day for each million gallons of waste water treated. 

(That the approach will also restore the Charles River is an added benefit.) These 

types of innovative projects should certainly be explored and incentivized so that 

they can be replicated across the country. 
29 

To conclude, we strongly support the passage of S. 1971 as a needed first step 

in coordinating federal activities in this important energy-water nexus area. We further recommend that a national policy be instituted to allow energy efficiency funding to be used for cold water conservation programs as well as hot water conservation programs because of the clear embedded energy benefits that this investment 

would provide. 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 
30 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Ms. Dickinson. Thank you to all 

of our witnesses today. 

As I said earlier I’m very delighted, in fact, that our committee 

is highlighting the critical relationship between energy and water. 

In Wisconsin forward looking energy and water strategies are 

also driving economic development which is always very exciting. 

My State is home to, what is becoming, a world hub for water research in industry innovation in the Milwaukee region of the State. 

Both public and private entities in the State have partnered together to lead international conversations on fresh water management, treatment and efficiency. These efforts have been led by the 

Water Council at its Global Water center in Milwaukee. 

That center is a water research hub and business accelerator for 

water related businesses. Members of the Water Council are involved in many aspects of the water/energy nexus. From breweries, 

which by the way are a big business in Wisconsin, that have reduced their water use and made their processes much more efficient to companies that are designing the next generation of highly 

efficient water heaters that reduce water use and energy consumption. 
31 

Dr. Pershing, I was pleased to hear your testimony and see the 

Department’s focus on the energy/water nexus. It’s obviously a 

broad topic with many implications across the economy. The recent 

white paper pointed out to a role that DOE will have with research 

and development. 

In your testimony you also talked about the competency that you 

bring with regard to stakeholder engagement. So I’d like to hear 

more about how the Department will focus on this and will partner 

with existing institutions like the Water Council that I was just 

talking about which have already laid the ground work in establishing public/private partnerships that are so important to transferring research into commerce. 

Mr. PERSHING. Thank you very much, Senator. 

I had the opportunity to engage with some of the folks at the 

Water group, the Council. They have a very interesting website. A 

lot of work, in fact, is going on there now. I did part of my work 

in Minnesota just across the way. So we have some of the same 

overlapping issues that play on both sides. 

The DOE work, I think, fits nicely into a couple of categories. 

Part of what we bring to the table is this really deep capacity in 

technology development and support and that crosses an enormous 

array of issues. On one end it’s around how do you make efficiency 

improvements in water requirements? 

As a number of the other panelists have suggested, efficiencies 

can be found in every sector of the energy system. The big one, obviously, is in withdrawals and pass through for cooling. So we’ve 

got technology R and D on how you can reduce that. 

Now there are some tradeoffs. So for example you can either run 

it through your system (in which case you pass it back out and it’s 

heated up a little bit) or you can consume it, in which case it mostly evaporates. The latter uses less water in terms of how much 

flows through, but it is then no longer available. It doesn’t pass 

through to the next user. 

So there’s tradeoffs that you have to think about in that domain. 

Work that we are currently investing in is how do you use less to 

cool more? 

But you can look at other sectors as well. Look at oil and gas. 

An enormous amount of water goes in. 

The, kind of, rule of thumb number that you might think about, 

for every barrel of oil produced 7 to 8 barrels of water are required. 

That’s a big number. You start thinking about what that implies 

in terms of opportunities to do better. 

Could you do it for less water? What does that mean? What else 

could you use besides fresh water? 

I lived in Alaska for a number of years. When I was there, we 

did sea water injection as part of oil extraction. We now use CO2. 

These are very interesting, different kinds of models. 

There are other ways to do this—ways to minimize your water 

requirements and really move forward. 

Then to comment briefly on the other part of your question, how 

do you engage? 

I’ll give just two examples, but there’s a legion. Many, many of 

them are done with interactions between players in the public and 

private sector. 
32 

States, many of your States, but all the ones on the committee 

here, have been very interested. There is a lot of work underway, 

with local players and actors. A great deal of work is underway 

from water utilities, and also power utilities. 

There’s an enormous amount of work in the private sector. People who make commercial profits out of this as well as in the public, civil society. 

Our effort in developing this report and in going forward has 

been to engage as many of those actors as we can. 

Senator BALDWIN. I think my next question will take more than 

my 40 seconds. So maybe we’ll do another round. But why don’t I 

yield right now to Ranking Member Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. 

I want to continue with you, Mr. Pershing, just for a moment. I 

have welcomed your report out of DOE and others have as well. I 

think it does a pretty good job in terms of summarizing where we 

are, the relevant issues. 

You talk about some of the technological innovations that are out 

there and how working together with related R and D we can promote some of these efficiencies that, I think, will be that breakthrough whether it’s for the oil and gas industry or whatever it 

might be. 

But as I mentioned in my opening statement what we haven’t 

clearly identified is what that path forward is then on how the Department would implement an energy/water nexus R and D program. You’ve mentioned that you’ve got a technology research portfolio analysis that will address the risk performance targets, impacts, R and D pathways and learning curves. 

Is this something that is being outlined in this next step forward? Just a little bit of a discussion here, if we may, about how 

we can implement this R and D initiative that we’re all talking 

about. 

Mr. PERSHING. Thank you very much. 

I think that there are two different parts where I’d like to frame 

for you the way we’re thinking about it. 

The first one really has to do with data. I think a number of us 

have commented on this particular question going forward. I am 

struck in the work that we’ve done so far on how difficult it’s been 

to even really get a good handle on the data. Exactly where is the 

energy going? Exactly where is the water going? How do we understand it regionally? How do we understand it by technology? 

I think we need much more work on data. We have some institutions that collect some. It’s not comprehensive. It’s not longitudinally very good. It means you don’t have long timelines for it. 

We don’t do a very good job about projecting what that might 

look like in the future—which means some modeling capacity. How 

do you think about where it’s going to go? 

I think that’s been very clearly identified as a big gap in our 

work. We think we have to pursue that direction. 

The second is a different box—really are about technologies and 

to a certain extent they’re contingent on the first one. 

If we make some decisions, collectively, around what kind of energy system we might have, we will make certain other decisions 

about its water implications. So for example, at the moment we 
33 

have these enormous new reservoirs of gas coming into the system, 

really opening up windows of opportunity for the country. We have 

a very great interest in all the new capacity we’ve got on renewables. 

Both of those open up questions around water demand. We can 

begin to look specifically at the technologies that could minimize 

that demand in those systems. 

So we’re looking at those two tracks. I don’t mean to limit to 

those two technologies. But broadly, the technology opportunities 

that you can take to really reduce consumption and the data and 

the data structure. I think both of them really require more work. 

This report begins to lay out issues, barriers, vulnerabilities. 

Where we are now is in designing next steps and recommendations. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Comparing what you’re outlining and what 

Mr. Iseman mentioned, you’ve got a water census that you’re working on. So much of what it appears we need to do in addressing 

these data gaps is it may be that we don’t have the gaps there. But 

we just don’t know what you all are doing in DOI verses what you 

are doing in DOE which brings us back to this need for collaboration in a way that takes us outside of our silos. 

This has been the struggle. This is not unique to this issue. This 

is something that is endemic to our systems here. 

But it seems to me that this is an area where if we can truly 

work to be sharing more of what is going on with one another. 

We’re not reinventing. We’re building off of the data that we acknowledge may not be 100 percent. But if we take what you have 

been building and what you have been building, we might get there 

a heck of a lot quicker. 

I worry about whether or not what we’re doing is sufficient and 

that was the impetus for this NEWS Act, to try to get all of the 

relevant stakeholders working together. 

In the next round here I think I want to talk a little bit more 

about this whole governance aspect of it because if we can’t figure 

out how we do that then we’re going to continue to operate in our 

silos, collecting our data and thinking well, we got about 75 percent 

of it here. But we can’t get any more. 

So when we talk about what that path forward is for the Departments I really do hope that we can coalesce more around some genuine partnering that takes us outside of our usual comfort zones, 

I guess. 

Senator BALDWIN. There are a number of companies, I guess 

there’s a theme for my questions which are things happening in 

Wisconsin. That’s not unusual for me. But there are number of 

companies that are working on innovative ways to process waste 

water in the State to reduce the energy used in that processing. 

One company in my hometown of Madison, called AquaMost now 

makes a low energy, water treatment system specifically to recycle 

the waste water in oil and gas processing. This reduces the water 

used in hydraulic fracturing and also reduces the energy used to 

produce natural gas. 

On the residential and community side, the city of Milwaukee 

has set a goal of using renewable energy for 100 percent of the energy needs in waste water treatment. They’re doing so by using anaerobic digesters and methane from a local landfill. 
34 

I’m interested in hearing from the entire panel on what types of 

barriers exist to the adoption and development of these types of 

technologies. We’ve just been talking about the limitations of information and data. So please, since all of you have referenced that 

in your testimony, feel free to identify that or elaborate on that. 

But what sort of additional information would help drive this sort 

of innovation that we’re seeing and improve the efficiencies that 

are being delivered by products like the ones that I was just referencing. 

Dr. Pershing, why don’t we start with you and get a couple of 

comments from each of our panelists? 

Mr. PERSHING. So thank you very much. 

I don’t know this particular company. But there is other work 

like it underway. So I’ll kind of draw from that broader example. 

I think it’s an enormously promising area of work. Some of the 

DOE activities, in fact, specifically are designed around at looking 

at waste water and waste water treatment and the energy sector 

component of that. How you can manage that. 

So let me turn to the other question because I think there is 

technology unfolding—and I see barriers falling into a couple categories. 

One, it tends to be higher cost. At the moment many times what 

you’ve got is a conventional supply that can provide energy at an 

assured rate with guaranteed performance. You’ve got this new 

technology which frankly has somewhat different risks attached to 

it. 

Two, you often have a process in which the company that’s seeking to make the investment doesn’t have a privileged position. It’s 

already looking at an existing relationship. So how do you manage 

to move into that kind of arena? The existing one may be working 

perfectly well, right? So it has a different set of characteristics, but 

it’s doing fine. 

Three, we tend not to value some of the things around water 

costs the same way as we do around energy. So if we take a look 

at the relative rank ordering as a business matter, its often about 

prioritizing by price and price right now is much more focused on 

my energy costs than on water costs. 

As a business, if I can find ways to think about these connections 

differently, perhaps I’d change that, but that requires a very different approach than we’ve ever sought to take. At the moment I 

don’t see that as very likely for most jurisdictions. 

Then finally there’s the question about how this technology is 

maintained and run. I’m a business. I look out there at the world 

and I say nobody else is doing this. Do I want to be first? 

If I can’t manage my waste I have a really big problem in Milwaukee. If I can do it, I’m happy to be third or maybe fifth, once 

the technology has been proven. 

So one of the things we think we probably have to do something 

about is on deployment. Create some models where its tried, and 

something where people could point to it and say it was used here, 

successfully, at a price I could meet. 

That demonstration component is another part of what DOE can 

often bring to the table. 

Senator BALDWIN. Mr. Iseman. 
35 

Mr. ISEMAN. Thank you. 

I would first say two things. 

That our two bureaus that I described, the U.S. Geological Survey and the Bureau of Reclamation are both doing work on waste 

water disposal and waste water treatment. I agree that it’s an important area of opportunity. A lot of work is focusing on better 

technologies, ways to reduce the costs and energy associated with 

waste water treatment. So it’s consistent, I think, with what you 

described for those farms in Wisconsin. 

I think Dr. Pershing did a great job of identifying some of the 

barriers. 

I would just go to the point about cost. I think one of the things 

we see and particularly in the Western United States is there’s 

more demand or more scarcity for water supplies. We’re going to 

see an additional driver to improve some of those treatment technologies. 

Senator BALDWIN. Dr. Carter. 

Ms. CARTER. Thank you for the question. 

Similar to Mr. Iseman, there are actually a lot of opportunities. 

So yes, there are barriers, but we’re actually seeing an energy sector. A lot of these technologies are already adopted. 

We have seen significant changes in how unconventional gas in 

say, the Marcellus, is being developed using reused water, using 

some of these technologies to treat it for a second time in a 

fracking operation as well as treatment processes for the water 

that’s produced from those operations. 

So we’re actually, not just—we don’t just have barriers. We actually see some adoption especially in the rapidly changing energy 

sector. 

Similar to what Dr. Pershing said, I think there are also opportunities for demonstration including some demonstration facilities 

that the Bureau of Reclamation has. But there are also a lot of opportunities internationally that are happening for demonstration. 

But getting—those are fairly competitive to get to participate in 

some of those. So I think there—you do hear companies identifying 

that demonstration is sometimes a barrier. 

Then as more attention is given to the energy/water nexus and 

the potential risks and vulnerability it represents than you are actually seeing more interest as well. So I think the barrier, in part 

in the past, had been education and understanding and that is 

starting to diminish. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you. 

Ms. Ray. 

Ms. RAY. OK. I think I’ll address most of the technologies associated with the thermoelectric which also you have in Wisconsin as 

well. 

Senator BALDWIN. OK. 

Ms. RAY. So I think the biggest issue is there’s not a one size fits 

all. There’s not a silver bullet for solving these issues. 

On the thermoelectric side you’ve got the cost issues, the retrofits 

verses the technologies that are primarily for new installations and 

that goes for water treatment as well as for power, thermoelectric 

power plants. 
36 

You’ve got efficiency penalties. How do certain fans, if you’re 

using fans, what the penalty for the amount of electricity that 

they’re using verses what that power plant may be producing? 

You’ve got local synergies. For instance you mentioned the methane gas that they were burning. If you have those co-located that 

provides a tremendous benefit that someone else in another facility 

wouldn’t have. 

Then finally the footprints that are required. Sometimes there 

just physically isn’t enough, like for air cold condensers that you 

may put on to do dry cooling for a thermoelectric plant or a data 

center or a refrigeration type of industry. 

So I think the biggest issue is there’s lots of technologies out 

there. They all have their benefits. But they all have tradeoffs associated with reliability, penalties, environment safety. You’re 

going to have to find some kind of a model that says how can I plug 

and play what’s best for my facility in this county, in this city. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you. 

Ms. Dickinson. 

Ms. DICKINSON. This is a great question because it encapsulizes 

all of the issues involved in the research that I think this bill 

would be directing these agencies to do. 

I think you’ve had some terrific responses from the panel. I especially liked Dr. Pershing’s barriers list. 

But the thing about the barriers and the reason it would be good 

to catalog those and research the reasons for those barriers is that 

they are constantly changing. Yes, water prices are very cheap 

now. That is not going to be the prices of the future. 

As we enter the area of scarcity and, you know, the incredible 

amounts of infrastructure repair and replacement that’s going on 

in the water sector, you’re going to see doubling and tripling of 

water prices which changes the economics of a lot of innovative solutions. 

But I think the biggest thing I wanted to mention here is that 

there’s not been enough integration of the solutions. We tend to 

take a problem and identify technology that fixes that problem 

rather than looking at it from a systems perspective which is why 

I mentioned the Charles River Watershed Association example because that’s a very big attempt to solve a number of water issues 

all at once. 

I think in the water/energy nexus it’s not just about availability 

of water. It’s about how that water exists in that ecosystem too. 

So there are regulatory issues associated which are a barrier that 

I would like to add to Dr. Pershing’s list. Sometimes from a regulatory perspective the new technology is not allowed to function in 

the way that we would otherwise like. 

So I really think this would be a great topic for the committee 

to be addressing under S. 1971. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you very much. 

Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Good. That was good feedback. 

Let me try to drill down just a little bit more with the data gaps 

and the recognition that within the Departments you’ve got work 

that is ongoing and, you know, how we can better collaborate within the Departments, I think, is important. But we also have the 
37 

private sector side and a recognition that there’s a great deal that 

is happening on the ground, out in the marketplace. Again, a 

source for taking that data and then as we work together really 

building on it. 

But there are barriers there. There’s certain sensitivities, I think, 

that folks have in not wanting to share some of this data. So I 

guess I direct this to you, Ms. Ray and Ms. Dickinson. 

What can we be doing from your perspective to encourage greater 

collaboration and efforts when it comes to how we deal with the 

data gaps that we recognize exist here? 

Ms. RAY. So, let me mention that we all know that research is 

very, very costly and money talks. So when there’s an opportunity 

to leverage data and resources so that everybody can share those 

people will pay attention. 

But let me give you an example of a sharing opportunity that 

EPRI had with DOE, not in this particular area. It was actually 

in nuclear, long term operations. We had a memorandum of understanding in which we specifically set periodic times to compare 

data and research in that particular area. So that we could say we 

wanted to avoid duplication. We wanted to take advantage of each 

other’s scientific and technical expertise and as well as looking at 

joint objectives. 

So there was an opportunity to pull that data together and do 

it in such a way that it did not lend to disclosing proprietary information that EPRI had with its utility members. So there are mechanisms out there. I think people want to see an ability to leverage 

and avoid duplication because it’s in no one’s best interest to have 

silo data sets. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Did you want to add anything, Ms. Dickinson? 

Ms. DICKINSON. Yes. I’m particularly interested in the embedded 

energy and water issue. In that respect there are water systems all 

over the country that probably have data within their systems. 

They can read their electric bills, figure out what their embedded 

energy footprint is for their different water supply sources. 

But they don’t have a vehicle for sharing that information with 

a broader network. I think the data is out there. I think it needs 

to be assembled. I think there could be partnerships that could easily be developed that wouldn’t be very costly to get some of this information that, I think, would be needed to be aggregated on a regional basis and a national basis. 

So I suspect that the data is available in places that we just need 

to go and ask for it. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Let me ask the question then about governance and the structure as we’ve outlined in the legislation here. 

We’ll start with you, Dr. Carter on this. 

I do appreciate you’ve worked well with our staff on this. We 

really appreciate the efforts that you have given in this. When 

we’re talking about what the ideal structure of this NEWS Committee might look like, the type of interactions that we have between the principals, between the other stakeholders there, the internal, external. 

Do you have anything further that you might want to share with 

the committee in terms of how we do all of what we’ve been talking 
38 

about here, better integration of the data that is out there, better 

collaboration, not only within agencies, but with our private stakeholders as well? 

Mr. Iseman, in your testimony you have raised concerns about 

this cross cut budget. 

Dr. Carter, you have as well. 

It seems to me that that’s something that we have the ability to 

produce a cross cut budget. We’ve done it with the Cal Fed law 

that this committee enacted several years ago. So you both raise 

concerns in that area. 

Talk to me a little bit about why you think that wouldn’t work? 

We’re trying to figure out a way that we’ve got some light to, kind 

of, shine on what’s going on out there and thought that that might 

be the approach. 

So if both of you can address that aspect of it? 

Ms. CARTER. Thank you, Ranking Member Murkowski. 

I’ll start with the second question. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. OK. 

Ms. CARTER. So cross cut budgets can and have provided a useful 

function. It is the crafting of them that can make them easier or 

more difficult to assemble. So it is, I’d say, that the comments were 

meant to indicate items that may be harder to implement, not necessarily that there would not be a utility for that. 

Actually DOE is a good example of where there would be a utility. If you look at DOE’s FY’15 budget request it says that it has 

a cross cutting initiative for energy and water. But it does not identify how much is going to be spent on that initiative. 

So what a cross cut would do would be reveal that information 

that the agencies may already know or may have to do some data 

collection to know. But—and they’re the only ones who can produce 

that data. So cross cuts can produce very valuable information that 

would not be otherwise available. 

But it’s trying to figure out how to do it. Especially since it will 

be an annual cross cut budget that is easily assembled and easily 

produced and provides the most useful information for those trying 

to make decisions based on that which will take me to the first 

question regarding the governance. 

So the placement of the NEWS Committee within the NSTC is 

putting it with the other entities with similar goals which is basically to have the Administration coordinate among the Federal research and development enterprise. Usually the Administration— 

this is an entity that was created by Executive Order and that it 

does these—it creates committees and subcommittees and disbands 

them as need be. In this case Congress is saying this is a need. 

This is what they typically do is they try to coordinate strategies 

to identify goals. Then they do sometimes produce reports. But 

often we probably don’t see what these committees are doing. Often 

it is those discussions among the 13 identified agencies that is producing some of the integration and results. 

Often, my understanding is that, OMB will contact these committees and subcommittees for advice on whether the budget that they 

are proposing is consistent or not with what the subcommittees and 

committees have developed. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Mr. Iseman. 
39 

Anything at all. So speak to the governance aspect of it as well. 

Mr. ISEMAN. Sure, sure. 

I’ll start with a cross cut budget. I just wanted to thank you for 

the question. I agree with your premise. 

I think it was you who stated in your opening remarks and also 

I think it’s the premise of the bill that there are a lot of these energy/water activities happening in different agencies within Interior and across the Federal Government as well as with the private 

sector and with the States. In order to do a better job of coordinating that and to do it efficiently we need to understand exactly 

what those activities are. So I think it’s right that we want a better 

understanding of what’s happening across the Federal agencies in 

terms of energy and water activities. 

One of my specific concerns about the cross cut budget was the 

definition of an energy/water project and just making sure that 

that’s narrow enough that we get something that’s useful when we 

look to gather these activities across the Federal agencies. 

I think one of the things that we’ve looked at and we’ve talked 

about how the energy/water nexus touches on all these issues is 

that it can sweep in a lot potentially. We want to make sure that 

we get at those issues and activities that are really addressing the 

intersection of energy and water in order for this survey to be useful. 

In terms of the governance. 

I’ll just say that we would like to continue to work with the committee. We’ve appreciated your efforts and the efforts of the committee staff to engage with us and to have a conversation about 

how to structure this coordination. 

We agree that this is an important issue. We do need more conversations among the Federal family and with partners. We would 

like to continue to work with the committee and your staff to determine the most effective way to do that. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I think that’s truly the goal here. The design of this legislation is to figure out how we can be more effective, be more efficient with the collaboration and the program management. 

Mr. Iseman, both you and Dr. Pershing have indicated that from 

whether it’s Department of Energy or Department of Interior’s perspective that you’re continuing to review the legislation. I would 

ask that you continue to work with us on this. 

I think that it is an issue that we can talk about here with great 

interest in terms of what’s going on with the technologies. But as 

several of you have raised the issue of access to water and the affordability of that is one that, I think, we have a tendency to take 

for granted. In particularly areas in the South and Southwest right 

now that are experiencing drought, they know that you can’t take 

it for granted. 

So many aspects of industry as has been noted, this is a pretty 

intense part of the business. Things are such that we just cannot 

continue to assume that unlimited quantities of affordable water 

will be available to us. So how we work smarter, how we work 

more efficiently is really the challenge to us all. 
40 

I think we’ve got some good constructive ideas and approaches 

here. But I would ask you all to continue to engage with us as we 

try to develop this further. 

With that, I’m done. I just want to thank the witnesses for, not 

only your testimony here this afternoon, but your very obvious engagement and input on an important issue. 

Thank you. 

Senator BALDWIN. I want to join the Ranking Member in those 

sentiments. Thank you for being here. Thank you for your testimony. 

With, there being no further questions, the testimony and any 

statements we receive related to today’s hearing will be made a 

part of the official hearing record. 

We will also keep the record open for an additional 2 weeks to 

receive other statements and additional testimony. 

With that this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:33 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.] 
(41) 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to Additional Questions 

RESPONSES OF TOM ISEMAN TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MURKOWSKI

Question 1. In the NEWS Act, as in my energy-water nexus whitepaper, I call for 

better and closer collaboration with external stakeholders—and especially with the 

private sector—to promote and develop innovative and advanced technologies and 

scientific tools for water for energy and energy for water systems. Could you please 

share with us the current state of affairs and how would you envision expanding 

and enhancing such collaborations? 

Answer. The Department of the Interior (Department) shares the Committee’s 

goal of close collaboration with stakeholders around the energy-water nexus. Several 

existing programs and activities that relate directly to the energy-water nexus within the Department are focused on collaboration with states and non-federal entities. 

For example, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is conducting Basin Studies 

to evaluate water supplies and demands over time, including under climate change, 

and to identify adaptation strategies to meet future water demands. The Basin 

Studies are cost-shared and co-led by state and local stakeholders and have 

spotlighted emerging clashes between competing demands, including energy, and 

limited supplies of water. Additionally, WaterSMART Grants provide cost-shared 

funding to States, tribes, and other entities with water or power delivery authority 

for water efficiency improvements, with a priority for those proposals that describe 

the estimated energy savings from those improvements. These grants provide one 

vehicle for implementing on-the-ground solutions to energy-water issues. 

Likewise, through the Cooperative Water Program and other activities, USGS is 

supporting state priorities in better understanding water budgets associated with 

unconventional oil and gas development. One recent example of USGS working with 

state geological surveys, academia, and industry to build better tools for the water 

for energy and energy for water systems referenced in your question is the compilation and release of an updated produced waters database. Produced waters are those 

volumes of water that are typically recovered during oil and gas exploration, development, or production. This database is an update of the 2002 USGS Produced 

Waters Database, adding more than 100,000 new samples with greater spatial coverage and from both conventional and unconventional oil and gas development. Scientists studying produced waters and their geochemical and environmental impacts 

have a powerful new tool in the newly released USGS Produced Waters Geochemical 

Database. This database is publicly available to all scientists and interested members of the public. 

As mentioned during the roundtable convened by the Committee in July 2013, 

states play a key role in allocating and administering water, and they must be a 

partner in energy-water efforts. Although the base grants program is under spending pressure, we see an opportunity to engage the state Water Resources Research 

Institutes (WRRI) as a federal-state bridge. WRRIs exist in every state, they have 

relationships with local players, and they have a strong functional relationship with 

USGS. WRRIs could serve as a local hub and contribute to a national, USGS-managed database on water use and its intersection with the energy sector. 

Question 2. As we’ve heard today, the DOE and DOI have been working together 

in the past on data collection related to, for example, hydropower development in 

the U.S. and perhaps on other issues as well. 

How do you envision the expansion of such collaborative efforts in the near future, 

given that the NEWS Act calls for the Secretaries of Energy and Interior to work 
42 

closely together as the co-chairs of the proposed Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability federal coordination committee (the NEWS Committee)? 

Answer. Expansion of collaborative efforts could be accomplished through the Department expanding direct collaboration with the Department of Energy (DOE) and 

the energy sector. Currently the Department collaborates with DOE on the collection of consistent information on withdrawals of water for use in thermoelectric 

power plants. We need to find more effective ways to link DOE’s detailed information on the status and trends in energy production with comprehensive information 

on water supply and use. The DOE-funded project with the Western Governors’ Association provides a leading example of integrating energy and water information 

to shape regional decisions. 

Coordination often occurs on a project-by-project or as-needed basis. This process 

allows for coordination around the full array of energy-water issues, not just within 

our two Departments but across the federal agencies that deal with the energywater nexus. 

Question 3. I understand that the Water Census activity under the WaterSMART 

initiative is meant to expand, improve and streamline data collection on water use 

in the U.S. Does water ‘‘use’’ include consumption as well as withdrawals? I know, 

for example, that the USGS currently only collects water withdrawal data. 

Answer. Yes. The USGS defines water use in the following way: ‘‘...water use pertains to the interaction of humans with and influence on the hydrologic cycle, and 

includes elements such as water withdrawal, delivery, consumptive use, wastewater 

release, reclaimed wastewater, return flow, and instream use.’’ (Page 49, USGS Circular 1344—Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 2005, Kenny, J.F. et 

al, 2009) 

It is true that the USGS 2005 water use circular, referenced above, only provides 

water withdrawal information for the Nation, and the USGS has not provided consumptive use information since its water use circular for 1995, primarily because 

consumptive use is frequently not reported or is reported inconsistently from state 

to state. However, the USGS is reinstating consumptive use reporting for thermoelectric cooling water for year 2010 in a report that was issued in September 2014. 

This consumptive use information will be based on a model that the USGS has developed and published in a report entitled ‘‘Methods for estimating water consumption for thermoelectric power plants in the United States’’ (Diehl, T.H.,et. al., 2013, 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report [SIR] 2013-5188, 78 p.). That 

report (SIR 2013-5188) was released to the public in November 2013. The USGS is 

striving to reinstate consumptive use reporting for other water use sectors. Consumptive use information is important in water availability management and central to the energy-water nexus. The next sector of water use that we will tackle for 

consumptive use information will be the public water supply sector. 

RESPONSES OF TOM ISEMAN TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR JEFF FLAKE

Question 1. In your testimony you raise an important issue regarding the role of 

states and state regulators with regard to both water supplies, which are largely 

governed by state water law, and energy supplies, which (at least for investor-owned 

utilities in Arizona) are overseen by state regulators. Yet, you note that S.1971 does 

not address this important state responsibility. How could this bill be improved to 

better account for the role that states play in regulating and managing water and 

energy supplies? 

Answer. States play a key role in allocating and administering water, and the Department will continue to work with the states and other stakeholders in energywater efforts. S. 1971 may be improved by directing the Committee to consult with 

states and stakeholders as it fulfills its duties. 

Question 2. Given the Department of the Interior’s role as trustee for Native 

Americans, I was surprised to see that your testimony did not include any discussion of how S.1971 would impact Native Americans. Arizona is home to 22 federally 

recognized Indian tribes and communities. It is critically important that any conversation about the energy-water nexus include those communities. For example, 

over the course of the last few years, EPA has sought to impose a regional haze 

plan on a power plant in Arizona that is located on the Navajo Reservation. The 

Bureau of Reclamation partially owns the plant. It uses the power output to pump 

water from the Colorado River to central Phoenix, where some of the water is used 

to satisfy Indian water settlement delivery obligations. Can you explain how the Department would represent the critical energy-water nexus issues as they relate to 

Native American communities, such as those in Arizona? 

Answer. The Department recognizes and is fully engaged in its federal trust responsibility to Native American tribes. Native American communities are valuable 
43 

partners to the Department, and the Department is committed to working with 

tribes on a government-to-government basis. Reclamation is committed to actively 

seeking partnerships with Native American tribes to ensure that tribes have the opportunity to participate fully in the Reclamation programs that affect the development and management of tribal water and related resources. We have worked closely with the Navajo Nation and other affected tribes to address the energy-water 

issues you identify at Navajo Generating Station. If S 1971 is enacted, the Department would look forward to the opportunity to engage in a more systematic information and data exchange on energy-water issues with our tribal partners, as described under Section 3 of the legislation. Tribes would also likely benefit from the 

identification and documentation of Federal and non-Federal programs and funding 

opportunities called for in S. 1971. 

Question 3. EPA is specifically mentioned among the departments and agencies 

that would be part of the coordinated effort outlined in S.1971. What role would the 

Department envision for the energy-water nexus committee relative to EPA’s rulemaking process, specifically EPA’s promulgation of regulations that impact energy 

and water production and deliveries? 

Answer. New water treatment, thermoelectric cooling, and other technologies have 

the potential to increase the array of options to protect the environment while also 

saving energy and/or water. EPA’s current long term engagement with DOI and 

other interagency collaborators pursuing research into such technologies helps inform EPA’S rulemaking process. 

Question 4. How does the Department believe the coordinated approach in S.1971 

will enhance federal policy, as opposed to leading to another layer of bureaucracy? 

Answer. The Department supports the type of coordination and data exchange 

called for in S. 1971 and already has a number of programs in place that involve 

coordination with other federal agencies to address the energy-water nexus, as discussed in the testimony. This ongoing coordination will continue to help close existing data gaps, provide a more systematic and comprehensive view of energy-water 

issues, and increase our understanding of water supply availability to benefit water 

and energy decision makers. As indicated in the testimony, the Department would 

need to more closely evaluate the commitments and reporting requirements in the 

bill and the additional resources that may be required to carry them out. 

RESPONSES OF JONATHAN PERSHING TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MURKOWSKI

Question 1. In the NEWS Act, as in my energy-water nexus whitepaper, I call for 

better and closer collaboration with external stakeholders—and especially with the 

private sector—to promote and develop innovative and advanced technologies and 

scientific tools for water for energy and energy for water systems. Could you please 

share with us the current state of affairs and how would you envision expanding 

and enhancing such collaborations? 

Answer. We agree that consultation and ongoing communication with stakeholders is critical to understanding problems and identifying possible solutions 

across the energy-water nexus. The release of The Water-Energy Nexus: Challenges 

and Opportunities has encouraged the private sector, municipal actors, and other 

stakeholders to reach out to DOE. We have both been following up with those that 

have contacted us, and are also actively working to strengthen our relationships in 

the sector. Key entry points to the private and municipal community are industrial 

associations and research institutes. We are currently developing connections with 

organizations such as the Water Environment Federation (WEF), the Water-Environment Research Foundation (WERF), and the National Association of Clean 

Water Agencies (NACWA) to address opportunities in the water sector. Organizations in the energy sector (many of which have a longer history of collaboration with 

DOE), such as the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), have recently highlighted their interest 

in water. DOE is further expanding its network by participating in relevant conferences. In the coming months, we are considering organizing several workshops 

on key topics as a follow-up to our report, and will use these as a further means 

of gaining insight from the private sector and others. 

Question 2. As we’ve heard today, the DOE and DOI have been working together 

in the past on data collection related to, for example, hydropower development in 

the U.S. and perhaps on other issues as well. 

How do you envision the expansion of such collaborative efforts in the near future, 

given that the NEWS Act calls for the Secretaries of Energy and Interior to work 

closely together as the co-chairs of the proposed Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability federal coordination committee (the NEWS Committee)? 
44 

Answer. DOE and Department of Interior (DOI) have complementary roles and 

interests. The two agencies are currently working together in a variety of areas. For 

example, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is working with the Energy Information Administration (EIA) to improve water consumption data in electricity generation. DOE shares an interest in the beneficial use of produced water with the Bureau of Reclamation. We are exploring opportunities to collaborate on the development and use of hydrologic models. DOE and DOI are also collaborating with other 

agencies. For example, A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is in place among 

DOE, DOI, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on unconventional oil 

and gas development. In addition, DOE, DOI, and the Army Corps of Engineers 

(ACE) have an MOU on hydropower. 

Question 3. The NEWS Act calls for a strong research and development component of any federal coordination effort to advance scientific and technological innovations to increase the efficiencies and reduces the costs of innovative energy and 

water related technologies. It appears that the recent organizational changes at 

DOE that brought together the Science and Energy related programs under one Undersecretary for Science and Energy present a unique opportunity to do just that. 

Can you please share your views on that, and specifically, on the role ARPA-E can 

play—particularly if the current nominee to head ARPA-E, Dr. Ellen Williams, who 

has demonstrated a strong interest in the energy-water nexus issues in her former 

role as BP’s Chief Scientist, is confirmed? 

Answer. DOE’s Office of Science, Energy program offices, ARPA-E, and the Office 

of Energy Policy and Systems Analysis (EPSA) have all played important roles in 

DOE’s recent water-energy work. Moving forward, DOE anticipates that the various 

offices will continue to work together productively. 

Technology innovations that reduce costs and improve efficiencies are often the 

result of focused research and development that builds on fundamental research. 

Both fundamental and applied sciences also inform a full range of modeling and 

analysis needed to support understanding and inform decision-making. The WaterEnergy Nexus: Challenges and Opportunities lays out possible next steps in all of 

these areas. DOE’s new organizational structure made it easier to recruit authors 

for this report from both the Office of Science and several Energy program offices. 

EPSA also provided leadership for this cross-cutting work. 

RESPONSES OF JONATHAN PERSHING TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR JEFF FLAKE

Question 1. EPA is specifically mentioned among the departments and agencies 

that would be part of the coordinated effort outlined in S.1971. What role would the 

Department envision for the energy-water nexus committee relative to EPA’s rulemaking process, specifically EPA’s promulgation of regulations that impact energy 

and water production and deliveries? 

Answer. New water treatment, thermoelectric cooling, and other technologies have 

the potential to increase the array of options to protect the environment while also 

saving energy and/or water. EPA’s current long term engagement with DOE and 

other interagency collaborators pursuing research into such technologies helps inform EPA’s rulemaking process. 

Question 2. How does the Department believe the coordinated approach in S.1971 

will enhance federal policy, as opposed to leading to another layer of bureaucracy? 

Answer. Existing interagency coordination processes provide mechanisms for 

agencies to work together on topics where they have a shared interest. In most relevant areas, collaboration and coordination are already taking place. For example, 

there is an MOA among DOE, DOI, and EPA on unconventional oil and gas development and an MOU on hydropower among DOE, DOI, and the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE). In addition, there is collaboration between USGS and EIA on water 

consumption data in thermoelectric generation. 

RESPONSE OF NICOLE T. CARTER TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR MURKOWSKI

Question 1. As we try to address the recurring drought conditions across the nation, could you discuss your views on the obvious and not so obvious links between 

the energy-water nexus issues and water shortages and mitigation strategies? How 

can S. 1971 address these links? 

Answer. Drought Exposes the Value of Decoupling Energy and Water Systems.— 

Drought exposes how dependent activities and populations are on water. It is often 

during drought when the economic, social, and environmental value of available 

freshwater is highest. That is, scarcity, including scarcity caused by drought, often 

drives up the value of water in all its uses. Therefore, the value of decoupling en-
45 

ergy sector activities and processes from freshwater often pays off most during 

drought. 

Water Shortages Often Tighten the Links of the Energy-Water Nexus.—Some activities negatively impacted by drought can be offset by activities in other regions 

not experiencing drought (e.g., corn, wheat, hay, and cotton production), while other 

water uses are harder to reduce quickly or substitute, such as drinking water, water 

for other public health and safety needs, and in-stream flows for ecosystems and 

species. Technologies exist to augment municipal water supplies during a drought, 

but some of these technologies are particularly energy-intense, such as standard desalination technologies (reverse osmosis dominates desalination in the United 

States). That is, desalination, which may produce one of the most drought-resilient 

supplies, also is among the most energy-intense forms of municipal water supply. 

Numerous innovative desalination technologies, energy recovery technologies within 

desalination facilities, and combined desalination and renewable electricity generation may provide opportunities to reduce the energy inputs associated with desalination, thereby increasing its appeal during drought as well as under normal water 

conditions. Other water supply augmentation options such as long-distance water 

transport also can consume significant energy depending on the amount of pumping 

required. For the electricity sector, less water-dependent cooling may allow power 

plants to avoid generation curtailments that would otherwise result due to water 

withdrawal limits during low flows. Available dry and hybrid power plant cooling 

technologies often are more expensive and less efficient at cooling than the more 

water-intense cooling technologies currently used. 

Science and Technology Can Reduce Barriers and Expand Options for Decoupling 

Energy and Water Systems.—S. 1971 would require the creation of a National 

Science and Technology Council committee (or subcommittee) to coordinate federal 

energy-water nexus science and technology activities. The Committee would guide 

how the federal research and development enterprise can address energy-water 

nexus challenges, including activities aimed at improving water-efficient power 

plant cooling and reducing energy requirements for desalination, water treatment, 

and water transport. Advancements in technologies relevant to the energy-water 

nexus may assist to reduce energy and water demand and disruptions during 

drought, thereby creating more resilient water and energy systems and sectors. 

While S. 1971 makes no specific mention of drought, science and technology that 

allow the energy sector to reduce its demand for water may be most valuable during 

a drought. The science and technology that would be guided by the NSTC Committee created by S. 1971 may improve drought resilience by reducing the water demand of the energy sector over the long term. Through inclusion of federal entities 

like the Department of Agriculture and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the NSTC Subcommittee, S. 1971 would appear to provide a 

forum for identifying how guided federal science and technology investments can effectively address the energy-water nexus to further drought mitigation. 

Drought Resilience is Determined by Both Long-Term and Drought-Specific Actions.—Responding to drought is not only defined by the actions and policies undertaken in midst of a drought, but also by the actions and policies that determine investments, decisions, behavior, and trends over the long term. Therefore, it is not 

just the technologies, action, and programs specific to drought that constitute 

drought mitigation, but also the science, actions, and programs that establish the 

long-term trajectory of water use that influence local, regional, and national resilience to water shortages. 

RESPONSE OF MARY ANN DICKINSON TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR MURKOWSKI

Question 1. Your organizations have done quite a bit to better understand the implications the energy-water nexus has for your members from the electric and water 

utilities, research community, and others. In my energy-water nexus white paper 

from this past May, I recommend that we ought to take a serious look at establishing an external organization, such as a foundation, to implement a robust multistakeholder energy-water nexus program. The thought is that such a congressionally-mandated organization could raise private money to support collaborative efforts between all stakeholders, both private and federal. Can you please share your 

thoughts on this? 

Answer. The Alliance for Water Efficiency shares the view expressed in the White 

Paper that ‘‘a national platform be established for exchanging information, data collection, dissemination and standardization; identification of innovative technologies 

and methodologies, including best practices and deployment incentives, and innova-
46 

1 ‘‘The Energy -Water Nexus: Interlinked Resources That Are Vital for Economic Growth and 

Sustainability’’, White Paper published by US Senator Lisa Murkowski, May 2014 2 Addressing the Energy-Water Nexus: A Blueprint for Action and Policy Agenda, Alliance for 

Water Efficiency and the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, May 2011 

tive RD&D projects.’’1 We identified the need for such a platform in our Blueprint 

for Action report2 where we highlighted the need for coordinated national and state 

actions in the areas of policies, best practice programs, codes and standards, and 

research. In the report, we identified eight thematic areas that would benefit from 

the creation of such a platform to coordinate these activities: 

1. Increase the level of collaboration between the water and energy communities in planning and implementing programs. 

2. Achieve a deeper understanding of the energy embedded in water and the 

water embedded in energy. 

3. Learn from and replicate best practice integrated energy-water efficiency 

programs. 

4. Integrate water into energy research efforts and vice versa. 

5. Separate water utility revenues from unit sales, and consider regulatory 

structures that provide an incentive for investing in end-use water and energy 

efficiency. 

6. Leverage existing and upcoming voluntary standards that address the energy-water nexus. 

7. Implement codes and mandatory standards that address the energy-water nexus. 8. Pursue education and awareness opportunities for various audiences and 

stakeholders. 

The basic question is: How should this national platform be created and structured? Should it be developed and assigned to an existing federal agency such as 

the Department of Energy or the Council on Environmental Quality? Should it be 

a new public-private entity created by Congress for this purpose? Or should the new 

entity be entirely private and self-governed—perhaps a non-profit organization or a 

private foundation? 

In our view, the answer is likely a combination of the above. Organizations already exist that are separately working on the energy-water nexus, particularly in 

the non-profit sector, although the work is largely uncoordinated at present. Federal 

agencies such as the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense already 

have activity underway on this topic. And foundations have started directing some 

of their philanthropy funding to climate change and energy-water issues. As an example, the Alliance for Water Efficiency’s energy-water nexus work was funded by 

the Turner Foundation and The Kresge Foundation. The Mitchell Foundation funds 

energy-water nexus research in Texas. In our view, the existing landscape of organizations should provide some good candidates. The Energy Foundation or the National Science Foundation, for example, would be great vehicles for national coordination of these issues and additional directed funding on this topic. 

So if there are existing players out there already, why has this ‘‘platform’’ not yet 

happened? The reason is that there isn’t a coordinated focus or specific assignment 

to any one entity. Creating a brand new foundation might be one way to do this, 

since a Congressional mandate for creating such a foundation brings cachet and status for the energy-water nexus issue. But frankly there is nothing to prevent the 

existing organizations out there from doing it now. The fact is that the foundation 

world—and particularly the Energy Foundation—has been focused on funding other 

initiatives or only funding energy-water work in a very limited way. 

In our view the platform activity would be best managed on a centralized basis 

by a federal agency such as the Department of Energy, working in tandem with a 

foundation such as the Energy Foundation for additional needed research funding. 

Creating a brand new separate foundation might work, but it does presume that 

there is significant opportunity for private donations. A model for this idea is the 

National Park Foundation, chartered by Congress in 1967 as the only national charitable nonprofit whose sole mission is to directly support the National Park Service. 

It does this by raising money from other foundations, from corporations, and from 

private citizens—and by all accounts has been highly successful in raising money 

to support the national park system. 

However, we don’t believe that this same model for a private foundation to support energy-water nexus activities will work as successfully as the National Park 

Foundation does. There isn’t the same direct and emotional connection to the energy 

and water issue that people clearly feel for preservation of their national parks. The 

extent of individual citizen contributions will be very small. Corporate contributions 
47 

will be more likely to occur, but it will need to be clear how the corporate donors 

may be involved in governance of the foundation and the eventual determination of 

the funded projects. An important consideration will be how to involve them without 

creating obvious conflicts of interest that might violate the IRS 501(c)(3) private 

foundation rules. 

RESPONSE OF ANDA RAY TO QUESTION FROM SENATORS MURKOWSKI AND SCHATZ

Question 1. Your organizations have done quite a bit to better understand the implications the energy-water nexus has for your members from the electric and water 

utilities, research community, and others. In my energy-water nexus whitepaper 

from this past May, I recommend that we ought to take a serious look at establishing an external organization, such as a foundation, to implement a robust multistakeholder energy-water nexus program. The thought is that such a congressionally-mandated organization could raise private money to support collaborative efforts between all stakeholders, both private and federal. Can you please share your 

thoughts on this? 

Answer. Thank you for your question regarding the establishment of a congressionally mandated external organization that could raise private money to implement a multi-stakeholder energy-water nexus program. I appreciate the opportunity 

to comment on this issue. 

EPRI has extensive experience working with both public and private stakeholders 

at the energy-water nexus. I am pleased to share insights from this experience as 

they relate to the establishment of such an external organization. 

EPRI was founded on a collaborative model in which members pool funds in order 

to advance a common research agenda for the public good. This model has worked 

well for over 40 years. 

Because energy and water are critical to the very existence of our society, a collaborative approach is particularly important in the energy-water nexus space. Sustainable water resource management, for example, involves collaborative decisionmaking across multiple societal and economic sectors, including, energy, municipal, 

residential, agricultural and industrial stakeholders. A congressionally established 

external organization might find ways to facilitate cooperation, collaboration, and 

coordination around the energy-water nexus. 

EPRI’s collaborative model is strengthened when our work is leveraged with state 

and federal funds. However, no government funding is proposed for the establishment or operation of this external organization. Additional federal funds, with a 

focus on ‘‘leveraging’’ private/public resources, could help address research needs 

currently unmet by the private sector and take better advantage of private sector 

funding. Leveraging funds involves specific guidelines (for example, provisions addressing proprietary information), but also has the embedded flexibility to provide 

opportunities for a diverse set of co-funders including government agencies, vendors, 

academia, and non-governmental organizations. 

Several questions are left unaddressed by the proposal in its current form. For 

example, who could do the work of the external organization (government, non-profits, private sector, all of the above)? Who would own any work created by the external organization? What would be the Scope of the foundation/external organization? 

What would it NOT be? 

Again, I appreciate the opportunity to provide written comment for the record on 

this issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of further assistance. 

(49) 

APPENDIX II 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

May 15, 2014. 

Hon. MARY LANDRIEU, 

Chair, 

Hon. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 304 Dirksen 

Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATORS LANDRIEU AND MURKOWSKI: 

The Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE) and the undersigned organizations would 

like to express our strong support for S. 1971, The Nexus of Energy and Water for 

Sustainability (NEWS) Act of 2014, and we thank you for your leadership on this 

important legislation. This bill would provide direction for federal coordination of 

water and energy programs within the National Science and Technology Committee, 

specifically to coordinate and streamline federal activities related to the management of the energy-water nexus. Passage of this bill will be a critical step in promoting better joint management of these two important national resources beginning at the federal level. 

AWE is a stakeholder based non-profit organization dedicated to the efficient and 

sustainable use of water. Our members and supporters include regional, state and 

local water utilities, plumbing, appliance, and irrigation manufacturers, governmental planning agencies, environmental and energy advocacy organizations, wateruse experts, corporations and individuals—all of whom share an interest in promoting water efficiency and sustainability in the United States and Canada. 

We are very interested in the energy-water nexus and have done considerable 

work in this area to highlight its importance. We stand ready to assist you in the 

successful passage of this bill. 

Sincerely, 

Alliance for Water Efficiency; Alliance to Save Energy; American Council 

for an Energy-Efficient Economy; American Standard; Amy Vickers & 

Associates, Inc.; Cahaba River Society; Center for Water-Efficient 

Landscaping; Ecoblue; Econics; Environmental Defense Fund; Global 

Water Policy Project; IAPMO; Kohler Co.; KWC America; Marin Municipal Water District; National Association of Water Companies; National Insulation Association; Neponset River Watershed Association; 

New York City Environmental Protection; Plumbing Manufacturers 

International; Round Rock, TX, City of; SeaCo Supply Corporation; 

Texas Water Foundation; Toto USA; Utah Water Conservation 

Forum; WasteWater Education; Water Demand Management; Waterless Co;. Western Resource Advocates; Woodcock & Associates, Inc. 

STATEMENT OF DAN KEPPEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FAMILY FARM ALLIANCE, 

KLAMATH FALLS, OR 

On behalf of the Family Farm Alliance, I write to express our strong support for 

S. 1971, the ‘‘Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability Fact of 2014’’ (NEWS 

Act of 2014). 

The Alliance is a grassroots organization of family farmers, ranchers, irrigation 

districts and allied industries in 16 Western states. Several of our members are mutual ditch and irrigation districts. The Alliance is focused on one mission: To ensure 

the availability of reliable, affordable irrigation water supplies to Western farmers 

and ranchers. S. 1971 calls for better coordination and management of relevant en-
50 

ergy-water nexus activities across the Federal Government by establishing a clear 

mechanism for this purpose. 

Western farmers and ranchers are concerned with the significant new overall 

power demands that are already being felt with demand growing in the future. The 

total water consumed by electric utilities accounts for 20 percent of all the nonfarm 

water consumed in the U.S. Vast amounts of water are used every day to produce 

vital fuels and to cool power plants in the United States. Without this water supply, 

most of our electricity would stop flowing and our economy and other essential functions would cease. At the same time, a great deal of energy is needed to treat, transport and convey water throughout the Western U.S., not only to support economic 

growth and well-being but also to sustain basic life. These inseparable links of 

‘‘water for energy’’ and ‘‘energy for water’’ comprise the energy-water nexus. 

The NEWS Act instructs the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to establish a committee or a subcommittee under the National Science 

and Technology Council (NSTC) to coordinate and streamline the activities of all 

Federal departments and agencies on energy-water nexus issues. This new panel 

will be co-chaired by the Secretaries of Energy and Interior and will be tasked with 

identifying all relevant energy-water nexus activities across the Federal Government; enhancing the coordination of effective research and development activities 

(both on-going and in the future); working to gather and disseminate data to enable 

better practices; and exploring relevant public-private collaboration. The bill also 

calls for the Office of Management and Budget to submit to the relevant congressional committees a socalled ‘‘cross-cut’’ budget soon after enactment of this act. The 

cross-cut budget will detail various expenditures across the Federal Government related to energy-water activities and will greatly assist in coordinating and streamlining these activities and identifying and eliminating duplicative efforts to the extent possible. 

This bill is expected to be ‘‘budget-neutral’’. The NSTC is expected to utilize existing coordination mechanisms with minimal or no additional spending. 

This is a very large mission, and we anticipate that it may be difficult to implement, due to the significant coordination that will need to occur, with a large number of entities. With that said, we believe this is an important bill, and the Family 

Farm Alliance urges your Committee to consider and pass this important legislation. I encourage you or your staff to contact me at (541)-892-6244 if you have any 

questions. 

STATEMENT OF MELISSA MEEKER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WATERUSE ASSOCIATION, 

ALEXANDRIA, VA 

On behalf of the WateReuse Association (WateReuse), I write to express our 

strong support for S. 1971, the ‘‘Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability Act 

of 2014’’ (NEWS Act of 2014). 

WateReuse represents 400 organizational members, including water agencies and 

corporations throughout the United States who actively practice and support water 

reuse and recycling. Water recycling and reuse remains the one reliable and readily 

available new source of fresh water across the Nation, and we believe the reuse and 

recycling of water to be a key part of intelligent conservation and management of 

both energy and water resources that will help us meet the demands of tomorrow. 

S. 1971 calls for better coordination and management of relevant energy-water 

nexus activities across the Federal Government by establishing a multiagency process for this purpose. 

WateReuse believes that we, as a Nation must focus on the relationship that energy and water have with one another in order to provide sustainable supplies of 

these important resources in the future. WateReuse believes that overall energy demands will continue to grow, putting even more pressure on the limited water resources so important to the Nation, as large volumes of water are used daily in the 

production of electricity. In the United States, for example, the total water consumed by electric utilities accounts for 20-percent of all the nonagricultural water 

consumed in the U.S. At the same time, large amounts of energy are used to treat 

and move water to people, farms and factories. In our view, these two resources 

must be considered as connected in the planning and development of future sources 

of both energy and water supplies in order for the Nation to continue to grow and 

prosper. 

The reuse and recycling of water must be considered a significant tool that can 

be used to manage both energy and water resources. In many instances, raw water 

supplies must be pumped, transported, and treated using tremendous energy resources in the process to meet water demands. This water is then used and treated 
51 

again, many times to be ‘‘thrown away’’. By reusing this water, we can recapture 

the energy resources already invested by simply administering a final treatment 

and recycling this water back into the system to meet ongoing demands. This additional supply of recycled water can also conserve the energy used in transporting 

and pumping raw water by reducing and replacing the demand for that raw water. 

In summary, water reuse and recycling projects can conserve both energy and water 

by utilizing the water that is already on site and readily available. 

WateReuse supports the fact that the NEWS Act would coordinate and streamline 

the activities of all Federal departments and agencies on energy-water nexus issues. 

The Act would engage the Secretaries of the Departments of Energy and the Interior and task them with identifying all relevant energy-water nexus activities across 

the Federal government, including the Environmental Protection Agency, and enhancing the coordination of effective research and development activities. Also, the 

Act would require the Federal agencies to gather and disseminate data to enable 

better practices and explore relevant public-private collaboration. We believe the 

NEWS Act can provide new opportunities to conserve and manage our limited energy and water resources, as well as provide a streamlined, coordinated approach 

to energy-water nexus partnerships with the Federal government, especially in the 

areas of enhanced project funding and financing, and on the research and development of next generation water reuse technologies. 

In conclusion, WateReuse thanks you for your leadership on this important nexus, 

and urges your Committee to consider and pass this important legislation. I encourage you or your staff to contact me at (703) 548-0880 Ext. 102 if you have any questions. 

STATEMENT OF EVAN R. GADDIS, PRESIDENT AND CEO, NATIONAL ELECTRICAL

MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, ROSSLYN, VA 

The National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) commends you for advancing the important issue of the energy-water nexus. 

As you know, power generation is the number one use of freshwater in the United 

States, accounting for roughly 201,000 million gallons per day. Similarly, water delivery is heavily dependent on energy in the extraction, treatment, and distribution 

of the water supply. Estimates of the amount electricity needed at the state level 

for the purpose of water processing can be as high as 19 percent of their total energy consumption. 

NEMA and its 400-plus member companies manufacture more than 50 types of 

products that provide greater energy efficiency. For example, with the right combination of efficient motors, drives and motor control systems, NEMA members’ 

technologies can reduce both the energy needed and operating costs of treating and 

transporting water. These technologies are ready today and greater deployment of 

them will help to address the challenges associated with the energy-water nexus. 

More specifically, S. 1971, the Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability 

(NEWS) Act of 2014 is an important step that will bring together government, industry, and other stakeholders to develop practical responses to the energy-water 

nexus. We appreciate your efforts to bring greater attention to the energy-water nexus. 

NEMA and its members stand ready to assist you and your staff. 

STATEMENT OF DAIN M. HANSEN, VICE PRESIDENT, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS

On behalf of The IAPMO Group, thank you for introducing S.1971, ‘‘The Nexus 

of Energy and Water for Sustainability Act of 2014.’’ The NEWS Act will institute 

a clear mechanism for interagency coordination across the federal government by establishing a committee devoted to identifying all energy-water nexus issues. Consequently, this legislation will provide a much-needed platform for collaboration 

among all stakeholders on relevant research and development efforts, enabling better practices. As an organization invested in resource conservation and the advancement of technology, we commend your efforts on this front. 

The links between water and energy are undeniable, as the production of one resource is highly dependent on the utilization of the other. In fact, 86% of electricity 

in the United States is produced utilizing steam turbines in thermoelectric power 

generating stations—equalling more than 3.4 trillion kilowatt hours (kWh.) Additionally, more than 12 billion gallons of freshwater are consumed daily, cooling the 

power plants that produce the fuels upon which our economy relies. Conversely, vast 

amounts of energy and electricity are expended in the treatment and transportation 
52 

of water. The availability of life’s most basic and essential need is greatly dependent 

upon large amounts of energy and it should be the top priority of our lawmakers 

to ensure its security. 

Along these lines, I’d like to call your attention to the National Institute of Building Science’s 2013 Report to the President of the United States. IAPMO chairs the 

Energy and Water Topical Committee for the Institute’s Consultative Council and 

this year’s report contains specific recommendations pertaining to the water-energy 

nexus, along with additional recommendations pertaining to energy and water efficiency. We welcome you to download the report at: http://c.yrncdn.com/sites/ 

www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/FilesNIBSl2013lAnnualReportlweb.pdf. 

Our need for water and energy cannot be avoided, but our use of them can be 

improved. The NEWS Act will encourage and foster an environment of open and 

continuous communication among all stakeholders, greatly enhancing research efforts and allowing for valuable knowledge and data to be shared effectively. This 

legislation will help us to secure our nation’s resources for generations to come. 

Thank you again for all of your work and introducing S.1971. We support this legislation and look forward to working with you to ensure its passage. 

STATEMENT OF KEN KIRK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN

WATER AGENCIES

The National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) is pleased to support 

S. 1971, The Nexus of Energy and Water for Sustainability Act of 2014 (NEWS Act), 

which recognizes the important connection between energy and water by creating 

a committee within the National Science and Technology Committee to coordinate 

and streamline federal activities related to the management of the energy-water 

nexus; the notion that all forms of energy production require water and that our 

use of water requires energy. 

In many communities around the country, public wastewater utilities are the single largest consumer of energy due to the vast amount of power needed to move, 

treat, and reclaim millions of gallons of wastewater every day. This is not only resource intensive, it is expensive for the ratepayers who bear the costs. As such, improving energy efficiency within the wastwater sector is an absolute priority for 

NACWA’s member utilities. Wastewater utilities can also provide recycled water for 

colling sources. By embracing new technologies and cutting-edge practices, clean 

water utilities have become a vital partner in this country’s work to manage our 

energy and water resources more efficiently, effectively, and affordably. 

The energy-water nexus is a central to NACWA’s Water Resources Utility of the 

Future campaign, which recognizes the important innovation occurring within the 

wastewater sector to help communities better manage their clean water needs. 

NACWA extends its thanks to you for for your leadership in this area, and urges 

all Members of Congress to support this important legislation. 

Æ