Mr. SCHROEDER. I am sure that many witnesses have appeared before you who have called attention to the great reserves of coal in the United States. The country is indeed one of the fortunate countries of the whole world with respect to supplies of coal.

The coal in this country not only is available in large amount, but it is also fairly close to the surface when compared to many European mines. Some of it we can strip mine. It is unusual that we have to go more than a few hundred feet underground, whereas abroad mines of 1,000 or 2,000 feet are well known and add to the difficulty, of course, of bringing out the material.

At the present rate of production it is generally admitted that we have about 2,000 years' supply of coal. We might think from that that we have so much we could be careless with its use, but that is not true. The coal industry is exceedingly careful to mine coal as efficiently and with as little waste as possible.

Back of the need for care in the utilization of this valuable resource is the great increase in our energy demands, particularly since the war. There are some curves in the back of this report which will give you a picture of what is happening in the United States with respect to energy demands.

The first figure shows the growth in population of the United States, and it is predicted now, if we look ahead to the period 1975 or 1980, our population is going to be in the range of 200 to 240 million people. Our present population, as of April 1 of this year, I think, was 167 million people.

As far as energy is concerned, you can see on the next figure the demand in millions of B. t. u. per capita. You will notice how steep that curve is since the turn of the century.

If you take the per capita demand and multiply it by the population, you will get the predicted energy output of the United States as a whole. I tried to extend that to the year 1980, and you will notice that total energy demand is going to be the tremendous figure of 20,000 trillion B. t. u.'s along about 1975 or 1980.

Mr. EDMONDSON. Does that projection include projected energy production in atomic energy?

Mr. SCHROEDER. Yes; it would include atomic energy. Actually these figures are on the conservative side. I took the population of 210 million for this projection, and it actually should have been closer to 230 or 240 million people.

Mr. EDMONDSON. That would lower the per capita showing, if you took a larger population?

Mr. SCHROEDER. I mean, I should multiply my per capita energy requirement not by 210, which is the figure I used, but by 240, which would raise this curve, you see.

Mr. EDMONDSON. I was looking at the energy output per capita. Did you use 210 million there?

Mr. SCHROEDER. I used 210 million population times an energy per capita of about 80 million B. t. u.'s per year.

So actually we are not talking about a coal reserve which is good for 2,000 years; we are talking about a coal reserve which is measured in terms of centuries.

For that reason, I think the industry is well aware that there is need here for careful utilization of coal supplies.

These curves do not show this particularly, but, as you realize, as time goes on, coal is undoubtedly going to be called upon to take over some of the energy that is now supplied by oil and gas. It is pretty generally realized that oil and gas are not going to continue to supply the high percentage of our total energy requirements.

There is a study that was prepared by Mr. Pogue for the Chase Bank—and I think everybody is in pretty good agreement with that, the oil industry and the gas industry-which indicates that our reserves of oil and gas are going over their peak, more or less, at the present time.

So far as oil is concerned, we can probably import oil from abroad for a period of time, but the cost of that oil will tend to be high.

As far as gas is concerned, it is not so easy to import gas. The sources from which we can get it are limited. It means we are going to have to look for other sources for gas, and I would not be surprised that coal is going to have to come in on that picture.

As far as research in the coal industry is concerned, it is a pretty small thing. As Mr. Perkins told you, the total annual expenditures are estimated at some $17 million.

If we look at the oil industry, for example, they are now spending at the rate of about $3 million a week. You can do a lot of research work for $3 million a week.

The chemical industry is spending at the rate of about $7 million a week.

That means a whole lot of people are engaged in these activities in these industries. It is sometimes interesting to go out and look at the research laboratories, for example, of the oil industry. I have had opportunity to visit the Emeryville Laboratory of the Shell Oil Co. It covers literally acres of land. There are some 1,100 people in this one laboratory. They have equipment which runs, I would say, into the millions and millions of dollars, some of it the finest equipment in the world.

If you look at the laboratories of the Esso Development Corp., for example, you have exactly the same thing-thousands of skilled technicians.

Now the coal industry can hardly support that kind of research effort. In the first place, the industry is broken up into a lot of small units. Pittsburgh Consolidation Coal Co. is perhaps one of the largest. I have had an opportunity to visit their laboratory, and I think they do the best they can with research.

But, after all, they cannot afford to support 1,100 people in 1 laboratory.

The result is that, because of this fractioning of the industry into small units, it is exceedingly difficult for the coal industry to organize and to support the type of research that the oil industry, for instance, can support.

In addition to that, I do not think it is quite fair to say that coal sells so many millions of dollars worth of products per year, and then say they ought to support in accordance with that a certain percentage of research based on gross sales.

After all, an industry, unless it makes a reasonable and sizable profit, is going to be hesitant about investing in research facilities and research skills.