(As prepared for delivery)

Thank you for this invitation to "All-Energy ‘07." As this is t he United Kingdom’s largest energy conference, I did not want to miss the opportunity to share with you America’s commitment to the use of renewable energy and to s et out some of our current activities.

President Bush’s commitment to renewables stems, at least in part, from his determination that the United States will break its dependence on oil – and Congress has supported him in that goal. However, the President is also aware of the danger of crippling the American economy and the injustice of restricting developing countries who are seeking to develop their own economic capacity.

We need to ensure we deal with energy security and access as part of how we deal with climate change. Availability and affordability, as well as efficiency, are all crucial to keeping both the developed and the developing world safe and prosperous.

It is telling that during each of the last two State of the Union addresses, the President used the occasion to explain to the American people, and the world, that America must break its dependence on oil. But he not only set out that goal, he explained how we would do it in practical terms.

Since 2001, the President has requested, and Congress has approved, approximately $35 billion for climate-related science, technology, observations, international assistance, and incentive programs.

Between 2003 and 2006, the President committed more funding than any other country in the world to climate-change technology, research, and deployment programs.

But the administration's energy policy should not be seen in isolation, which is why energy security, availability, and efficiency have been so firmly linked. In a globalized world, the President is clear that our security, and the security of the world, depend on the expansion of freedom and democracy.

The cornerstone of these liberties is economic progress for everyone – and that will depend on their access to energy.

The administration’s initiatives are intended to address domestic energy security as well as climate-change concerns. They are designed to encourage growth and development at home, while not hobbling those countries that need development most.

Today, I want to focus on one area of renewables – biofuels – which has been in the press a lot lately, both positively and negatively. And let me be clear from the outset. This is just one technology, and no single technology can meet the climate-change challenge by itself.

Of course, regions and countries have different resources. They have different policies and markets, different preferences, and are at different phases of infrastructure development.

We are still learning about the capacity of these technologies, and the market is still deciding what it can bear, and what it will support.

One example is high corn prices, which, spurred by a surge in demand for ethanol production, has led to a 15 percent increase in the planting of corn in the United States. A Department of Agriculture report has found that farmers intend to increase corn planting by over 12 million acres.

Bluntly, our increased use of corn-based ethanol has its drawbacks – it has an impact on food markets and prices. There may be better ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; it may not even be the most efficient crop to use. It is because we recognize these challenges that we are also developing the technology to allow other crops to be used for biofuel production.

And that is not an unrealistic goal. What we need is the fibrous, woody, inedible part of the plant – or cellulosic biomass. This is attractive because it is an abundant, domestic and renewable source, that can be converted to liquid transportation fuels.

The added benefit is that such fuels can be used readily by current-generation vehicles and distributed through the existing transportation-fuel infrastructure.

However, we need more research and investment in this area, as our current methods are inefficient. This constitutes the major barrier to producing ethanol at quantities and costs competitive with gasoline.

That is why the United States is focusing a great deal of effort on this process.

These small-scale research projects will experiment with various approaches, and a variety of cellulosic feedstock, to test new refining processes. These will inform the development of full-scale facilities in the longer-term.

Just this month, the U.S. Department of Energy announced it will provide up to $200 million over five years to support the development of small-scale cellulosic bio-refineries in the United States. This, added to the existing $385 million for the development of several full-scale bio-refineries, brings the total to $585 million just for these projects!

These projects will help advance the President’s goal of making this kind of ethanol competitive with gasoline by 2012.

I mentioned the need to ensure that developing countries have access to the energy to support their economies and their security – and biofuels have an important role to play in that development.

The United States is working at all levels to help countries analyze their options in terms of what crops they might use for such fuels. We are also encouraging as many developing countries as possible to move towards these renewable sources.

There is no better example of this work than the memorandum of understanding to advance cooperation on biofuels that was signed just two months ago between the United States and Brazil.

The agreement highlights the importance of biofuels as a transformative force in the region to diversify energy supplies, bolster economic prosperity, advance sustainable development, and protect the environment.

As the world's two largest producers of ethanol, the United States and Brazil intend to advance the research and development of new technologies to promote biofuels. Reducing the cost of production, land-use demands, and price pressures on feedstocks, are key to increasing their global adoption.

Regionally, the two nations intend to help other countries, beginning in Central America and the Caribbean, to stimulate private investment for local production and consumption of biofuels.

Multilaterally, the United States and Brazil intend to work through the International Biofuels Forum to examine development of common biofuels standards and codes to facilitate its commoditization.

In the developed world, the United States is also working closely with the European Union. Just three weeks ago, at the latest EU – U.S. summit, they released a statement on energy security, efficiency, and climate change.

Overall, the statement highlights the importance of advancing energy efficiency, near-zero emissions coal, and renewables – including biofuels. But more importantly, it makes specific plans and commitments to develop and deploy commercial renewable and alternative technologies. They even agreed to develop a set of compatible standards for bio-ethanol and bio-diesel by the end of this year!

This is only a small portion of the agreement between the EU and the United States on this issue, but it all fits into a long history of mutual encouragement – and challenge – in this crucial area of transatlantic business and politics.

You could even say it goes all the way back to Henry Ford, who powered his famous Model-T with ethanol, while across the ocean, Rudolf Diesel presented an engine at the Paris World's Fair in 1900, powered by peanut oil. Same challenge – different solutions!

Today, I have focused primarily on biofuels, but the United States has adopted a wide range of technologies to address energy security and climate change – wind power, solar and carbon capture, as well as investigating low-carbon, clean-coal technologies.

One small example particularly close to home is the micro-wind turbine we have installed on an American Embassy annex building in London!

But we should not get carried away. Technology alone is not enough. There is no “one-answer-fits-all” solution to affordable, secure, and efficient energy. In fact it is quite the opposite.

We need a broad approach that embraces numerous technologies. We need investors and businesses to take up the challenge. We need consumers to demand more from government and from industry.

In October 2006, President Bush summed up his approach when he said:

". . . What I’m talking about is a comprehensive approach to solving a national issue, which is dependence on oil, and how best to protect the environment. . . . It’s time to get rid of the old, stale debates . . . And recognize new technologies are going to enable us to achieve a lot of objectives at the same time. Technology will enable us to grow our economy and protect the environment. . . ."

This technology is extremely exciting, and the spirit of entrepreneurship is strong on both sides of the Atlantic. Just look at Sir Richard Branson’s initiative with Boeing and GE to have a Virgin Atlantic Boeing 747-400 that will fly on biofuel by the end of next year!

I have no doubt that Virgin, Boeing and GE will achieve that admirable objective. Nor do I doubt that people like you will continue to develop new technologies every day that will help all our economies grow, provide diverse energy sources, and protect the environment.

We all recognize the danger of ignoring the growing evidence of climate change. But ultimately, government can only act as a catalyst, a spur, a goad to change behavior.

At the end of the day, it will depend on having the research and technology, combined with investment and promotion, to ensure that the marketplace can make informed decisions.

Consumers may drive this process, but it is industry – again, people like you – who will be the engine of that change, and in control of the speed of its development.

Thank you.