Energy & Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership Leverage. Phase II Sector Study: Energy Leverage. Phase II Sector Study: Energy This publication may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form beyond copying permitted by sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. copyright law and excerpts by reviewers for the public press, without written consent from the publishers. THE COUNCIL ON COMPETITIVENESS is a nonprofit, 501(c) (3) organization as recognized by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. The Council’s activities are funded by contributions from its members, foundations, and project contributions. To learn more about the Council on Competitiveness, visit our home page at Compete.org.

COPYRIGHT © 2018 Council on Competitiveness

Printed in the United States of America Energy & Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership Leverage. Phase II Sector Study: Energy

Table of Contents 3

Table of Contents

Letter from the Co-Chairs 4 Introduction 5 Findings & Recommendations 6 Setting the Stage 8 Stakeholder Dialogue 10 Moving Forward 16 About the Energy & Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership 17 About the Council on Competitiveness 18 Council on Competitiveness Membership 19 EMCP Steering & Advisory Committees 23 Appendices Participants 25 Agenda 26 White Paper 29 4 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Letter from the Co-Chairs

The Council on Competitiveness, Exelon Corporation, cyber attacks; better guide research and investment Penn State University and Argonne National Labora- in the energy sector to areas in a way that speeds tory are pleased to present the final report on the the commercialization of new technologies; and Energy and Manufacturing Competitiveness encourage a multidisciplinary approach to education Partnership (EMCP) dialogue on America’s energy that provides the current and future workers with the sector. Leverage: Energy provides an overview of skills needed to succeed in the various and evolving this critical sector of the economy, as well as a set areas encompassed by the energy sector. of recommendations on how America can address We recognize that none of this would be possible the challenges and capitalize on the opportunities without the support of our members and key experts presented by new-found energy abundance and an that provided their valuable input and unique per- expanding supply of more sustainable, clean energy. spectives and we thank them all for their continued With one of the most complex supply portfolios of work with us. We look forward to continuing engage- any industry, the U.S. energy sector is an enormous ment with national and regional leaders in industry, driver of research, innovation and manufacturing academia, national laboratories and government as across a broad range of technologies and applica- we capture insights and recommendations across tions. Energy is the competitive advantage of our our sector dialogues and put forward an action plan country, and our abundance of existing low-cost and to drive U.S. productivity and prosperity. low emission energy can continue to drive economic Sincerely, growth for the entire economy and create opportuni- ties to advance our manufacturing capabilities. But radical changes in the energy sector are hap- pening faster than ever. From inconsistent market The Honorable structures that threaten existing low emission Deborah L. Wince-Smith Dr. Eric Barron President resources to changing economic pressure and rising President & CEO Council on Competitiveness Penn State University security threats, the challenges that accompany opportunities in the energy sector are numerous and complex. Because of the constant evolution of the energy sector and its significant role in America’s Mr. Christopher Crane Dr. Paul Kearns ability to compete, this sector study is central to President & CEO Director the themes and issues we have explored as part Exelon Corporation Argonne National Laboratory of the EMCP. Among the key findings of this study, which builds on the first four sector studies conducted under the Council’s leadership, are the need to: develop addi- tional energy storage capacity; protect America’s energy infrastructure from the threat of physical and Introduction 5

Introduction

Energy is the linchpin of economic growth and competitive advantage for industry and workers, prosperity. In its abundance, low-cost, efficient business practices, government policies, and strategic energy can create a competitive advantage for the investments must reflect the opportunities for and United States, enabling increased productivity and needs of the private sector. Capitalizing on the efficiency across industries. The country’s commit- opportunities of America’s energy-manufacturing ment to energy efficiency has helped not only to nexus requires overcoming barriers in talent, reduce the negative environmental impacts associ- technology, investment and infrastructure. ated with heavy industrial and consumer reliance on The Council on Competitiveness hosted the Energy energy, traditionally in the form of coal and other and Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership fossil fuels, but also to reduce costs and drive inno- (EMCP) sector study dialogue on energy on May 31, vation and competitiveness. 2017 in partnership with Exelon Corporation, Penn As the world sits on the precipice of a clean energy State University and Argonne National Laboratory to revolution, energy resides as an attractive invest- address these and other current issues in the energy ment that both supports preserving the nation’s economy. The dialogue focused on strategies for a existing zero emission technologies and enables sustainable, economically viable energy future that new technologies and innovative strategies to satisfies the sometimes-competing needs of con- reduce our carbon footprint and remain sustainable sumers, industry and the environment. Based on the for generations to come. But America’s energy discussion, this report puts forth recommendations security is also an issue of national security. As we to capitalize on the current capabilities and future continue to advance and modernize America’s opportunities across the energy landscape. energy systems, it is important to ensure grid mod- ernization does not occur at the expense of security. Monitoring cyber activity and guarding against infiltrations of America’s grid and nuclear plants are a significant concern, and grid security is a national security risk of the highest order. In its 2011 report, Make: An American Manufacturing Movement, the Council declares “the image of manufacturing as dumb, dirty, dangerous and disappearing is inaccurate.” In fact, today’s manufacturing, underpinned by today’s energy portfolio, is increasingly “smart, safe, sustainable and surging.” But to transform this outlook into a clear 6 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Findings & Recommendations

• Implement regulatory policies that • Secure America’s critical energy encourage the preservation, development infrastructure from cyber attacks. According and implementation of more efficient, clean to the Department of Homeland Security, last energy solutions. With gains being made in year, of the cyber incidents targeting industrial efficient energy technologies, the United States control systems in the 16 infrastructure sectors is becoming more self-reliant and even an designated as critical, 20 percent were in the exporter of energy and energy technologies. The energy sector.2 Technological advancements approach of preservation and investment provides made in favor of energy efficiency are outpacing a comparative advantage in many fuel-based security and will continue to do so unless we sectors of the economy, increases cost-efficiency change the way we approach and implement in major manufacturing sectors and promotes cybersecurity strategies and practices. Protecting investment in existing and new technologies. America’s energy infrastructure against cyber Policymakers and regulators in the United States attacks is an issue of national security, and must embrace new scientific discoveries and requires a model for valuation of cyber security modeling and simulation technologies to maximize and best practices that includes input from a efficiency for non-renewable energy sources and diverse group of stakeholders from industry, increase production of clean energy. academia and government. • Direct funding and investment toward innova- • Utilize national labs to develop innovative tion in energy storage capabilities and clean energy technologies. The national labs, when energy technology. It is widely accepted that provided appropriate funding, have the means to innovation is responsible for one third of gains in design improvements for reliable and efficient economic growth in the United States. For exam- energy equipment such as wind turbines or oil ple, by shifting focus toward innovation, nuclear and gas drills that are cost-effective and less plants have been able to increase operating capac- prone to traditional wear. By investing in national ity from 60 percent to more than 90 percent in labs and making their resources available to the past 30 years.1 Policymakers must create private entrepreneurs and innovative start- incentives that accelerate the pace of change in ups, researchers can hope to foster major the energy sector, which would allow for more technological breakthroughs in the areas of immediate returns on innovation as well as future energy production and storage. economic development. This includes modernizing the energy grid, updating our energy infrastructure, preserving the nation’s zero emission resources and focusing on clean, resilient and renewable energy sources.

1 World Energy Needs and Nuclear Power, World Nuclear Association, 2 ICS-CERT Year in Review, Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency August 28, 2017. Response Team, Department of Homeland Security, 2016. Findings & Recommendations 7

• Guide research to the market and provide • Encourage lifelong learning opportunities guidance on where investment can be most that allow students to gain more skills and impactful to speed the commercialization of stack credentials. Every time a new technology new technologies. Building the bridge between is developed, there must be a ripple of new universities, national labs and the business world training within the industry so workers can is critical to ensure research is not stranded operate these new machines and researchers in universities or labs. Universities, companies can build on intermediary technologies to develop and the federal government must ensure breakthrough inventions. Utilities, technical adequate and predictable R&D spending to companies and labor unions can ensure their foster technological development and the federal current employees’ skill sets are meeting the government must encourage investments that put evolving needs of the energy industry by providing the United States in a more competitive position. education opportunities to people across diverse • Encourage a multidisciplinary approach to ages and stages of their careers. education that includes opportunities for students to learn technical skills, soft skills, teamwork and critical thinking skills from early development through post-graduate education. Education must distance from teaching by syllabus as this stifles creativity. Policymakers must provide funding for technical education in high schools and give students hands-on training while de-stigmatizing well- paying “blue collar” jobs. Students should have access to occupational engineers in hands-on problem solving, and teachers must continue to learn and communicate with industry experts to evolve science curriculum. 8 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Setting the Stage

In the past decade, the United States has developed existing zero emission resources and recognize new into a world-leading net exporter of energy fuels, opportunities are available to replace traditional, making significant gains in crude and natural gas environmentally damaging fossil fuels with cleaner exports. Residential and commercial energy energy sources. demands remain relatively flat, whereas industry Increased funding for research and development of demand is growing. This is particularly true in the advanced materials can foster major technological plastics and manufacturing industries, which rely breakthroughs in efficient fuel extraction, storage heavily on petroleum (2 percent growth) and shale and deployment of sustainable energy solutions. 3 gas (3.5 percent growth). All the while, renewable Such opportunities for new technologies will likely energy supply is stagnating at 1 percent annual reside within national labs and with start-up entre- growth. Fossil fuels persist as an attractive fuel preneurs, in partnership with industry leaders and source due to their storage capacity at a volume university partners. 20 times higher than batteries4 and the increasing support of shale gas extraction infrastructure, which America’s aging energy grid and storage issues last year reached over $100 billion in investment inherent to renewable energies, however, concern from the chemical industry alone.5 traditional investors. The energy economy faces slow speed-to-market innovations because of the deterio- Driven largely by economic growth, energy con- rating vital link between scientific research and the sumption is predicted to increase by 48 percent market, often the result of impatient capital. Although 6 between 2012 and 2040. Meanwhile, the coal- the research is happening in the United States, an and gas-supported grid is foreseeably unreliable often-convoluted regulatory environment doubles the due to environmental instabilities such as hurricanes construction time of nuclear plants7 and offers and snowstorms. The nation’s focus, as recognized investors only long-term (20-30 years) returns on by the DOE in a recent Grid Study, is for a reliable, wind and solar investments.8 Producers are incentiv- resilient, diverse and flexible resource mix that ized to move to places like China where relaxed encourages efficiency and supports the opportunity environmental regulations result in faster construc- for investment in new technologies that benefit tion of necessary infrastructure with higher returns. customers and their communities. With international To combat this, a balance between regulations and governments and industry leaders increasingly in industry speed must be struck. support of reducing our carbon footprint, the United States must make it a priority to preserve the Finally, when it comes to building a talented work- force in the energy sector, collaboration between university and industry leaders is necessary to 3 Total Energy: Production: Crude Oil and Lease Condensate, U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2017. 4 Bu-1007: Net Calorific Value, Battery University, March 6, 2016. 5 U.S. Chemical Investment Linked to Shale Gas Reaches $100 Billion, American Chemistry Council, February 20, 2014. 7 Nuclear Power in the USA, World Nuclear Association, September 2017. 6 EIA Projects 48% Increase in World Energy Consumption by 2040, 8 Investors are Making Money on Renewable Energy, Mindy Lubber, U.S. Energy Information Aministration, May 12, 2016. Forbes, March 20, 2012. Setting the Stage 9

Participants discuss competitiveness in the energy sector at a dialogue hosted by Exelon at Workspring in Chicago, IL.

ensure emerging talent is able to compete in this changing landscape. With over 50 percent of the energy sector’s workforce set to retire in the next decade,9 educators are being called upon to offer hands-on technical education to students while unions and energy companies are realizing the need to develop updated teaching methods to ensure workers can operate new machines and researchers can develop breakthrough technologies.

9 Who Will Replace Nuclear Power’s Aging Work Force?, Russell Ray, Power Engineering, February 5, 2015. 10 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Stakeholder Dialogue

Advancing U.S. Energy—Infrastructure The replacement of traditional fossil fuels, such as coal, with natural gas and other cleaner energy New-found abundance of non-conventional fossil sources is in part a consequence of regulations fuel—primarily the proliferation of low-carbon natural encouraging cleaner fuel options. Other variables gas—heralds lower energy costs, a new generation of also affect the reliability and utility of coal, such as energy innovation and an energy productivity-driven the development of smart grids and the need to renaissance in manufacturing. But increasing con- counter more frequent and more severe weather sumption from the industrial sectors and their heavy phenomena.13 As the energy mix continues to trans- reliance on shale gas creates growing pressure on form, there is a need to adjust consumption patterns the extraction infrastructure.10 Simultaneously, nega- and develop the storage infrastructure to balance tive perceptions around nuclear energy and low ebbs and flows in the supply of renewable energy. visibility of private sector development—despite its Energy must also remain affordable, meaning viability as the largest clean alternative to fossil encouraging production and access is vital. Despite fuels—are pushing investment toward renewable large investments, meeting the needs of industry and energy sources.11 Together, these factors present individuals while keeping energy abundant and both challenges and opportunities to the energy cheap is a persistent challenge. sector as it continues to transform to meet current As the country’s energy sector continues to evolve and future needs. and innovate to meet changing demand and Amer- One of the most significant shifts in the energy ica continues to modernize its energy infrastructure matrix is the growing prevalence of natural gas, a and grid, the security of U.S. digital infrastructure potentially cleaner and cheaper choice other over supporting grid and energy operations is crucial. fossil fuels. Increased natural gas dependency Recently, efficiency has been prioritized over secu- financially benefits consumers, but gas and coal grid rity, making grid and nuclear plant monitoring, even coordination issues pose resiliency risks, with the infiltrations, a significant concern.14 Grid security is possibility of incidents like service interruptions and a national security risk of the highest magnitude delivery challenges. Pipeline capacity and the ability and requires public-private partnerships and cross- to deliver natural gas to consumers not living near sector coordination. Policymakers must engage on drill sites significantly impacts prices, further com- potential impacts of cyber attacks and weigh costs pounded by federal policies pushing responsibility to and benefits. expand infrastructure onto states.12

10 For the First Time, Majority of Americans Oppose Nuclear Energy, Gallup, March 2016. 11 ibid. 13 Energize America: Invest in a Smarter Electricity Infrastructure, Brigham Mccown, The Hill, July 11, 2017. 12 2013 Special Reliability Assessment: Accommodating an Increased Dependence on Natural Gas for Electric Power, North American 14 Electric Grid Security and Resilience: Establishing a Baseline for Electric Reliability Corporation, May 2013. Adversarial Threats, Department of Energy, June 2016. Stakeholder Dialogue 11

Although there are challenges in the U.S. energy immediate and future returns.17 Changes in the sector, as an industry it has tremendous potential to energy industry happen slowly, though, and there contribute to overall economic growth. Labor, capi- is a need to better understand how to accelerate tal and innovation drive economic growth in energy innovation and advancement, in order to grow with 1 percent of the annual U.S. growth rate due industries and create new jobs. to modernization.15 In the past 30 years, nuclear plants went from running at 60 percent capacity to Advancing U.S. Energy—Technology 16 90 percent —due largely to innovation as opposed Technological innovation is essential to capitalizing to added labor—confirming the necessity of long- on the growing number of opportunities that exist in term industry drivers while creating incentives for America’s energy sector. The country’s ability to

Source: Argonne National Laboratory.

15 Game Changer: Five Opportunities for US Growth and Renewal, Susan Lund, James Manyika, Scott Nyquist, Lenny Mendonca and Sreenivas Ramaswamy, McKinsey & Company, July 2013. 16 Nuclear Power in the USA, World Nuclear Association, August 4, 2017. 17 ibid. 12 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Source: Argonne National Laboratory.

make technical advancements in energy storage, crucial, as they are building blocks for the energy for example, is perhaps the most prominent example sector and support production and usage of energy. and would be an industry game-changer in terms of But developing and deploying new advanced materi- global competitiveness. Improving the United States’ als requires not only research, but also design and ability to store renewable energy and therefore deployment. Using computational science instead of control distribution and provide a more consistent trial-and-error in this process can lead to significant supply would further spur innovation in clean energy improvements. Designing metals less prone to tradi- for manufacturing, heating and even vehicles. tional wear and tear for wind turbines or drilling equip- Similarly, facilitating access to national laboratories ment, for example, can increase reliability and for entrepreneurs and innovators across America’s efficiency while reducing costs. growing number of start-ups has the potential to kick Widespread evolution of the energy sector, however, start innovation not only in energy storage but also requires a shift from an energy deficiency mentality across various aspects of the energy sector. Innova- to one of abundance. America is verging on trans- tion in advanced materials, for example, is also portation fuel self-sufficiency, with high job creation potential, thanks in part to new discoveries and well Stakeholder Dialogue 13

simulation technologies. The United States may in the energy sector. New technologies often face also be on the precipice of a carbon economy, with regulations that impede the ability to secure early- advancements in manufacturing enzymes and stage capital funding. In these cases, while research computation leading the way forward. But production may occur in the United States, the regulatory and commercialization of new technologies are environment incentivizes production to move significant challenges, as the perceived cost to elsewhere—to countries like China, for example— manufacturers of using new processes or materials where production is more viable and less costly often outweighs the supposed benefits. As a result, as a consequence of a laxer regulatory environment. companies must take it upon themselves to be There is also a significant imbalance between designers, producers and suppliers. funding available to areas such as software and Another challenge is connecting science and manu- biotechnology—which provide short-term payoff and facturing back to the market. Material development present less risk—and energy, where innovation is for only the sake of research is not useful, especially often plagued by extended project lifecycles. Slow regarding technology innovation. Connecting univer- technical change in nuclear energy is a key example, sities and businesses is critical to accelerating as smaller water-based reactors are not expected to innovation and ensuring research moves out of be operational until 2025 due to an average of four academia and is implemented. years of regulatory review required before construc- tion begins.18 In South Carolina, two reactor projects Advancing U.S. Energy—Investment were recently scrapped mid-construction due to 19 When it comes to designing, developing and deploy- budgeting and regulation issues. ing new energy technologies, it is important to Some entrepreneurial capital has entered the energy consider the investment cycle and analyze the mar- sector in the past five years despite long wait times, ket. Investors put significant thought into whether a possibly due to a seismic global shift in demand product is truly innovative, what the market size is, toward low-carbon, cleaner energy options. This shift whether the speed to market is viable and what is less about specific policies or agreements and execution of this cycle would cost. But as global more the willingness and patience of investors to competition grows, investment is becoming increas- wait for the anticipated return on investment. ingly disconnected from the market. Policies do play a role, however, as some states have One of the most persistent challenges in the energy found regulations supporting low-carbon energy sector is a lack of guidance when it comes to direct- profitable. New York, for example, after studying how ing investment to areas with the highest potential for to achieve statewide goals of reducing carbon impact. Additionally, the regulatory environment in emissions by 40 percent and generating 50 percent the United States is not keeping pace with innovation

18 Nuclear Innovators Say Public-Private Collaboration Vital, Nuclear Energy Institute, May 19, 2016. 19 U.S. Nuclear Comeback Stalls as Two Reactors Are Abandoned, by Brad Plumer, The New York Times, July 31, 2017. 14 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Mr. Christopher Crane, President and CEO, Exelon Corporation, addresses Dr. Eric Barron, President, Penn State University, leads the discussion on energy sector dialogue participants. talent in the energy sector.

of the state’s electricity with renewable sources by petitive. Data shows that federal investment in R&D 2030, found that using Zero Emission Credits (ZECs) has declined, while university investment has risen to keep existing nuclear plants operating can hold to a level that is likely unsustainable.21 The electric down carbon emissions during the transition phase utilities receive one of the lowest percentages of necessary for these other carbon-free options to R&D spending despite the call for massive transfor- ramp up to scale. This would save New York custom- mation of the system—demonstrating a significant ers about a billion dollars a year, or $12 billion by disconnect.22 Federal research and development 2030, compared with immediately replacing the investments are declining, causing concern across upstate nuclear plants with 100 percent renew- sectors and raising red flags around the ability of the ables.20 These types of pathways to long-term invest- U.S. energy sector to remain a global leader in the ment growth and consumer incentives are crucial to long-term. promoting clean energy and the goal of providing electricity to the 2.1 billion living without. Advancing U.S. Energy—Building Talent While industry has increased its research spending Every instance of technological development requires and venture capital is available, federal funding for training so workers can quickly grasp concepts and R&D is essential to foster continued technological researchers can build on intermediary technologies innovation and keep America’s energy sector com-

21 Trump’s Cuts to Federal Science Funding Will Mean Less Industry R&D, Not More, by Adams Nager, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, March 17, 2017. 20 Preserving Upstate Nuclear Saves New York Consumers Billions, Compared With Additional Renewables Beyond CES Goals, by Dean 22 Trends in Non-Defense R & D by Function, American Association for Murphy and Mark Berkman, 2016. the Advancement of Science, 2012. Stakeholder Dialogue 15

a traditional method of learning by syllabus—which often stifles creativity rather than encouraging an entrepreneurial mindset—universities must provide training in four fundamental areas—technical skills, soft skills, teamwork and critical thinking. Students should learn from real engineers and hands-on problem-solving tasks, and teachers must com- municate with industry to evolve curricula to meet workforce needs. Education in science and math, as well as cultivating interest, will be critical for developing the next generation of technicians and innovators. Mr. Chris Gould, Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy and Chief Demand for new skills is unlikely to slow, increasing Sustainability Officer, Exelon Corporation, makes remarks during the energy sector dialogue. the value of lifelong learning that allows students to gain new skills and stack credentials. But while college-educated employees are crucial, they are to create breakthrough inventions. With technology only a part of the workforce. Utility workers comprise advancing more quickly than some universities can a large portion of the industry, and approximately update curricula, there is an opportunity for unions 50 percent will retire in the next 10 years.23 A lack and technical organizations to teach the new work- of resources such as high school shop classes and force. Together, these groups can train and re-skill hands on vocational training makes it difficult to workers to meet the demands of today and tomor- enter the industry. row—a task that is not the responsibility of one There is also a higher level of skill required now than sector but rather the collective obligation of universi- there has been in the past as technology continually ties, labor unions and industry. America’s ability to advances. This has meant a shift to more online prepare the energy sector workforce for current and learning that provides a higher skill level needed to future opportunities is a key aspect of the country’s operate smart grids and other new technologies but ability to remain competitive. also requires partnerships between utilities and labor With regard to formal education, however, there unions to ensure a base of employees with necessary must be a multidisciplinary approach that includes fundamental skills remains. And while these used to opportunities both inside and outside the classroom be perceived as lifetime jobs, utilities are now begin- for students from early development through post- ning to see unemployment as some transition through graduate education to obtain the skills to meet the attrition. These “blue-collar” jobs need a narrative needs of the energy industry. Rather than relying on change to remove the stigma surrounding them.

23 Gaps in the Energy Workforce Pipeline 2013 Survey Results, Center for Energy Workforce Development, 2013. 16 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Moving Forward

Leverage: The Energy Sector is the second sector Pharmaceuticals and Medical study dialogue held during Phase II of the EMCP. Devices This dialogue addressed energy as its own, distinct sector of the economy and applied findings and With multifaceted industries such as drug manufac- themes from previous sector studies. We look turing and medical devices, the United States health- forward to continuing these deep-dive discussions care sector can be seen as one of the most complex on American competitiveness and, among other key yet robust sectors in the world. As an energy-inten- policy efforts, engaging the Congress and the sive sector and one with significant opportunities for administration. advancement, this sector study will look at the Phase II sector studies will conclude with a strategic pharmaceutical and medical device industries in the focus on: United States as an opportunity to leverage new production processes, and prototype and test new Aerospace technologies and alternate fuel sources to hone its competitive cost-edge over competitors in Europe, As the U.S. aerospace sector seeks more energy- India and East Asia and drive productivity and pros- efficient fleets and continues to rely on energy-inten- perity for the U.S. economy. sive raw materials, manufacturers must out-innovate their global competitors. The competitiveness of the Cybersecurity American aerospace sector over the next decade will be defined by the ability to develop, standardize and As the Council’s EMCP builds upon the success deploy advanced materials, technologies and pro- of the first five sector studies on water and cesses on a broad scale supported by a highly skilled manufacturing, advanced materials, bioscience, workforce. Building on some of the findings of the agriculture and consumer water use, and energy, EMCP’s Phase I sector study on advanced materials, we continue to identify common themes, challenges the aerospace sector study looks at how the design and opportunities that apply across a wide swath and manufacturing of products and the associated of American industries and transcend sector physical and regulatory infrastructure will define the boundaries. Among these key areas that has come competitiveness of this sector as it seeks to out- to the forefront has been the issue of protecting innovate its global competition. America’s critical infrastructure, intellectual property, and industrial operations from the growing threat of cyber attacks. In 2018, the Council and the EMCP will undertake an effort to develop a policy doctrine on American cybersecurity in partnership with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Verizon Enterprise Solutions and Carnegie Mellon University. About the Energy & Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership (EMCP) 17

About the Energy & Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership (EMCP)

The energy sector study is part of a larger initiative of the Council on Competitiveness known as the Energy TECHNOLOGY

and Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership (EMCP). The EMCP, since it began in 2015, has united Council members to focus on the shifting TALENT global energy and manufacturing landscape and how energy transformation and demand is sharpening INVESTMENT industries critical to America’s prosperity and security. PILLARS OF

The EMCP has tapped into a diverse membership of COMPETITIVENESS leaders from business, academia, the national labora- INFRASTRUCTURE tories and the labor community to understand the discrete and distinct challenges critical sectors of the U.S. economy face in the energy-manufacturing 1 convergence and how decision-makers can bolster the critical pillars of competitiveness—technology, talent, investment and infrastructure. Throughout the first six EMCP sector studies, it has become increasingly apparent that while manufacturers face sector-specific challenges and U.S. Energy & opportunities at the national level, the enabling Manufacturing environment at the regional and local levels signifi- Competitiveness cantly influences America’s competitiveness in the Partnership global economy. In 2018, the Council will employ a Updated August 2015 new, regional approach to looking at manufacturing competitiveness that will seek to catalyze change in a way that has sector- and economy-wide impacts on U.S. competitiveness. These aims will be achieved through a rebranded EMCP, to be called: The Partnership for Talent & Production (PTAP): An Exploration of the Future of Work and U.S.

Manufacturing. 9/12/16 5:05 PM

EMCP Concept Paper 101515.indd 1

The Energy & Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership Concept Paper, August 2015. 18 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

About the Council on Competitiveness

For more than three decades, the Council on Com- Council on Competitiveness petitiveness (Council) has championed a competi- 900 17th Street, NW tiveness agenda for the United States to attract Suite 700 investment and talent, and spur the commercializa- Washington, D.C. 20006 tion of new ideas. +1 (202) 682-4292 While the players may have changed since its found- Compete.org ing in 1986, the mission remains as vital as ever—to enhance U.S. productivity and raise the standard of living for all Americans. The members of the Council—CEOs, university presidents, labor leaders and national lab directors— represent a powerful, nonpartisan voice that sets aside politics and seeks results. By providing real- world perspective to Washington policymakers, the Council’s private sector network makes an impact on decision-making across a broad spectrum of issues from the cutting-edge of science and technology, to the democratization of innovation, to the shift from energy weakness to strength that supports the growing renaissance in U.S. manufacturing. The Council’s leadership group firmly believes that with the right policies, the strengths and potential of the U.S. economy far outweigh the current chal- lenges the nation faces on the path to higher growth and greater opportunity for all Americans. Council on Competitiveness Membership 19

Council on Competitiveness Members, Fellows and Staff

BOARD Mr. Jeff M. Fettig Mr. Jonas Prising Chairman Chairman Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Mr. Samuel R. Allen Whirlpool Corporation ManpowerGroup Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Mr. George Fischer Mr. Robert L. Reynolds Deere & Company Senior Vice President and Group President President and CEO Industry Vice-chair Verizon Enterprise Solutions Putnam Investments Dr. Mehmood Khan Mr. Michael Fucci Mr. Matthew Riddle Vice Chairman and Chief Scientific Officer Chairman President and Chief Executive Officer of Global Research and Development Deloitte, LLP Walbro Engine Management PepsiCo, Inc. Dr. William H. Goldstein Dr. Mark S. Schlissel University Vice-chair Director President Dr. Michael M. Crow Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory University of Michigan President Mr. James S. Hagedorn Dr. Lou Anna K. Simon Arizona State University Chairman and CEO President Labor Vice-chair Emeritus The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company Michigan State University Mr. William P. Hite Ms. Sheryl Handler Mr. Steve Stevanovich Former General President President and CEO Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, SGS Global United Association Ab Initio Holdings; and Member, Board of Governors, Chairman Emeritus Argonne National Laboratory The Honorable Shirley Ann Jackson Mr. Charles O. Holliday, Jr. President Mr. Lawrence Weber Chairman Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Chairman Royal Dutch Shell, plc W2 Group, Inc. Dr. Pradeep K. Khosla President & CEO Chancellor Ms. Randi Weingarten The Honorable Deborah L. Wince-Smith University of California, San Diego President Council on Competitiveness American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO Mr. J.B. Milliken Chancellor Dr. W. Randolph Woodson FOUNDER The City University of New York Chancellor North Carolina State University Mr. John A. Young Mr. Blake Moret Former Chief Executive Officer President and Chief Executive Officer Mr. Paul A. Yarossi The Hewlett Packard Company Rockwell Automation, Inc. President HNTB Holdings Ltd. Mr. Brian T. Moynihan EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Dr. Robert J. Zimmer Bank of America President Mr. Thomas R. Baruch The University of Chicago Managing Director The Honorable Janet Napolitano Baruch Future Ventures President The University of California System-Regents Dr. Gene D. Block GENERAL MEMBERS Chancellor Dr. Harris Pastides Dr. Joseph E. Aoun University of California, Los Angeles President President University of South Carolina Mr. William H. Bohnett Northeastern University President Mr. James M. Phillips Dr. Aziz Asphahani Whitecap Investments LLC Chairman and CEO Chief Executive Officer NanoMech, Inc. Mr. James K. Clifton QuesTek Innovations LLC Chairman and CEO Mr. Nicholas T. Pinchuk Mr. Jim Balsillie Gallup, Inc. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Co-Founder Snap-on Incorporated Dr. John J. DeGioia Institute for New Economic Thinking President Professor Michael E. Porter Mr. Ajay Banga Georgetown University Bishop William Lawrence University Professor President and Chief Executive Officer Harvard Business School MasterCard Worldwide 20 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Dr. Eric Barron Dr. Michael V. Drake Dr. Eric Kaler President President President Pennsylvania State University The Ohio State University University of Minnesota The Honorable Sandy K. Baruah Dr. Taylor Eighmy Mr. Adam Khan President and Chief Executive Officer President Founder and Chief Executive Officer Detroit Regional Chamber The University of Texas at San Antonio AKHAN Semiconductor Dr. Mark P. Becker Dr. Carol L. Folt Mr. David W. Leebron President President President Georgia State University The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Rice University Dr. Richard Benson Mr. Robert Ford Dr. Laurie Leshin President Executive Vice president, Medical Devices President University of Texas at Dallas Abbott Worcester Polytechnic Institute Ms. Stephanie W. Bergeron Mr. Kenneth C. Frazier Dr. Michael Lovell President Chairman and Chief Executive Officer President Walsh College Merck & Co., Inc. Marquette University The Honorable Rebecca M. Blank Dr. W. Kent Fuchs Dr. Gary May Chancellor President Chancellor University of Wisconsin—Madison University of Florida University of California, Davis Dr. Lee C. Bollinger The Honorable Patrick D. Gallagher Mr. Sean McGarvey President Chancellor President Columbia University University of Pittsburgh North America’s Building Trades Unions Dr. Robert A. Brown Dr. E. Gordon Gee Dr. H. Keith Moo-Young President President Chancellor Boston University West Virginia University Washington State University Tri-Cities Mr. Al Bunshaft Mr. Robert Graybill Mr. Jere W. Morehead Senior Vice President, Global Affairs President and Chief Executive Officer President Dassault Systèmes Americas Nimbis Services, Inc. University of Georgia Dr. James P. Clements Dr. Amy Gutmann Dr. John Opperman President President President Clemson University University of Pennsylvania Texas Tech University Mr. Christopher Crane Ms. Marillyn A. Hewson Dr. Eduardo J. Padrón Chief Executive Officer Chairman President and CEO President Exelon Corporation Lockheed Martin Miami Dade College Mr. Bruce Culpepper Dr. John C. Hitt Dr. G.P. “Bud” Peterson Shell U.S. Country Chair & President President President Shell Oil Company University of Central Florida Georgia Institute of Technology The Honorable Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr. Dr. Farnam Jahanian Dr. Neville Pinto President Interim President President Purdue University Carnegie Mellon University University of Cincinnati Dr. Beverly Davenport Rev. John I. Jenkins Mr. Scott Pulsipher Chancellor President President University of Tennessee, Knoxville University of Notre Dame Western Governors University Mr. Ernest J. Dianastasis Mr. R. Milton Johnson Mr. John Pyrovolakis Managing Director Chairman and Chief Executive Officer CEO CAI Hospital Corporation of America Innovation Accelerator Foundation Dr. Joseph A. DiPietro Dr. Robert E. Johnson Dr. L. Rafael Reif President Chancellor President The University of Tennessee University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Massachusetts Institute of Technology Council on Competitiveness Membership 21

Mr. Ralph Resnick Dr. Satish K. Tripathi CORPORATE PARTNERS President and Executive Director President Baker Hughes National Center for Defense Manufacturing and State University of New York at Buffalo Machining Cray Inc. Dr. Thomas M. Uhlman Mr. Rory Riggs Founder and Managing Partner Intel Corporation Managing Member New Venture Partners LLC The Boeing Company Balfour, LLC Dr. Steven J. Visco United Technologies Corporation Mr. John Rogers Chief Executive Officer President and CEO PolyPlus Battery Company Intrexon Corporation Local Motors Dr. Jeffrey Wadsworth Mr. Douglas Rothwell Chief Executive Officer and President UNIVERSITY PARTNERS President and Chief Executive Officer Battelle Memorial Institute Oklahoma University Business Leaders for Michigan Dr. Kim A. Wilcox University of Illinois System Dr. David Rudd Chancellor President University of California, Riverside University of California, Irvine University of Memphis Mr. Keith E. Williams Vice Admiral John R. Ryan USN (Ret.) Chief Executive Officer NATIONAL AFFILIATES President and Chief Executive Officer Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Center for Creative Leadership Ms. Caitlin Cain Dr. Mark S. Wrighton Chief Executive Officer Dr. Timothy D. Sands Chancellor World Trade Center New Orleans President Washington University in St. Louis Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Mr. C. Michael Cassidy Dr. Michael Young President and Chief Executive Officer Dr. Richard Schneider President Georgia Research Alliance President The Texas A&M University Norwich University Dr. Jonathan Fanton President Mr. Paul Scialla NATIONAL LABORATORY PARTNERS American Academy of Arts and Sciences Founder and Chief Executive Officer Delos Living LLC Dr. Steven F. Ashby Mr. Jeffrey Finkle Director President Mr. John Sharp Pacific Northwest National Laboratory International Economic Development Council Chancellor The Texas A&M University System Dr. Paul Kearns Dr. Norman Fortenberry Director Executive Director Dr. David E. Shaw Argonne National Laboratory American Society for Engineering Education Founder D.E. Shaw Research Dr. Martin Keller Mr. Richard Grefé Director Executive Director Mr. Frederick W. Smith National Renewable Energy Laboratory AIGA President and Chief Executive Officer FedEx Corporation Dr. Mark Peters Mr. Matthew Loeb Director Chief Executive Officer Dr. Elisa Stephens Idaho National Laboratory ISACA President Academy of Art University Dr. Michael Witherell Dr. Anthony Margida Director Chief Executive Officer Mr. Lonnie Stephenson Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory TechGrit AMX2 LLC International President IBEW Dr. Thomas Zacharia Mr. Jack E. Middleton Director President and Chief Executive Officer Dr. Elizabeth Stroble Oak Ridge National Laboratory SMC3 President Webster University Ms. Karen Pedersen President IEEE-USA 22 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Ms. Andrea Purple The Honorable Alexander A. Karsner, Dr. Anthony J. Tether, Distinguished Fellow President Distinguished Fellow Former Director, Defense Advanced Research ARCS Foundation Inc. Chairman and CEO, Manifest Energy LLC; and Projects Agency, U.S. Department of Defense Former Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency Dr. Catherine Roberts Dr. Thomas M. Uhlman, Distinguished Fellow and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy Executive Director Founder and Managing Partner American Mathematical Society Mr. Dominik Knoll, Senior Fellow New Venture Partners LLC Former Chief Executive Officer Dr. Richard M. Soley Dr. William Wescott, Senior Fellow World Trade Center of New Orleans Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Managing Partner, BrainOxygen, LLC. Object Management Group, Inc. The Honorable Steven E. Koonin, Distinguished Dr. Mohammad A. Zaidi, Distinguished Fellow Fellow Mr. Greg Wetstone Member, Strategic Advisory Board, Braemer Energy Director, Center for Urban Science and Progress, President and Chief Executive Officer Ventures; and Former Executive Vice President and and Professor, Information, Operations & American Council on Renewable Energy Chief Technology Officer, Alcoa, Inc. Management Sciences, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, New York University; and Former Second FELLOWS Under Secretary of Energy for Science, U.S. STAFF Department of Energy Mr. Bray Barnes, Senior Fellow Mr. William Bates Founder and Principal, Security Evaluation and The Honorable Alan P. Larson, Distinguished Executive Vice President & Chief of Staff Solutions Group, LLCMs. Fellow Senior International Policy Advisor, Covington & Mr. Chad Evans Ms. Jennifer S. Bond, Senior Fellow Burling LLP; and Former Under Secretary of State Executive Vice President Former Director, Science & Engineering Indicators for Economics, U.S. Department of State Ms. Marcy Jones Program Special Assistant to the President & CEO and National Science Foundation Mr. Alex R. Larzelere, Senior Fellow President, Larzelere & Associates LLC; and Office Manager Dr. Thomas A. Campbell, Senior Fellow Former Director, Modeling and Simulation Energy Ms. Patricia Hennig Former National Intelligence Officer for Technology, Innovation Hub, Office of Nuclear Energy, U.S. Vice President for Finance Office of the Director of National Intelligence Department of Energy Mr. Chris Mustain Ms. Dona L. Crawford, Senior Fellow Mr. Edward J. McElroy, Distinguished Fellow Vice President for Innovation Policy and Programs President, Livermore Lab Foundation Former Chief Executive Officer, Ullico, Inc.; and Former Associate Director, Computation, Lawrence President Emeritus, American Federation of Mr. Gourang Wakade Livermore National Laboratory Teachers, AFL-CIO Vice President The Honorable Bart J. Gordon, Distinguished The Honorable Julie Meier Wright, Senior Fellow Ms. Eliza White Fellow Former Chief Executive, San Diego Regional Vice President Partner, K&L Gates LLP; and Economic. Development Corporation; and Former Mr. Michael Bernstein Former United States Representative (TN) First Secretary of Trade & Commerce, State of Senior Policy Director for Innovation Policy Mr. Thomas Hicks, Distinguished Fellow California and Programs Principal, The Mabus Group; and Former Mr. Mark Minevich, Senior Fellow Ms. Katie Sarro Undersecretary of the Navy, U.S. Department of Principal Founder, Going Global Ventures Senior Policy Director for Energy and Defense Ms. Michelle Moore, Senior Fellow Manufacturing Initiatives Dr. Paul J. Hommert, Distinguished Fellow Chief Executive Officer, Groundswell; and Ms. Ta Tanisha Scott-Baker Former Director, Sandia National Laboratories; and Former Senior Advisor to the Director, Office of Director for Information Technology and Services Former President, Sandia Corporation Management and Budget, Executive Office of the Mr. Patrick French President of the United States Dr. Lloyd A. Jacobs, Distinguished Fellow Policy Analyst President Emeritus, The University of Toledo Dr. Luis M. Proenza, Distinguished Fellow Ms. Rachel O’Meara President Emeritus, The University of Akron Dr. Ray O. Johnson, Distinguished Fellow Membership and Events Coordinator Executive in Residence, Bessemer Venture Mr. Allen Shapard, Senior Fellow Ms. Amber O’Rourke Partners; and Former Senior Vice President and Senior Director, Chair of Public Engagement Policy Analyst Chief Technology Officer, Lockheed Martin Strategies APCO Worldwide Mr. DeWayne Johnson Finance Manager EMCP Steering and Advisory Committees 23

EMCP Steering and Advisory Committees

EMCP STEERING COMMITTEE Howard Gillman Horst Simon Samuel Allen Chancellor Deputy Director Chairman and CEO University of California, Irvine Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Deere & Company William Goldstein Lou Anna Simon Steven Ashby Director President Director Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Michigan State University Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Jim Hagedorn Kim Wilcox Aziz Asphahani Chairman & CEO Chancellor Chief Executive Officer The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company University of California, Riverside QuesTek Innovations Mark Hussey Keith Williams Eric Barron Vice Chancellor President & CEO President Texas A&M University Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Pennsylvania State University Greg Hyslop W. Randolph Woodson Richard Benson Chief Technology Officer Chancellor President Boeing North Carolina State University University of Texas at Dallas Farnam Jahanian Thomas Zacharia Rebecca Blank Interim President Director Chancellor Carnegie Mellon University Oak Ridge National Laboratory University of Wisconsin—Madison Robert Johnson Gene Block Chancellor EMCP ADVISORY COMMITTEE University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Chancellor Diran Apelian University of California, Los Angeles Paul Kearns Alcoa-Howmet Professor of Engineering, Metal William Bohnett Director Processing Institute President Argonne National Laboratory Worcester Polytechnic Institute Whitecap Investments LLC Martin Keller Glenn Baker James Clements Director Director of Engineering, Technology & Quality President National Renewable Energy Laboratory Services Clemson University Laurie Leshin Deere & Company Christopher Crane President John Ballato President & CEO Worcester Polytechnic Institute Vice President Economic Development Exelon Corporation Michael Lovell Clemson University Jeff Fettig President M. Kathrine Banks Chairman Marquette University Vice Chancellor for Engineering Whirlpool Corporation Blake Moret Texas A&M University System George Fischer President and CEO Margaret Brooks Group President Rockwell Automation, Inc. Office of Customer Success Verizon Enterprise Solutions Harris Pastides Verizon Enterprise Solutions Carol Folt President Nora Brownell Chancellor University of South Carolina Founding Partner University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Mark Peters ESPY Energy Solutions, LLC Robert Ford Director Todd Combs Executive Vice President Medical Devices Idaho National Laboratory Associate Laboratory Director for Energy and Abbott Laboratories James Phillips Environment Science & Technology Idaho National Laboratory Craig Giffi Chairman & CEO Vice Chairman Leader U.S. Consumer NanoMech, Inc. Dona Crawford & Industrial Products Richard Schneider Associate Director for Computation Emeritus Deloitte LP President Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Norwich University 24 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

James Davis Mark Slavens Vice Provost, Information Technology Vice President of Environmental Affairs University of California, Los Angeles The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company Chris Gould Dave Swihart Senior Vice President—Corporate Strategy Senior Vice President Global Technology & Chief Sustainability Officer & Operations Exelon Corporation The Scotts Miracle Gro Company Klaus Hoehn David Szczupak Vice President Advanced Technology & Engineering Executive Vice President Global Product Deere & Company Organization Whirlpool Corporation Gene Huang Vice President & Chief Economist Satish Udpa Abbott Laboratories Executive Vice President for Administrative Services Glen Lewis Michigan State University Principal Glen Lewis Group, LLC; and Bodgan Vernescu Operations, Energy & Supply Chain Management Professor of Mathematical Sciences & Vice Provost Advisor for Research University of California, Davis Worcester Polytechnic Institute Ajay Malshe Mohammad Zaidi Founder, Executive Vice President & Chief Senior Advisor Technology Officer, Braemar Energy Ventures NanoMech, Inc. Sethuraman Panchanathan Senior Vice President Office of Knowledge Enterprise Arizona State University Robert Pleasure Senior Advisor to the President North America’s Building Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO James Porter Founder & President Sustainable Operations Solutions, LLC Ramamoorthy Ramesh Associate Laboratory Director for Energy Technologies Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Douglas Rotman Program Director Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Carmel Ruffolo Associate Vice President for Research and Innovation Marquette University Appendices 25

APPENDIX A Participants

Monty Alger Paul Kearns Director—Institute of Natural Gas Research Interim Director Penn State University Argonne National Laboratory Aziz Asphahani Cyril Martinand Chief Executive Officer Division Manager—Procurement, Energy & Iron Ore QuesTek Innovations ArcelorMittal USA LLC Eric Barron Katrina McMurrian President Executive Director Penn State University Critical Consumer Issues Forum (CCIF) William Bates Thomas Meyer Executive Vice President & Chief of Staff Arey Distinguished Professor of Chemistry Council on Competitiveness University of North Carolina Wolfgang Bauer Reid Miller Department of Physics and Astronomy U.S. Power & Utilities Sector Leader Michigan State University Deloitte Mary Blanchard Michael Pacilio Associate Director Executive Vice President Wisconsin Energy Institute Exelon Corporation Steve Bohlen James Porter Global Security E-Program Manager Founder & President Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Sustainable Operations Solutions Bill Bohnett Bruce Quinn President Vice President—Government Affairs Whitecap Investments Rockwell Automation, Inc. Donnie Colston Carmel Ruffolo Director—Utility Department Associate VP for Research and Innovation International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Marquette University Ron Coutu Katie Sarro V. Clayton Lafferty Endowed Chair Senior Policy Director Marquette University Council on Competitiveness Christopher Crane Neil Sharkey President & CEO Vice President, Research Exelon Corporation Penn State University Matthew Crozat Lonnie Stephenson Senior Director of Policy Development International President Nuclear Energy Institute International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Michelle Drew Rodriguez Steve Stevanovich Manufacturing Leader—Center for Industry Insights Chief Executive Officer Deloitte Services LP SGS Global Holdings Chris Gould Deborah L. Wince-Smith Senior Vice President—Corporate Strategy, Chief President & CEO Sustainability Officer Council on Competitiveness Exelon Corporation Steven Hauser Chief Executive Officer GridWise Alliance 26 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

APPENDIX B Agenda

MORNING 9:45 America’s Energy Infrastructure

8:30 Registration and Light Breakfast As the United States faces unprecedented energy demands and changing climates, the imperative to maintain and upgrade 9:00 Welcome and Opening Remarks the country’s energy infrastructure is key to enabling continued research, development and implementation of new energy Mr. Chris Crane sources systems and services. President & CEO Exelon Corporation Presenter Dr. Eric Barron Chris Gould President Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy & Chief Penn State University Sustainability Officer Exelon Corporation Dr. Paul Kearns Interim Director Discussants Argonne National Laboratory Steve Hauser Chief Executive Officer 9:15 The Council & and the Goals of Today’s Dialogue GridWise Alliance The Honorable Deborah L. Wince-Smith Matthew Crozat President & CEO Senior Director, Policy and Development Council on Competitiveness Nuclear Energy Institute Mr. William Bates Key Questions Executive Vice President and Chief of Staff • What investments in infrastructure are necessary to fully Council on Competitiveness exploit the opportunity of America’s growing energy Today, America’s competitiveness is shaped by the strength and innovation ecosystem? convergence of a distinctly modern breed of energy abundance • Looking at infrastructure from a regulatory perspective, with a re-emergent manufacturing sector. Challenges from what are the costs and benefits that should be considered globalization to climate change are forcing us to understand as we modernize and expand America’s energy portfolio? the nexus of energy and manufacturing as a whole more powerful than the sum of its parts. • In efforts to optimize the nation’s full energy potential—and consequent competitiveness—how can policymakers and The Energy and Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership the nation’s business, research and labor communities (EMCP) is a collaborative effort of national leaders from come together to resolve conflicts hindering the build-out all sectors of the economy committed to deepening our the nation’s energy infrastructure, including pipelines, the understanding of the complexities of the energy landscape grid, and new technology deployment? and building a roadmap to ensure that America captures the competitiveness opportunity of this new frontier. 10:45 Networking Break Appendices 27

11:00 Innovative Energy Technologies AFTERNOON

The United States is one of the world’s largest producers 12:00 Lunch and consumers of energy. To remain competitive, the country must create and commercialize a wide range of innovative and 12:45 Guest Presentation: Sunny Elebua, Vice advanced technologies in this sector. President—Corporate Strategy, Exelon Corporation

Presenter 1:00 Investing in American Energy Paul Kearns Interim Director As consumer behavior evolves and a changing regulatory Argonne National Laboratory landscape encourages development of alternative energy sources, the need for public and private sector investments Discussants as well as innovative financing models is required to spur the Aziz Asphahani creation of new, innovative technologies and renewable energy Chief Executive Officer systems. QuesTek Innovations Steve Bohlen Presenter Global Security E-Program Manager Bill Bohnett Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory President Whitecap Investments Key Questions • What role are energy abundance and innovation playing in Discussant increasing the productivity and competitiveness of American Steve Stevanovich manufacturing? Chief Executive Officer SGS Global Holdings • What innovations are occurring—or are urgently needed—for manufacturers to leverage natural gas, renewables, and Key Questions efficiency technologies to improve their competitiveness in • What investments are U.S. manufacturers making in the global marketplace? response to growing demand for new energy technologies, • How is demand for new energy technologies and sources products, and services? (natural gas, biofuels, batteries/ storage, renewables, • How is America’s energy abundance reflected in the and efficiency technologies) impacting innovation, competitiveness of sectors downstream from energy- manufacturability, and business outlooks for domestic intensive sectors of the economy? technology manufacturing? • What new institutions, mechanisms, and knowledge-transfer • What regulations and policy interventions could enhance systems must the investment community create to capture innovation and accelerate the development and deployment U.S. technology innovation and scale it domestically? of energy technologies and greater industrial energy productivity? 28 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

2:00 Building Talent in the Energy Sector

This final session will take a closer look at the key challenges related to the education and skills needed to capitalize on opportunities for the current and incoming workforce in the energy sector. The mismatch between opportunities and skills could be a significant roadblock to fully realizing the economic growth potential of this sector.

Presenter Eric Barron President Penn State University

Discussant Lonnie Stephenson International President International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Key Questions • What skills will define the 21st century energy and manufacturing economy? • What domestic skill shortages and talent deficits hinder America’s ability to achieve the full potential of the new energy economy? • What formal, alternative and continuing education platforms must be established or strengthened to ensure a robust talent pipeline and domestic workforce in the energy sector?

3:00 Conclusion and Next Steps Appendices 29

APPENDIX C

Energy: A Sector Study of the Energy & Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership

U.S. and global energy systems are undergoing unprecedented changes and experiencing intense new pressures. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects world energy consumption will grow by 48% between 2012 and 20401, challenging existing supplies and strategic reserves of conventional fuels, as well as straining America’s aging energy generation, transmission and distribution infrastructure. Concerns about increasing demand, the climate impacts of fossil fuel emissions and rising long-term global oil prices support expanded use of renewable energy sources and nuclear power.

While energy is an economy-wide competitiveness linchpin, it is in its own right a formidable, diverse and transforming industry. With one of the most complex supply portfolios, the U.S. energy sector is an enormous driver of research, innovation and manufacturing across a broad range of technologies and applications.

For the last decade, the Council has been studying and bringing together experts across the energy sector to explore the challenges and opportunities related to the changing energy landscape. The 2008 Energy Security, Innovation and Sustainability Initiative (ESIS) presented a blueprint for America’s energy agenda to the private sector and to President Obama ahead of the 2008 presidential election. More recently, the Council’s long-term collaboration with the Department of Energy, including the Accelerating Energy Productivity 2030 Partnership and the multi-year American Energy and Manufacturing Competitiveness (AEMC) Partnership, has contributed to a tectonic shift in how the United States consumes energy and how our public and private sector leaders conceive of energy as an input to manufacturing and the competitiveness equation.

In response to continuing challenges around evolving consumer behavior and expectations and a changing regulatory landscape, the U.S. needs a more dynamic and resilient energy system in which emerging technologies lead to new business models, energy products and services. Efforts by both the public and private sectors to increase the development and deployment of clean energy technologies and alternative and renewable energy sources are accelerating at a record pace. An all-of-the-above strategy will be key to ensuring a reliable, affordable and sustainable energy portfolio to drive the U.S. economy—especially its manufacturing sector.

The public and private sectors must come together, with the nation’s academic, research, and investment communities, to overcome impediments to innovation and commercialization. And— critically—policymakers must build strategies to ensure that investments in innovation and R&D are captured and commercialized here in the United States.

1 http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=26212

30 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Energy: A Sector Study of the Energy and Manufacturing Competitiveness Partnership May 31, 2017 Page 2 of 2

Key Questions for the Sector Study to Address

1. What role are energy abundance and innovation playing in increasing the productivity and competitiveness of American manufacturing?

2. How is demand for new energy technologies and sources (natural gas, biofuels, batteries/ storage, renewables, and efficiency technologies) impacting innovation, manufacturability and business outlooks for domestic technology manufacturing?

3. How are sectors across the economy leveraging new energy resources, technologies and processes to increase margins and expand operations?

4. What regulations and policy interventions could enhance innovation and accelerate the development and deployment of energy technologies and greater industrial energy productivity?

5. What skills will define the 21st-century energy and manufacturing economy? How is the private sector communicating needs to educators and students?

6. How are the tectonic shifts occurring across today’s energy landscape—as the U.S. moves from “energy weak” to “energy strong”—changing the decision-making processes and competitiveness propositions for domestic and foreign manufacturers?

7. How is America’s energy abundance reflected in the competitiveness of sectors downstream from energy-intensive sectors of the economy?

8. What investments in infrastructure are necessary to fully exploit the opportunity of America’s growing energy strength and innovation ecosystem?

9. In efforts to optimize the nation’s full energy potential, how can policymakers and the nation’s business, research and labor communities come together to resolve conflicts hindering the build-out the nation’s energy infrastructure?

The EMCP Methodology Energy and manufacturing are inextricably linked with America’s new found energy abundance creating a window of opportunity for the nation. How this opportunity manifests across different sectors of the economy is the central question of the EMCP. For each sector study, the EMCP will explore four cross-cutting pillars—technology, talent, investment and infrastructure—with the end goal to find commonalities across sectors as well as key differences or even policy conflicts. 31 32 Council on Competitiveness Leverage

Council on Competitiveness 900 17th Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20006, T 202 682 4292 Compete.org

@CompeteNow facebook.com/USCouncilonCompetitiveness linkedin.com/company/council-on-competitiveness/