I've got into the energy area in Minnesota from Iowa where I had to head of the Iowa Energy office. And before that. I was a member of the Iowa 2000 committee that worked on that State's efforts to decide what kind of a stated wanted to be in the year 2000. So it was somewhat through the planning area that I made the transition from journalism to Administration. One of the persons who was most impressive to me as I was working in Iowa in the area of the futurism was Alvin Toffler who I think has been one of the most profound authors of the current seen. He makes the point that most of our crises leave us a very very little room for manoeuvre. I think energy and crisis have been a couple the terms that are used with great frequency. The reason topper says is that when we are in the midst of a crisis the factors that have led to that crisis decisions that were made many many years earlier. And as a consequence in the throes of a severe energy supply problem or some other problem. The options are exceedingly limited the really managing with her within very tight limits. As a consequence than toddler says if we want to really affect the future effect change, we have to look at where we want to be 5 10 15 20 years from now and make the decisions. Now that will move us in that direction and ultimately if we're going to deal with some of these problems successfully without the gripping tents emergency situation that so frequently arises. It's going to require a longer view more planning more perception more ability to see the direction that the current actions we've taken our caring us. This is certainly true in the energy area where the energy Supply problems that are occurring with greater frequency are the result of the number of resource used to say Asians that were made too many years ago. I think the it's very important for anyone who is in the planning area in Minnesota to start out with some recognition of just Where We Are And if you look at the energy supplies, you can start out from a fairly simple equation with supplies on one side and uses on the other end for many many years the supplies exceeded the uses and we had no energy problems. What is occurring is a closer and closer balance between available supplies and energy demand? Still by and large supplies exceed demand and by and large we don't have serious Supply problems. But as the balance between these becomes narrower and narrower the kinds of Supply problems. We had a 1973 again this winter and some areas of the state electricity Supply problems last summer as the balance becomes more narrow the the the likelihood of energy emergencies become a greater and greater. The on the supply side. We have various fuels we have petroleum natural gas cold hydro and nuclear energy alternative energy systems such as solar and these other systems if you look at those or a sector-by-sector you get a better understanding of that half of the equation. In the petroleum area petroleum supplies about 43% of the BTUs of energy used in Minnesota last year's the largest sector about half of our petroleum comes from Canada through pipelines that then lead to Minnesota area refineries where the oil is the processed into diesel fuels your middle level distillates gasoline. Hey, the residual oils airplane fuels a variety of petroleum products. The other half comes into the state from product pipelines that extend refineries to the South and West Canada is rapidly curtailing its exports of crude oil and its pursuit of its own energy Independence policy and as a consequence, so there is a real concern now about whether the refineries requiring Canadian crude will be able to continue to operate they won't have sufficient supplies to operate for more than a year or two of us some alternative sources of crude oil are of made available. This would be alternative but crude oil pipelines. I saw this clearly is a critical supply problem. If we were to lose half of that 43% we would lose something in the range of 20 to 25% of our current energy, which would have disastrous repercussions throughout the state. So we are at the energy agency at the state level working to provide some alternative pipeline connections for these refineries and without getting into the detail of those pipeline connections. It looks as if there will be at least there are plans for pipelines. That would make up for the Lost Canadian crude oil. If that occurs, then we would be in the same position in Minnesota that the nation is facing declining domestic crude oil production and with the balance of payments and security problems associated with increased Imports. So the supply of petroleum, although we have some immediate problems is closely tied to National Petroleum Supply problems in and hear the best guess I think would be that we will probably have to get along with about as much petroleum in the future as we have now domestic production of petroleum has Pete Pete's in 1970. And I think it will be very likely that President Carter and his April 20th energy message will come up with some kind of recommendations that will at least hold a limit a cap on the amount of imported crude oil. He probably will be calling for some kind of reduction in crude oil imports any reduction in Call Imports below the current level will be exceedingly difficult to achieve in my view. That would mean you would end up with less and less crude oil has you reduced your Imports? And as you at the same time got left from us Wells. In the area of natural gas natural gas is a source of about 30% of our energy in Minnesota. Natural gas cannot be so easily imported. It's much more costly to liquefy it and then we gas if I can't carry the gas on boats it would just take up too much space we get most of our natural gas from the northern natural gas pipeline system. It goes to the Southwest part of the country to Wells that are older Wells that are losing their supply. So the Outlook is for some decline in gas from these traditional parts of the country in the range of 4 to 6% a year this to some extent will be offset by new whales in the Gulf there would be a healthy increase in gas for this area. If the North Slope of Alaska gas comes across Canada through the proposed Arctic gas pipeline system, but in the natural gas area as well as a petroleum, we're looking at a resource that has Pete natural gas production of this country Pizza 1973. How's you're all familiar? Probably with bell-shaped curves bell-shaped curve can be very useful in determining just what are a supply of energy production follows. There's a. Of rather slow development them quite a bit intense rapid growth the lazy against against time it Peaks out and then the stays at a fairly high level for a while. Then starts are quite a Brisk sharp Decline and then is used for some. Of time thereafter, but with both petroleum and natural gas were looking at at fossil supplies that will not be significant sources of energy within the next 20 to 40 years. So in Minnesota were looking at getting about 3/4 of our current energy from sources that are going to deteriorate in terms of available volumes here quite rapidly during the next ten years will still be on the crest of that bell-shaped curve, but after that the level of the Fine as in all likelihood going to accelerate. Play Third energy source in Minnesota is cold a cold provides about 17% of our energy or we have some Geographic disadvantages and terms of being at the end of the pipeline with petroleum and natural gas. We have some advantages as far as cold as concerned and that we are relatively close to the high chol yield areas of the Northern Great Plains much does cold about 40% of the nation's call is in that area of northeast of Wyoming Southeast Montana and Southwest North Dakota. Do we have some Geographic advantages there their problems throughout the cold fuel cycle ranging from some of the cold being on Indian lands to Val and Rehabilitation to weather use coal slurry pipelines or are trains to the location of Coltrane shipping facilities to air pollution problems of sulfur oxides and particulates, but the BTUs of Are there and there will be an increased use of coal because most of our lost energy supplies in the petroleum and natural gas. So I will probably be made up in cold and because of much of the changes from some of these traditional supplies to electricity and coal is used as a principal fuel for the generation of electricity you move on to the nuclear area of there is a Piers to be a great slowed in down in the amount of nuclear energy plants being constructed several plants in Wisconsin, Iowa have been canceled and we are something on a national up holdfast pattern as far as additional nuclear developments are concerned the proposed plans in Minnesota currently. During the next 10 years or so, we don't anticipate any additional energy in Minnesota as a result of nuclear plants here, then move into the Alternative Energy Systems. This is solar geothermal wind biomass that is plant life. All of these are are quite promising and we need to accelerate their development as rapidly as possible, but would be fooling ourselves. If we thought that these alternative systems could rapidly become a significant large-scale energy resource. Let me just give you a quick rundown through some some percentages in this area because until I started looking at more closely. I was far more hopeful of what could be done with solar energy, but I think most of people looking at solar energy would feel as if quite optimistic if if the 10% of the homes built in Minnesota from Saved 1975 to 1985 were solar homes. Approximately don't say 20% of the homes available in 1985 were built during the Ten Years prior to that time. So that would mean 10% of that 20% of 2% of the homes in Minnesota. That would have solar systems are in 1985 new homes, residential space heating uses about 20% of the energy requirements of Minnesota the others of course go for other things. So you would have 20% times at 2% would be for cancer 1% of the energy requirements in Minnesota 1985 would be from the solar a solar systems never are totally self-supporting. You have to have some kind of backup system that provides about half your energy. So only about two-tenths of 1% of the energy used by those homes would actually come from their solar systems. Any kind of solar system requires energy itself to produce since the you have to have an effect a dual system. So you would have to look at the net energy that would come from the solar system. Would you be somewhat less about two-tenths of 1% that clearly we have to move ahead as rapidly as possible on these Alternative Energy Systems and besides new residential that could be retrofit to Old residential systems. There could be commercial and Industrial Systems for solar energy as well. But we're talking at this just the amount of time that is going to be necessary to move a new energy source into effective utilization is quite large Atoms for Peace program was announced in 1953. And currently we get only about the 3% of our energy nationally from a nuclear energy. So in 23 years despite the hundreds of millions of dollars. Federal investment in the nuclear area, we have less than 3% of our energy nationally coming from that Source or energy systems are so huge. They take time to come make a sweeper sweeping changes. Let me make some conclusions from this energy Supply overview first gas in oil. For the next 10 years or so will be at about the same level of availability in Minnesota or somewhat less. In the area of coal Coal will be used to Greater extent and 80% of our coal is used for electric generation. So we will probably see coal electricity as a more and more significant. Very important to understand here is that the environmental impacts of your coal electricity delivery system are significantly greater in Minnesota. Then the use of the natural gas or petroleum systems. We're here at the effect is largely due to underground pipelines that haven't been a source of great concern when you're talkin about coal and electricity your talk about transmission lines location of generating plants coal trains and your environmental impacts are are sharply greater with a this sort of delivery mechanism. The Alternative Energy Systems are certainly going to be a very important but developments. There are going to be quite slow. Now this is the supply-side the other half of the equation is is conservation. Now we have had in the pasta in Minnesota for several years about a 4% a year increase in energy consumption. And so with those kinds of Supply problems on one side placing quite serious constraints on what will be available. If we look over at the youth side. We see a pattern historically of brother steady increases of of something well in excess of population increases The area of conservation has unfortunately been neglected as a significant source of energy. That's certainly the cleanest fastest and cheapest source of energy is the energy that can be saved through conservation. This isn't recognized locally in the state or are nationally as well as it might have been just as as an example the recent energy policy and conservation act enacted by Congress gave States the assignment of coming up with conservation plans that would provide the for 5% the energy saving over what those States otherwise would be using in the Year 1980 will the appropriation for the implementation of that program prices out at $0.10 a barrel of oil that is the states were given that amount of money to achieve that kind of energy savings. No one really pointed this out legislatively are paid much attention to it, but it's That the Investments that have been received by conservation activities are significantly much many times quantum's below the kind of the interest inappropriation on a tension that's been given to a developing new energy supplies yet. If you can serve a barrel of oil through some kind of insulation program or some kind of Lessa energy-consuming car that barrel of oil is is just as good. In fact, it's preferable in that. It's much cleaner then getting a new barrel of oil to some new. Oh well refining methodology. So clearly it's been neglected. I also it's much more difficult than I anticipated often times. A company will will show that it has come up with a plan for saving 10% of the energy at used to per unit of production or 20% or something like that in the Assumption has been that that kind of saving can be replicated by everyone and that it's not really that much of a job if we could just save 20% of the energy we currently are but if you start looking at specific a measures and what can be done in terms of a at the state level or at the national level you find that putting that kind of saving into effect is far far more difficult than anticipated. Nothing in the conservation area stuff so far. We've looked at the easy targets. We've looked at the important targets but easy targets such as building insulation such as more energy efficient cars such as appliances that don't use as much energy utility. Right? So these are measures that are not too difficult to approach legislatively although up action here has husband I think Progressive in Minnesota were far ahead of other states, but we haven't done everything that we we might we hope the legislature remove on some of the proposals we have before but if we're looking at significant Energy savings if we're looking at really getting at the causes for the amount of energy that is used you looking at other areas the amount of energy that's consumed does significantly related to transportation planning the how you lay out your road system it significantly depends upon land use patterns clearly decentralize systems use far more energy. More centralized systems clearly it's determined by your demographic planning. Just how many people are you planning for by economic planning? What kind of economic system do you want to have in the state? It's all of these were some adjectives followed by the noun planning and it what we're dealing with here are the the demographic transportation land use and economic systems that we experience that we are planning for in the future. And unless we deal with some of these generic factors in our energy consumption patterns are we won't be dealing with some of the basic elements that we're going to have to address. One of the persons who has looked at this with some inside I think is a economist Kenneth boulding. He makes the quote that in the in the past. We've looked upon the man who looked upon ourselves more as Cowboys sort of John Wayne type characters striding across the apparel source of doing the land to our own best interest and then writing off someplace else where there was a new frontier to conquer and I work very well when we had ample a parent resources when there was a West to win that's a dude the Westin build us into the kind of industrial Colossus that we are in the future according to bowling. We need to look at ourselves more as a Spaceman as a person who are on a vehicle a planet of finite resources. We're almost everything that we do affects other things and some Rippling face. Oh where we need to look at the clothes interconnections between the actions that we take and the following environmental economic and energy considerations. Following up on what top floor said earlier. He said we are in our planning often times of to short-term. Often times we feel too much with economics alone and often times we are too elitist and I think these are shortcomings in the planning systems that we've had that will have to be corrected as we look into the future certainly in the area of energy. It's necessary to take a longer. Look at the what are supplies. Hold on for the next two, three, four, five even 10 or 20 years because during this we have to look now at the fact that we are going to be losing our principal fossil fuels natural gas and oil during the next 20 to 40 years. We also have to look at more than economically. I think we've gone to a. When we first for a while looked at the economic considerations primarily, but then we recognize that environmental considerations had been badly neglected and environmental factors got the kind of attention. They needed now, we're starting to be aware of that energy supplies are playing placing constraints on what will be able to do a clearly it's necessary to look at these three profound. He's economics environmental and energy in some way that provides some kind of balancing out of all three of these important considerations. The end of the third area is a toddler points out is the extent to which planning in the past has been elitist. We've had planners who took care of things for us. Minnesota has done some things that are more significant than getting Grassroots input than other states at the EQ see the Environmental Quality Council on siding decisions. There are elaborate efforts made to get citizen input into those decisions. At the energy agency in determining certificates of need whether these will be granted on new energy facilities than effort is made to hold hearings in the affected area and who provide he's for participation in some of these proceedings and notice ahead of time. Despite these efforts probably there is as much concern in Minnesota about some of these major decisions as in almost any other state in part, it looks almost as if as you make special efforts to get the the citizens involved in some of these decisions the citizens get involved to the point where they want to decide what the course will be taken and not all citizens are deciding the same way. So I think this is I guess there's one of the areas that I find Most Fascinating and trying to figure out just how do you achieve for citizen involvement real significant citizen involvement? I yet you're able to have a due process that moves along and makes decisions that have to be made and then resolved things so that you can move ahead. The energy area and the planning area I think are extremely interesting and important because in the energy Supply problems that were facing what we're looking at is resource Supply problems. So we're looking at Water Supply problems. We're looking at the supply problems in terms of some of our basic fuels and also some of our basic minerals are involved in a sense in looking at the problems that mankind faces as it goes from sort of a robust the growing adolescence into an effort to maturely assess what it has in terms of resources and where it wants to go and what it wants to do with its resources. Anyone who in this area says he has the answer clearly doesn't understand the question. What we are do is sort of wrestling with this gigantic systems problem where everything seems to be interacting with air. Play Nelson trying to move it ahead as best we can the clues that I think that we have are the clues the the top four suggested that is that we look ahead as far as we can date. We try to take a balanced view at the goals that we have and that we try to involve the public as much as possible and effectively interacting with those who have the technical expertise. Governor perfect in his energy message outline the number of strong energy conservation recommendations the house natural resources committee proved that the plan this week. So I think we will be building on what the governor and legislature currently is considering. We may have to make some adjustments as we see what the president is considering but we feel as if we have a strong energy conservation package already before the legislature, you mentioned a doctor bowling and dr. Toth or to Innovative and highly thought of authors and Economist another one b f Schumacher who is too recently in discussing his concept of alternative or intermediate Technologies. A lot of people backyard inventors who are trying to come up with these sorts of things on Grass Roots level say that they're bypass when it comes time to fund they lose out to the university into the Honeywell. Is there any attempt being made to reach a small entrepreneurs in the alternative business or is it simply a matter of the decentralization is too much for the energy agency to handle and it's better to go through larger sectors. I have think Schumacher has made a number of excellent points. I think we Need to give far more attention to the intermediate or appropriate Technologies. The energy agency has a program that does this year is funding 29 different lower technology intermediate technology projects involving a total outlay of more than some $400,000. So clearly this is an area that needs more attention. I would hope that the federal government would recognize this as an area to I think Schumacher is correct and giving attention to the fact that the small can be beautiful. I would need both some of the small projects and some of the larger ones I neither small nor beautiful is intrinsically beautiful or ugly. And we've just been placing too much emphasis on on big things and some of the alternative systems eat far more attention than they receive.