diff --git "a/data/CHRG-116/CHRG-116hhrg35330.txt" "b/data/CHRG-116/CHRG-116hhrg35330.txt"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/data/CHRG-116/CHRG-116hhrg35330.txt"
@@ -0,0 +1,4102 @@
+
+ - TIME FOR ACTION: ADDRESSING THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
+
+[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
+[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
+
+
+
+
+
+ TIME FOR ACTION: ADDRESSING THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF
+ CLIMATE CHANGE
+
+=======================================================================
+
+ HEARING
+
+ BEFORE THE
+
+ SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE
+
+ OF THE
+
+ COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
+ HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
+
+ ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
+
+ FIRST SESSION
+
+ __________
+
+ FEBRUARY 6, 2019
+
+ __________
+
+ Serial No. 116-1
+
+
+
+
+
+ [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+
+ Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
+
+ govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy
+ energycommerce.house.gov
+
+
+
+ ______
+
+
+ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
+ 35-330 PDF WASHINGTON : 2020
+
+
+
+
+ COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
+
+ FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
+ Chairman
+BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois GREG WALDEN, Oregon
+ANNA G. ESHOO, California Ranking Member
+ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York FRED UPTON, Michigan
+DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
+MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
+JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana
+G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
+DORIS O. MATSUI, California CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
+KATHY CASTOR, Florida BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
+JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland PETE OLSON, Texas
+JERRY McNERNEY, California DAVID B. McKINLEY, West Virginia
+PETER WELCH, Vermont ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
+BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia
+PAUL TONKO, New York GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
+YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York, Vice BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
+ Chair BILLY LONG, Missouri
+DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana
+KURT SCHRADER, Oregon BILL FLORES, Texas
+JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III, SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana
+ Massachusetts MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
+TONY CARDENAS, California RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
+RAUL RUIZ, California TIM WALBERG, Michigan
+SCOTT H. PETERS, California EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
+DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
+MARC A. VEASEY, Texas GREG GIANFORTE, Montana
+ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
+ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
+NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California
+A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia
+LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
+DARREN SOTO, Florida
+TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona
+ ------
+
+ Professional Staff
+
+ JEFFREY C. CARROLL, Staff Director
+ TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Deputy Staff Director
+ MIKE BLOOMQUIST, Minority Staff Director
+ Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change
+
+ PAUL TONKO, New York
+ Chairman
+YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
+SCOTT H. PETERS, California Ranking Member
+NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
+A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia DAVID B. McKINLEY, West Virginia
+LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
+DARREN SOTO, Florida BILLY LONG, Missouri
+DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado BILL FLORES, Texas
+JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
+DORIS O. MATSUI, California EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
+JERRY McNERNEY, California JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
+RAUL RUIZ, California, Vice Chair GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio)
+DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
+FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex
+ officio)
+ C O N T E N T S
+
+ ----------
+ Page
+Hon. Paul Tonko, a Representative in Congress from the State of
+ New York, opening statement.................................... 2
+ Prepared statement........................................... 4
+Hon. John Shimkus, a Representative in Congress from the State of
+ Illinois, opening statement.................................... 5
+ Prepared statement........................................... 6
+Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the
+ State of New Jersey, opening statement......................... 7
+ Prepared statement........................................... 9
+Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of
+ Oregon, opening statement...................................... 10
+ Prepared statement........................................... 12
+Hon. Debbie Dingell, a Representative in Congress from the State
+ of Michigan, prepared statement................................ 105
+
+ Witnesses
+
+Brenda Ekwurzel, Ph.D., Director of Climate Science, Union of
+ Concerned Scientists........................................... 14
+ Prepared statement........................................... 17
+Richard J. Powell, Executive Director, ClearPath................. 25
+ Prepared statement........................................... 27
+ Answers to submitted questions............................... 128
+Richard D. Duke, Principal, Gigaton Strategies................... 31
+ Prepared statement........................................... 33
+Reverend Leo Woodberry, Justice First Campaign, Kingdom Living
+ Temple Church and New Alpha Community Development Corporation.. 44
+ Prepared statement........................................... 46
+ Answers to submitted questions............................... 130
+Barry Worthington, Executive Director, United States Energy
+ Association.................................................... 48
+ Prepared statement........................................... 50
+ Answers to submitted questions............................... 132
+Michael Williams, Deputy Director, BlueGreen Alliance............ 53
+ Prepared statement........................................... 55
+
+ Submitted Material
+
+Slide, ``CO2 Emissions, 2000-2016,'' Congressional
+ Research Service, submitted by Mr. McKinley.................... 77
+Statement of Jason Hartke, President, The Alliance to Save
+ Energy, February 6, 2019, submitted by Mr. Tonko............... 107
+Fact sheet of Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments,
+ ``Climate Change in the Great Lakes Region,'' submitted by Mr.
+ Tonko.......................................................... 110
+Letter of January 8, 2019, from A. O. Smith, et al., to Hon.
+ Nancy Pelosi, et al., submitted by Mr. Tonko................... 112
+Letter of February 6, 2019, from Linda Moore, TechNet President
+ and Chief Executive Officer, to Mr. Tonko and Mr. Shimkus,
+ submitted by Mr. Tonko......................................... 116
+Letter of February 5, 2019, from Nat Kreamer, Chief Executive
+ Officer, Advanced Energy Economy, to Mr. Pallone, et al.,
+ submitted by Mr. Tonko......................................... 119
+Witness slides compilation, submitted by Mr. Tonko............... 121
+
+
+ TIME FOR ACTION: ADDRESSING THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF
+ CLIMATE CHANGE
+
+ ----------
+
+
+ WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2019
+
+ House of Representatives,
+ Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change,
+ Committee on Energy and Commerce,
+ Washington, DC.
+ The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:02 a.m., in
+the John D. Dingell Room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building,
+Hon. Paul Tonko (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
+ Members present: Representatives Tonko, Clarke, Peters,
+Barragan, McEachin, Blunt Rochester, Soto, DeGette, Schakowsky,
+Matsui, McNerney, Ruiz, Pallone (ex officio), Shimkus
+(subcommittee ranking member), Rodgers, McKinley, Johnson,
+Long, Flores, Mullin, Carter, Duncan, and Walden (ex officio).
+ Also present: Representatives Castor and Sarbanes.
+ Staff present: Jeffrey C. Carroll, Staff Director; Adam
+Fischer, Policy Analyst; Jean Fruci, Energy and Environment
+Policy Advisor; Tiffany Guarascio, Deputy Staff Director;
+Caitlin Haberman, Professional Staff Member; Rick Kessler,
+Senior Advisor and Staff Director, Energy and Environment;
+Brendan Larkin, Policy Coordinator; Dustin J. Maghamfar, Air
+and Climate Counsel; Tim Robinson, Chief Counsel; Mike
+Bloomquist, Minority Staff Director; Adam Buckalew, Minority
+Director of Coalitions and Deputy Chief Counsel, Health; Jerry
+Couri, Minority Deputy Chief Counsel, Environment; Jordan
+Davis, Minority Senior Advisor; Caleb Graff, Minority
+Professional Staff Member, Health; Peter Kielty, Minority
+General Counsel; Bijan Koohmaraie, Minority Counsel, CPAC; Ryan
+Long, Minority Deputy Staff Director; Mary Martin, Minority
+Chief Counsel, Energy and Environment; Brandon Mooney, Minority
+Deputy Chief Counsel, Energy; Brannon Rains, Minority Staff
+Assistant; Zack Roday, Minority Director of Communications;
+Peter Spencer; Minority Senior Professional Staff Member,
+Energy.
+ Mr. Tonko. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the
+Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change's first hearing
+of the year. Now that the gavel has been found, we can move
+forward.
+ Let me before I make my comments thank Chairman--former
+Chairman, always Chairman perhaps--John Shimkus for his great
+work in leading this subcommittee. I think we had an
+outstanding track record. And I enjoyed the years that he
+served as chair and I as ranking member. It is a pleasure to
+have served with you and now to continue to serve with you.
+ I welcome all the colleagues of this subcommittee to this
+first hearing and to service through this subcommittee. And in
+general I think we have a lot of business ahead of us but I
+look forward to a great, spirited debate on all of these issues
+and bipartisan response to the solutions that we will develop.
+ The subcommittee now comes to order. I recognize myself for
+5 minutes for an opening statement.
+
+ OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL TONKO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
+ CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK
+
+ In 1957, when I was the impressionable age of 8, Earth
+entered the Space Age with the launch of the Sputnik satellite
+by the Soviet Union. People around the world stopped what they
+were doing and looked the heavens. Nothing after that would
+ever be the same. Americans leapt into action, training to
+become scientists and engineers in droves. I was one of them.
+ And I see that same motivation, wonder, and drive in many
+of the people today who are working and advocating to transform
+our economy to one that is cleaner, safer, and more just. They
+are advancing clean energy technologies, designing the
+infrastructure of the future that will help communities endure,
+and rethinking every industry we have ever known.
+ It goes by many different names: Sandy, Harvey, Maria,
+Katrina, Campfire. But there is no question we have reached a
+new generation's Sputnik moment. How we respond to this threat
+and the opportunities it offers will indeed shape American
+lives for generations. In the 1960s our Government and our
+Nation's best rose to the Sputnik challenge by sending a person
+to the moon. Today our course remains unclear.
+ How our committee responds at this inflection point will
+define our Nation for the next half-century and beyond. Will we
+rise to this challenge and tackle our most complex problems?
+Will we continue to be the world leader in science,
+engineering, and technology innovation? Will we make our
+country and our planet better for future generations?
+ These questions are at the heart of our work here today. In
+1961, when President Kennedy promised to put a person on the
+moon by the end of the decade, what would have been the
+consequences of failure? Loss of scientific discovery? Damage
+to America's reputation? Ultimately it would have been
+remembered as another missed deadline, or failed call to
+action, or broken promise from a politician.
+ With climate change, the cost of failure is existential.
+Failure to launch this next moonshot will result in deaths,
+devastation, and irreversible damage to our communities, our
+economy, and our environment. This is not an exaggeration. It
+is the assured outcome if we should fail.
+ But America is a nation of pioneers and problem solvers.
+This climate challenge is not beyond us. Time is running out
+but it is not gone. Some of our colleagues may protest the cost
+of climate protection. And our constituents are already paying
+a heavy price after each and every hurricane, wildfire, and
+flood. Investing in solutions and resilience today will help
+manage and limit those risks and serve as a foundation for job
+creation, healthier communities, and economic opportunity. But
+let's be clear: There is no path forward more costly than for
+us to do nothing.
+ Today we will hear from an expert panel to help us better
+understand those costs, along with possible solutions that
+Congress should consider. Dr. Brenda Ekwurzel coauthored the
+Fourth National Climate Assessment and can explain climate
+threats our Nation is facing.
+ Mike Williams can discuss job opportunities that will come
+from a clean energy transition, including from building more
+resilient infrastructure to adapt to new climate realities.
+ Reverend Leo Woodberry can tell us the importance of a
+transition that is equitable. We must address historic
+environmental injustices and ensure that benefits of a green
+transition are shared across every community.
+ Rick Duke can discuss a range of potential policy and
+technology solutions for climate mitigation, many of which are
+cost-competitive and proven to work.
+ In the decade since Congress last considered comprehensive
+climate legislation, green technologies have become more
+affordable and more effective. Today there are viable
+decarbonization pathways for many sectors of our economy that
+will enable our Nation and the world to achieve emissions
+reduction targets. Congress can give the certainty, price
+signals, and resources needed to achieve these goals.
+ In 1961, we chose to go to the moon. Today we must make
+another choice. Will we have the clarity of mind and conscience
+to choose to address climate change with the urgency that
+scientists say is necessary? I say yes. Chairman Pallone says
+yes. Every Member on this side of the aisle says yes. And we
+are willing to work with the legions of Americans, countless
+businesses, local, State, and foreign governments, our U.S.
+Department of Defense, and our colleagues here on the other
+side of the aisle, and anyone else with ideas that can solve
+this crisis.
+ To my friends across the aisle, I implore you, now is the
+time to join us. We want to work together, but inaction is no
+longer an option. We must act on climate.
+ These issues were not always partisan. Our parties came
+together to pass the Clean Air Act and its amendments. And as a
+credit to Mr. Shimkus' leadership, this subcommittee found ways
+to work together to solve other seemingly intractable, multi-
+decade stalemates. We have proven we can find common ground and
+we can get things done. We want to find solutions that work for
+all communities and all Americans, and we will not be deterred.
+ We have science-based targets that we cannot afford to
+miss. The very real and urgent threat of climate change is not
+just the issue of the day, it is the issue of our time, the
+challenge of our time, the opportunity of our time. And I hope
+the hearings held by this subcommittee will help us find a
+path, a path forward where we can seize this opportunity.
+ With that, I yield back.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Tonko follows:]
+
+ Prepared statement of Hon. Paul Tonko
+
+ In 1957, when I was at the impressionable age of 8, Earth
+entered the space age with the launch of the Sputnik satellite
+by the Soviet Union.
+ People around the world stopped what they were doing and
+looked to the heavens.
+ Nothing after that would ever be the same. Americans leapt
+into action, training to become scientists and engineers in
+droves. I was one of them.
+ And I see that same motivation, wonder, and drive in many
+of the people today who are working and advocating to transform
+our economy to one that is cleaner, safer, and more just.
+ They are advancing clean energy technologies, designing the
+infrastructure of the future that will help communities endure,
+and rethinking every industry we have ever known.
+ It goes by many different names: Sandy, Harvey, Maria,
+Katrina, Camp Fire. But there is no question we have reached a
+new generation's Sputnik moment. How we respond to this threat,
+and the opportunities it offers, will shape American lives for
+generations.
+ In the 1960s, our Government and our Nation's best rose to
+the Sputnik challenge by sending a person to the moon. Today,
+our course remains unclear.
+ How our committee responds at this inflection point will
+define our Nation for the next half-century and beyond.
+ Will we rise to this challenge and tackle our most complex
+problems? Will we continue to be the world leader in science,
+engineering, and technology innovation? Will we make our
+country and planet better for future generations? These
+questions are at the heart of our work here today.
+ In 1961, when President Kennedy promised to put a man on
+the moon by the end of the decade, what would have been the
+consequences of failure? Loss of scientific discovery? Damage
+to America's reputation? Ultimately, it would have been
+remembered as another missed deadline, or failed call to
+action, or broken promise from a politician.
+ With climate change, the cost of failure is existential.
+Failure to launch this next moonshot will result in deaths,
+devastation, and irreversible damage to our communities, our
+economy, and our environment.
+ This is not an exaggeration. It is the assured outcome if
+we should fail.
+ But America is a nation of pioneers and problem solvers.
+This climate challenge is not beyond us. Time is running out,
+but it is not gone.
+ Some of our colleagues may protest the costs of climate
+protection, but our constituents are already paying a heavy
+price after every hurricane, wildfire, and flood.
+ Investing in solutions and resilience today will help
+manage and limit those risks, and serve as a foundation for job
+creation, healthier communities, and economic opportunity.
+ But let's be clear, there is no path forward more costly
+than for us to do nothing.
+ Today we will hear from an expert panel to help us better
+understand those costs, along with possible solutions that
+Congress should consider.
+ Dr. Brenda Ekwurzel coauthored the Fourth National Climate
+Assessment and can explain climate threats our Nation is
+facing.
+ Mike Williams can discuss job opportunities that will come
+from a clean energy transition, including from building more
+resilient infrastructure to adapt to new climate realities.
+ Rev. Leo Woodberry can tell us the importance of a
+transition that is equitable. We must address historic
+environmental injustices and ensure that benefits of a green
+transition are shared across every community.
+ Rick Duke can discuss a range of potential policy and
+technology solutions for climate mitigation, many of which are
+cost competitive and proven to work.
+ In the decade since Congress last considered comprehensive
+climate legislation, clean technologies have become more
+affordable and effective. Today there are viable
+decarbonization pathways for many sectors of our economy that
+will enable our Nation and the world to achieve emissions
+reduction targets.
+ Congress can give the certainty, price signals, and
+resources needed to achieve these goals.
+ In 1961, we chose to go to the moon. Today, we must make
+another choice. Will we have the clarity of mind and conscience
+to choose to address climate change with the urgency that
+scientists say is necessary?
+ I say yes. Chairman Pallone says yes. Every Member on this
+side says yes. And we are willing to work with the legions of
+Americans, countless businesses, local, State, and foreign
+governments, our U.S. Department of Defense, and anyone else
+with ideas that can solve this crisis.
+ To my friends across the aisle, I implore you: join us! We
+want to work together, but inaction is no longer an option. We
+must act on climate.
+ These issues were not always partisan. Our parties came
+together to pass the Clean Air Act and its amendments. And as a
+credit to Mr. Shimkus' leadership, this subcommittee found ways
+to work together to solve other seemingly intractable, multi-
+decade stalemates. We have proven we can find common ground and
+get things done.
+ We want to find solutions that work for all communities and
+all Americans, and we will not be deterred. We have science-
+based targets that we cannot afford to miss.
+ The very real and urgent threat of climate change is not
+just the issue of the day. It is the issue of our time. The
+challenge of our time. The opportunity of our time. And I hope
+the hearings held by this subcommittee will help us find a path
+forward where we can seize this opportunity. I yield back.
+
+ Mr. Tonko. And the Chair now recognizes Mr. Shimkus,
+ranking--excuse me, Republican leader of the Subcommittee on
+Environment and Climate Change, for 5 minutes for his opening
+statement.
+
+ OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN SHIMKUS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
+ CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
+
+ Mr. Shimkus. First of all, let me congratulate you, Mr.
+Chairman. And thank you for the kind words. I am truly touched
+by those.
+ We have had some policy differences over the past 6 years.
+We also enjoyed, as you identified, some significant bipartisan
+policy achievements during my chairmanship, in no small part
+because of the thoughtful work that you brought to the panel as
+a Democrat leader, and your very competent staff. I believe
+this subcommittee will be served by your leadership.
+ Today's hearing ticks off a topic that will be challenging
+but not impossible to work through in a bipartisan manner. We
+all agree that extreme weather events and climate change
+presents risks to our communities and communities around the
+world. While we agree these risks should be addressed, we may
+disagree about what to do. If we are to reach an agreement on
+this issue, I believe we must look openly and broadly at
+potential solutions.
+ Many climate policy advocates have been suggesting for
+years that if you agree climate change is real, then command
+and control policy prescriptions are the only way to address
+this problem. If you question these expensive solutions, you
+must not accept the problem.
+ That is a false choice. And the amped-up partisan rhetoric
+it generates severely inhibits a full look at potential,
+practical policies that not only help reduce carbon dioxide
+emissions, but also ensure our Nation and its communities can
+grow and prosper.
+ Recent projections by the International Energy Agency show
+that fossil energy, even with all existing and announced
+policies implemented, will likely be the dominant form of
+energy in our world system through 2040, and likely beyond.
+Wind and solar energy will serve a larger portion of
+electricity generation across the world and in the United
+States according to this data, but fossil energy and nuclear
+energy, a technology regrettably frowned upon by many climate
+policy advocates, will remain dominant.
+ While future innovation could substantially change these
+projections, the stubborn route is that U.S. and global energy
+systems necessary for societies to develop, grow, trade, and
+prosper depend upon affordable and abundant energy and
+mobility. Policies that artificially raise the costs or
+availability of energy threaten to undermine this fundamental
+fact, which helps explain the 30-year failure of international
+climate agreements to significantly reduce global emissions,
+although the United States seems to be doing better than most
+of the countries that are in agreement.
+ No nation seeking to improve the lives of its citizens will
+accept energy or transportation constraints, and neither should
+the United States if we want to maintain a robust economy,
+economic growth, and remain globally competitive for future
+generations.
+ We could have a fuller conversation about accelerating the
+transformation to cleaner technologies if we accept that
+proposing top-down Government requirements to rapidly
+decarbonize the U.S. and global economies may not be the most
+realistic way to address the climate change problem.
+ We should be open to the fact that wealth transfer schemes
+suggested in the radical policies like the Green New Deal may
+not be the best path to community prosperity and preparedness.
+ And we should be willing to accept that affordable and
+abundant energy is a key ingredient for economic development
+and growth. After all, economic growth and economic resources,
+coupled with sound planning, infrastructure, and governance,
+increase local capabilities to minimize impacts of future
+extreme events.
+ These are realities we should explore today and in future
+hearings if we want to develop sound environmental and energy
+policies to address climate risk. We should also focus on the
+ingredients behind the exceptional achievements of American
+know-how in energy, in technology and innovation that has led
+to world-leading prosperity, and making sure we can continue to
+foster these advances in other technology.
+ The American shale revolution transformed our Nation's
+economic competitiveness and is driving cleaner electricity
+generation because of old-fashioned innovation,
+entrepreneurship, regulatory certain private capital, not
+bigger Government mandates. And let me also mention private
+property rights on these areas. Let's apply these lessons more
+broadly.
+ Mr. Chairman, there are different approaches to dealing
+with climate change. Let's focus on solutions that work for the
+American public.
+ And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Shimkus follows:]
+
+ Prepared statement of Hon. John Shimkus
+
+ First, let me congratulate you Mr. Chairman. While you and
+I had some policy differences over the past 6 years, we also
+enjoyed some significant bipartisan policy achievements during
+my chairmanship--in no small part because of the thoughtful
+work you brought to the panel as Democrat leader.
+ I believe this subcommittee will be well served with your
+leadership.
+ Today's hearing kicks off a topic that will be challenging,
+but not impossible, to work through in a bipartisan manner. We
+all agree that extreme weather events and climate change
+present risks to our communities-and communities around the
+world.
+ While we agree these risks should be addressed, we may
+disagree about what to do. If we are to reach an agreement on
+this issue, I believe we must look more openly and broadly at
+potential solutions.
+ Many climate policy advocates have been suggesting for
+years that, if you agree climate change is real, then command-
+and-control policy prescriptions are the only way to address
+the problem. If you question these expensive solutions, you
+must not accept the problem.
+ This is a false choice. And the amped up partisan rhetoric
+it generates severely inhibits a full look at potential,
+practical policies that not only help reduce carbon dioxide
+emissions but also ensure our Nation and its communities can
+grow and prosper.
+ Recent projections by the International Energy Agency show
+that fossil energy, even with all existing and announced
+policies implemented, will remain the dominant form of energy
+in our global systems through 2040, and likely beyond.
+ Wind and solar energy will serve a larger portion of
+electricity generation across the World and in the United
+States, according to this data, but fossil energy and nuclear
+energy--a technology regrettably frowned upon by many climate
+policy advocates--will remain dominant.
+ While future innovation could substantially change these
+projections, the stubborn reality is, the U.S. and global
+energy systems necessary for societies to develop, grow, trade,
+and prosper depend upon affordable (and abundant) energy and
+mobility.
+ Policies that artificially raise the cost or availability
+of energy threaten to undermine this fundamental fact, which
+helps explain the 30-year failure of international climate
+agreements to significantly reduce global emissions (although
+the United States seems to be doing better than most other
+nations).
+ No nation seeking to improve the lives of its citizens will
+accept energy or transportation constraints, and neither should
+the United States if we want to maintain robust economic growth
+and remain globally competitive for future generations.
+ We could have a fuller conversation about accelerating the
+transformation to cleaner technologies if we accept that
+proposing top-down Government requirements to rapidly
+decarbonize the U.S. and global economies may not be the most
+realistic way to address the climate change problem.
+ We should be open to the fact that wealth transfer schemes,
+suggested in radical policies like the Green New Deal, may not
+be the best path to community prosperity and preparedness.
+ And we should be willing to accept that affordable (and
+abundant) energy is a key ingredient for economic development
+and growth. Afterall, economic growth and economic resources,
+coupled with sound planning, infrastructure, and governance,
+increase local capabilities to minimize impacts of future
+extreme events.
+ These are realities we should explore today and in future
+hearings if we want to develop sound environmental and energy
+policies to address climate risks.
+ We should also focus on the ingredients behind the
+exceptional achievements of American know-how in energy, in
+technology, and in innovation that has led to world-leading
+prosperity--and make sure we can continue to foster these
+advances in other technologies.
+ The American shale revolution transformed our Nation's
+economic competitiveness and is driving cleaner electricity
+generation because of old-fashioned innovation,
+entrepreneurship, regulatory certainty, and private capital--
+not big Government mandates. Let's apply these lessons more
+broadly.
+ Mr. Chairman, there are different approaches to dealing
+with climate change. Let's focus on solutions that work for the
+American public.
+
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back. And thank you, Mr.
+Shimkus.
+ The Chair now recognizes Mr. Pallone, chairman of the full
+committee, for 5 minutes for his opening statement.
+ Mr. Pallone.
+
+OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, Jr., A REPRESENTATIVE
+ IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
+
+ Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Mr. Tonko, Chairman Tonko.
+ Today's hearing on climate change is long overdue. We are
+feeling its effects now, and the influence of unchecked climate
+change is becoming more obvious every year. Experts have warned
+us for a long time that climate change would lead to more
+intense storms, extended droughts, longer wildfire seasons that
+burn hotter and cover larger areas, greater seasonal
+temperature extremes, melting of glaciers and ice sheets, and
+rising sea level.
+ The predictions have proven true. And these scientific
+experts warn us that, as greenhouse gas pollution continues to
+grow, climate change effects will intensify as the planet warms
+to levels that people have not experienced any time in human
+history.
+ Unfortunately, we are currently going in the wrong
+direction with respect to greenhouse gas pollution. The Fourth
+National Climate Assessment of the International Panel on
+Climate Change's recent report made clear that if we do not
+aggressively cut emissions now, we will jeopardize public
+health and safety, as well as our economic and national
+security.
+ The science on climate change is indisputable. And I do
+want to thank--I listened to Mr. Shimkus' opening remarks, and
+I noticed that he basically said that he agrees that there is a
+major impact from climate change, suggested that innovation was
+certainly one of the ways that we deal with it. So, again, I
+want to say that I know that in the past we were never able to
+have a hearing on climate change when the Republicans were in
+the majority, but I am glad to see that our ranking member is
+saying that it's something that has to be dealt with and is
+real.
+ I don't think that we need to debate the scientific facts.
+Instead, we must focus on solutions to the problems and must
+act now to avoid the most catastrophic consequences associated
+with climate change. The good news is that we already know the
+solutions. There are untapped opportunities to expand the use
+of renewable energy and to become more efficient with all the
+resources and energy we use. With focused investment and
+innovation, we can help transform industries and economic
+sectors that will find meaningful emission reductions more
+challenging.
+ Meanwhile, States, local government, and individual
+businesses are moving forward to reduce emissions to meet our
+obligations under the Paris Agreement. And it is now time for
+the Federal Government to step up and help them in these
+efforts and spur further action in communities across the
+country.
+ I know there are those who believe we can't address this
+problem because the costs are too high. But the costs of not
+acting are far higher and a lot more painful. In 2017, the U.S.
+experienced 16 natural disasters with costs totaling $360
+billion. This past year, disasters again cost over $100
+billion. The dollar figures are concerning, but the real
+tragedy is the loss of life and destruction of homes,
+businesses, and communities when these events occur.
+ And tremendous, sustained efforts are required for
+communities to recover and rebuild. And I saw this firsthand in
+the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy in my district. Events
+disappear from the headlines in a matter of weeks, but the work
+to rebuild and recover takes years. And it is still going on in
+my district. Many people have not been able to return to their
+homes. Many businesses have not.
+ We simply cannot afford to delay any longer. And we must
+discuss ways to help communities better adapt to the changes
+that we are already seeing. We need to modernize and upgrade
+our infrastructure to ensure vital services like water, sewer,
+electricity, telecommunications, and transportation are more
+resilient. And here, Mr. Shimkus, in particular, I think that
+we can work together with the Republicans. And this important
+work would not only make our communities safer and better
+prepared for extreme weather events, but it will also provide
+good-paying jobs and the modern, flexible infrastructure that
+will better support a robust economy in the future.
+ We want to find innovative solutions that will help
+strengthen our economy by creating jobs in industries that will
+begin to repair the disparities found in so many vulnerable
+communities. And it is precisely those front-line communities
+that experience the worst effects of climate change and natural
+disasters and that are the least able to recover from them.
+Again, I saw it in my own district where some of the most
+vulnerable communities economically are the ones that still
+have not recovered.
+ I think we can do better. We must do better. And these
+communities need to be engaged in the process of designing
+adaptation and mitigation measures to reduce pollution.
+ So as we move forward, we hope to have our Republican
+colleagues as partners in these efforts. Certainly what has
+been said by Mr. Shimkus today gives me hope. The devastating
+effects of unchecked climate change do not know partisan or
+political boundaries. They effect us all. And I hope we will be
+able to find common ground and work together on solutions.
+ And the U.S. has always been a global leader in science,
+technology, and industry. And our leadership on climate action
+and global transformation to a low-carbon economy is leading
+now. This hearing is the start of our efforts to maintain U.S.
+leadership and to put us on the path to a low-carbon and more
+prosperous future.
+ And if I can say something, Chairman Tonko, I know that
+this has always been something that you cared so much about and
+worked on even when you were in the State legislature. So we
+are glad that you are the chairman. Thank you.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
+
+ Prepared statement of Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr.
+
+ Today's hearing on climate change is long overdue. We are
+feeling its effects now, and the influence of unchecked climate
+change is becoming more obvious every year. Experts have warned
+us for a long time that climate change would lead to more
+intense storms, extended droughts, longer wildfire seasons that
+burn hotter and cover larger areas, greater seasonal
+temperature extremes, melting of glaciers and ice sheets, and
+rising sea level. Their predictions have proven true. And,
+these scientific experts warn us that as greenhouse gas
+pollution continues to grow, climate change effects will
+intensify as the planet warms to levels that people have not
+experienced any time in human history.
+ Unfortunately, we are currently going in the wrong
+direction with respect to greenhouse gas pollution. The Fourth
+National Climate Assessment and the International Panel on
+Climate Change's recent report make clear that if we do not
+aggressively cut emissions now, we will jeopardize public
+health and safety, as well as our economic and national
+security.
+ The science on climate change is indisputable. We are not
+going to waste any time debating the scientific facts. Instead,
+we must focus on solutions to the problem. We must act now to
+avoid the most catastrophic consequences associated with
+climate change.
+ The good news is that we already know the solutions to this
+challenge. There are untapped opportunities to expand the use
+of renewable energy and to become more efficient with all the
+sources of energy we use. With focused investment and
+innovation, we can also help transform industries and economic
+sectors that will find meaningful emission reductions more
+challenging.
+ Meanwhile, States, local government and individual
+businesses are moving forward to reduce emissions to meet our
+obligations under the Paris Agreement. It's now time for the
+Federal Government to step up and help them in these efforts
+and spur further action in communities across the country.
+ I know there are those who believe we cannot address this
+problem because the costs are too high. But, the costs of not
+acting are far higher and more painful. In 2017, the U.S.
+experienced 16 natural disasters with costs totaling $360
+billion. This past year disasters again cost over $100 billion.
+The dollar figures are concerning, but the real tragedy is the
+loss of life and destruction of homes, businesses, and
+communities when these events occur. Tremendous, sustained
+efforts are required for communities to recover and rebuild. I
+saw this first-hand in the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy in my
+district. Events disappear from the headlines in a matter of
+weeks, but the work to rebuild and recover takes years.
+ We simply cannot afford to delay any longer, and we must
+discuss ways to help communities better adapt to the changes
+that we're already seeing. We need to modernize and upgrade our
+infrastructure to ensure. vital services like water, sewer,
+electricity, telecommunications, and transportation are more
+resilient. This important work will not only make our
+communities safer and better prepared for extreme weather
+events, but it will also provide good paying jobs, and the
+modern, flexible infrastructure that will better support a
+robust economy in the future.
+ We want to find innovative solutions that will help
+strengthen our economy by creating new jobs and industries and
+that will begin to repair the disparities found in so many
+vulnerable communities. It is precisely these ``front line''
+communities that experience the worst effects of climate change
+and natural disasters and that are the least able to recover
+from them. We can do better. We must do better. And, these
+communities need to be engaged in the process of designing
+adaptation and mitigation measures to reduce pollution.
+ As we move forward, we hope to have our Republican
+colleagues as partners in these efforts. The devastating
+effects of unchecked climate change--do not know partisan or
+political boundaries. They affect all of us. I hope we will be
+able to find common ground and work together on solutions.
+ We cannot transform our economy and society overnight, but
+every journey starts with a single step. The U.S. always has
+been a global leader in science, technology, and industry. And,
+our leadership on climate action and a global transformation to
+a low carbon economy is needed now. This hearing is the start
+of our effort to maintain U.S. leadership and to put us on the
+path to a low-carbon--and more prosperous--future.
+ I thank the witnesses for participating in this important
+hearing. I look forward to your testimony today and to working
+with you to address the climate challenge before us.
+ I yield back.
+
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The gentleman yields back.
+And, Chairman Pallone, I appreciate your comments.
+ The Chair now recognizes Mr. Walden, the Republican leader
+of the full committee, for 5 minutes for his opening statement.
+
+ OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
+ CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON
+
+ Mr. Walden. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again,
+congratulations on finding the gavel and using the gavel. We
+are delighted to work with you. And thanks for holding this
+hearing on climate change.
+ It is no secret the Energy and Commerce Committee has the
+jurisdiction, the ability to find a bipartisan path forward to
+tackle this important issue that confronts not only our Nation
+but also the world. As you know, I spoke out early and
+forcefully, Mr. Chairman, about the unnecessary effort by
+Speaker Pelosi to create yet a separate select committee which
+lacks any legislative authority. Our able Members will
+certainly serve on that panel. It is as redundant as the last
+one she created more than a decade ago.
+ With all this activity, it is important to highlight a few
+fundamentals at the onset. Climate change is real. The need to
+protect the environment is real. The need to foster a strong
+U.S. economy and grow American jobs is also real. And the need
+to prepare our communities for the future is real. Republicans
+on this committee are ready, willing, and able to have serious
+solutions-oriented discussions about how to address and balance
+these considerations.
+ For instance, we believe that a longer conversation about
+the Democrats' Green New Deal is necessary. We have heard about
+general tenets of the plan for the U.S., such as all-renewable
+electricity generation by 2030, all-zero-emission passenger
+vehicles in just 11 years, a Federal job guarantee, a living
+wage guarantee, but we obviously have some concerns about the
+potential adverse economic employment impacts of these
+measures.
+ At least one analysis has estimated that going to a 100
+percent renewable energy in the U.S. could cost a minimum of
+$5.7 trillion--trillion--dollars. It sounds like a huge sum for
+consumers and taxpayers to foot.
+ The Republicans are focused on solutions that prioritize
+adaptation, innovation, and conservation. Just as America led
+the world in energy development, which reduced carbon
+emissions, we want America's innovators to develop the next
+technologies that will improve the environment and create jobs
+here at home. We want to help the environment for our children,
+and grandchildren, and their children. We also want the people
+who live in our districts in this country today, right now, to
+have jobs and to be able to provide for their families.
+ These are not mutually exclusive principles. And I believe,
+Mr. Chairman, working together we can develop the public
+policies to achieve these goals.
+ As the Republican leader of the committee, I will work to
+promote a better policy vision for the environment, one which
+supports and accelerates continued technological advances in
+energy and environmental practices to improve our quality of
+life. It ensures a sound regulatory environment where people
+have the confidence to invest their money to innovate and to
+create American jobs, one that improves information needed to
+understand future impacts and provide resources to communities
+to adapt and to prepare for these impacts, one that promotes
+America workforce development and training in energy-related
+industries, and one that recognizes the importance of open and
+competitive markets in the role the United States plays as the
+world's leading energy producer, innovator, and exporter of
+advanced technologies.
+ Indeed, Republicans have a track record of supporting
+policies that protect the environment and ensure energy access.
+For example, in the last Congress we supported legislation to
+promote zero-emissions nuclear energy, and renewable energy
+including hydropower. Hydropower has great success as a clean
+energy source across the country, and especially in my district
+and my State, where 40 percent of our energy comes from
+hydropower.
+ Legislation we passed into law in the last Congress will
+streamline the permitting process for closed-loop pump
+hydropower projects. We have such a project in the permitting
+process in my district that would power up to 600,000 Oregon
+homes in a closed-loop hydropower process.
+ We also advanced legislation to promote energy efficiency,
+grid modernization, energy storage, natural gas, a more
+resilient electric grid, carbon capture and utilization, and
+better forest management to address wildfires and limit their
+air quality impacts. This is what happens after a fire. This is
+called post-fire wildlife habitat right here. It is nothing but
+ash and destruction of the habitat.
+ Oregonians choke on smoke every summer from wildfires that
+burn across our poorly managed Federal forests, filling our
+skies with ash and polluting our airsheds with carbon dioxide,
+among other pollutants. Managing our forests not only reduces
+the risk of these catastrophic fires, but the Intergovernmental
+Panel on Climate Change say that sustainably managing our
+forests would create the longest sustained carbon mitigation
+benefit. So there is work we could do there.
+ And the numbers show that our policies are working. In
+2017, U.S. carbon emissions were the lowest they have been
+since 1992, and are projected to remain steady in upcoming
+years, more than 10 percent below 2005 levels. Unfortunately,
+the Green New Deal ignores many of these important elements of
+our energy strategy and makes it more difficult to reach our
+shared environmental goals.
+ We look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on
+these topics, especially Mr. Powell from ClearPath, which has
+promoted clean energy, advanced nuclear, and carbon capture,
+and Mr. Worthington of the U.S. Energy Association, which
+advocated for a diverse energy mix within the United States and
+the importance of energy access and affordability around the
+globe.
+ So, when it comes to climate change, Mr. Chairman,
+Republicans are focused on solutions. That is why we back
+sensible, realistic, effective policies to tackle climate
+change. What we are deeply concerned about are plans we believe
+will harm consumers and cost American jobs and drive up our
+costs and not result in the kinds of goals we want to achieve
+mutually.
+ So thank you for having the hearing. I yield back the
+balance of my time.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Walden follows:]
+
+ Prepared statement of Hon. Greg Walden
+
+ Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing on
+climate change. It is no secret that the Energy and Commerce
+Committee has the jurisdiction and ability to find a bipartisan
+path forward to tackle this important issue that confronts not
+just our Nation, but the world. As you know, I spoke out early
+and forcefully about the unnecessary effort by Speaker Pelosi
+to create a separate, select committee which lacks any
+legislative authority. While able Members will serve on this
+panel, it is as redundant as the last one she created more than
+a decade ago.
+ With all this activity, it is important to highlight a few
+fundamentals at the onset. Climate change is real. The need to
+protect the environment is real. The need to foster a strong
+U.S. economy and grow American jobs is real. And the need to
+prepare our communities for the future is real. The Republicans
+on this committee are ready and willing to have serious,
+solutions-oriented discussions about how to address and balance
+these considerations.
+ For instance, we believe that a longer conversation about
+the Democrats' Green New Deal is needed. We have heard about
+general tenets of the plan for the U.S.--such as all renewable
+electricity generation by 2030, all zero-emission passenger
+vehicles in just 11 years, a Federal job guarantee, and a
+living wage guarantee. We have serious concerns about the
+potential adverse economic and employment impacts of these
+types of measures. At least one analysis has estimated that
+going to 100 percent renewable energy in the U.S. could cost a
+minimum of $5.7 trillion--that sounds like a huge cost for
+consumers and taxpayers to foot.
+ Republicans are focused on solutions that prioritize
+adaptation, innovation, and conservation. Just as America led
+the world in energy development that has reduced carbon
+emissions, we want America's innovators to develop the next
+technologies that will improve the environment and create jobs
+here at home.
+ We want a healthy environment for our children,
+grandchildren, and their children. But we also want the people
+who live in our districts and in this country today, right now,
+to have jobs and to be able to provide for their families.
+These are not mutually exclusive principles. Working together
+we can develop the public policies to achieve these goals.
+ As the Republican leader on the committee, I will work to
+promote a better policy vision for the environment, one which:
+ Supports and accelerates continued technological
+advances in energy and environmental practices to improve our
+quality of life;
+ Ensures a sound regulatory environment, where
+people have the confidence to invest their money to innovate
+and create American jobs;
+ Improves information needed to understand future
+impacts and provides resources to communities to adapt and
+prepare for those impacts;
+ Promotes American workforce development and
+training in energy-related industries; and,
+ Recognizes the importance of open and competitive
+markets; and the role the United States plays as the world's
+leading energy producer, innovator, and exporter of advanced
+technologies.
+ Indeed, Republicans have a track record of supporting
+policies that protect the environment and ensure energy access.
+For example, last Congress we supported legislation to promote
+zero-emissions nuclear energy, and renewable energy including
+hydropower. Hydropower has great success as a clean energy
+source in my Oregon district and generates approximately 40
+percent of the electricity in my State. Legislation we passed
+into law last Congress will streamline the permitting process
+for closed-loop pumped hydropower projects. One such project in
+my district aims to generate enough power for 600,000 homes in
+southern Oregon.
+ We also advanced legislation to promote energy efficiency,
+grid modernization, energy storage, natural gas, a more
+resilient electric grid, carbon capture and utilization, and
+better forest management to address wildfires and limit their
+air quality impacts.
+ Oregonians choke on smoke every summer from wildfires that
+burn across our poorly managed Federal forests, filling our
+skies with ash and polluting our airsheds with carbon dioxide.
+Managing our forests not only reduces the risk of these
+catastrophic fires, but the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
+Change says that sustainably managing our forests will create
+the longest sustained carbon mitigation benefit.
+ And the numbers show that our policies are working--in
+2017, U.S. carbon emissions were the lowest they have been
+since 1992, and they are projected to remain steady in upcoming
+years, more than 10 percent below 2005 levels.
+ Unfortunately, the Green New Deal ignores many of these
+important elements of our energy strategy, and makes it more
+difficult to reach our shared environmental goals. I look
+forward to hearing from our witnesses today on these topics,
+particularly Mr. Powell from ClearPath, which has promoted
+clean energy, advanced nuclear and carbon capture, and Mr.
+Worthington of the U.S. Energy Association, which has advocated
+for a diverse energy mix within the United States, and the
+importance of energy access and affordability around the globe.
+ When it comes to climate change, Republicans are focused on
+solutions. That's why we back sensible, realistic, and
+effective policies to tackle climate change.
+ What we are deeply concerned about are the Democratic plans
+we believe will harm American consumers and American jobs by
+driving up costs and pushing jobs overseas where environmental
+laws are far more lax. We can do better than old policies
+rooted only in over-regulation, excessive-taxation, and
+economic stagnation.
+ Thank you, Chairman, and I yield back.
+
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Representative Walden. And the
+gentleman yields back.
+ As chair, I remind Members that, pursuant to committee
+rules, all Members' written opening statements shall be made
+part of the record.
+ I now introduce our witnesses for today's hearing. And let
+me thank each and every one of you for sharing your time and
+offering input on this very important topic. We do appreciate
+your participation.
+ So we have from my left to right Dr. Brenda Ekwurzel,
+Director of Climate Science, Union of Concerned Scientists.
+ Next to her is Mr. Rich Powell, executive director of
+ClearPath.
+ Then we have Mr. Rick Duke, principal of Gigaton
+Strategies.
+ Then Reverend Leo Woodberry, Justice First Tour, Kingdom
+Living Temple Church.
+ Then we have Mr. Barry K. Worthington, executive director
+of United States Energy Association.
+ And then finally, Mr. Michael Williams, deputy director of
+BlueGreen Alliance.
+ We as a committee want to thank our witnesses for joining
+us today. We look forward to your testimony. At this time, the
+Chair will now recognize each witness for 5 minutes to provide
+his or her opening statement.
+ Before we begin I would like to explain the lighting
+system. In front of our witnesses is a series of lights. The
+lights will initially be green at the start of your opening
+statement. The light will turn yellow when you have 1 minute
+left. Please begin to wrap up your testimony at that point. The
+light will turn red when your time expires.
+ So, with that, Dr. Brenda Ekwurzel, again welcome. You are
+recognized for 5 minutes.
+
+ STATEMENTS OF BRENDA EKWURZEL, PH.D., DIRECTOR OF CLIMATE
+ SCIENCE, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS; RICHARD J. POWELL,
+ EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CLEARPATH; RICHARD D. DUKE, PRINCIPAL,
+ GIGATON STRATEGIES; REVEREND LEO WOODBERRY, JUSTICE FIRST
+CAMPAIGN, KINGDOM LIVING TEMPLE CHURCH AND NEW ALPHA COMMUNITY
+ DEVELOPMENT CORP.; BARRY WORTHINGTON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
+UNITED STATES ENERGY ASSOCIATION; AND MICHAEL WILLIAMS, DEPUTY
+ DIRECTOR, BLUEGREEN ALLIANCE
+
+ STATEMENT OF BRENDA EKWURZEL
+
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Thank you, Chairman Tonko, Ranking Member
+Shimkus, and for the opening statements by Chairman Pallone and
+Ranking Member Walden, and the committee for providing me the
+opportunity to testify here before you today.
+ I am Director of Climate Science at the Union of Concerned
+Scientists, and I also had the privilege of serving as one of
+the coauthors of the Fourth National Climate Assessment
+released in November. Before I share with you the advances in
+our understanding from these latest assessments, I want to turn
+to a recent example of the high cost of climate change.
+ During the recent outbreak of extreme cold weather that
+gripped large parts of the Nation, a University of Iowa student
+and a University of Vermont student were counted among at least
+21 people who perished from consequences likely from the
+dangerous wind chill. Although it may seem counterintuitive,
+recent studies indicate that climate can cause unusually cold
+temperatures at mid-latitudes by disrupting the normal winter
+season polar vortex in the stratosphere.
+ A good analogy to this disruption is a weak seal on a
+freezer door that periodically allows frigid air to flood into
+the room while warmer air rushes into the freezer. At the end
+of January, similarly, a cold blast spilled out of the Polar
+Regions and into the Midwest and expanded through to the
+eastern U.S., breaking wind chill records across. Yet Alaska
+experienced above-freezing temperatures and rain falling on
+snow, forcing the cancellation of mid-distance dog sled races
+that contestants use to compete for the long-distance races,
+the Iditarod.
+ Evidence is growing that warmer-than-normal periods in the
+Arctic are associated with a greater chance for extreme winter
+weather in the eastern United States. This deadly cold snap is
+just a recent example of the changing nature of extreme events
+that scientists are studying. One goal is to provide earlier
+warning so local officials have more time to take precautionary
+measures and improve safety.
+ Climate assessment provides the public and policymakers the
+most advanced warnings through summary and evaluation of the
+latest science. I will briefly share with you some findings
+with you today from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
+Change Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius
+above preindustrial levels, and the Fourth National Climate
+Assessment.
+ So human-induced warming reached approximately 1 degree
+Celsius, or 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, a warmer world. And what
+has that brought us? Research indicates that this warming has
+changed the behavior and severity of extreme events.
+ For example, scientists found that global warming made the
+precipitation around 15 percent more intense for Hurricane
+Harvey that brought devastating flooding to Houston, and made
+it around three times more likely.
+ So, at the present rate, global warming would reach 1.5
+degrees around 2040, and around 2 degrees around 2065. And
+every half a degree of global temperature increase has major
+consequences. For example, coral reefs have an immense variety
+of species and support fisheries that help feed many around the
+world. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special
+Report assessed that coral reefs are projected to decline a
+further 70 to 90 percent at 1.5 degrees Celsius above
+preindustrial, and losses of nearly all coral reefs at 2
+degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.
+ To avoid surpassing 1.5 degrees Celsius, global carbon
+emissions would have to drop around 45 percent below 2010
+levels by around 2030, and reach net-zero emissions by the mid-
+century. The special report asserts that to hold temperatures
+to 1.5 degrees would require ``rapid and far reaching
+transitions in energy, land, urban, and infrastructure'' at an
+``unprecedented scale'' with ``significant upscaling of
+investments in options.'' Given the scale of changes needed and
+the time to lay the framework, this is a make-or-break decade
+to make capital investments needed to reduce carbon dioxide
+levels, or the Paris Climate goals are unlikely to be achieved.
+ The Fourth National Climate Assessment was released in
+November in accordance with the legal mandate of the 1990
+Global Change Research Act. And, increasingly, U.S. residents
+already recognize the consequences of climate change. Midwest
+forest products industry has experienced over the past 70 years
+2- to 3-week shorter frozen ground season suitable for winter
+harvests. The Great Lakes ice cover decreased on average 71
+percent from 1973 to 2010, with a recent rebound in the ice
+years of 2014 and 2015.
+ Meanwhile, during the 2012 and 2017 winters, in Lake
+Ontario and southern Lake Michigan the temperatures never
+dropped below 39 degrees Fahrenheit. And that's a critical
+threshold for seasonal mixing of the waters. Without winter or
+spring seasonal mixing, the chance is for increases for low
+oxygen conditions, which are toxic to aquatic species.
+ In another case, an extreme flooding event in Thailand
+caused a U.S.-based company to lose around half of its hard-
+drive shipments during the last quarter of 2011. Consumers may
+not have realized this, but this temporarily doubled global
+hard-drive prices and drove up the costs for Apple, HP, and
+Dell.
+ Climate change can exacerbate historical inequities. And I
+want to say that the projected costs in the labor is around
+$155 billion per year. And under a low-emissions scenario we
+could take a bite of nearly a half out of those damages.
+Extreme heat mortality could have damages towards the end of
+the century of over $140 billion per year. We could take a 48
+percent bite.
+ Mr. Tonko. If I can ask you to wrap up, please.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. And I just want to say overall coastal
+property losses, the losses are real, climate change is real.
+We need to step up solutions at the root cause, which States
+and cities are doing today.
+ Thank you very much.
+ [The prepared statement of Dr. Ekwurzel follows:]
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you. And we now move to Mr. Rich Powell.
+You are recognized for 5 minutes, Mr. Powell.
+
+ STATEMENT OF RICHARD J. POWELL
+
+ Mr. Powell. Good morning, Chairmen Tonko and Pallone,
+Republican leaders Shimkus and Walden, and other members of the
+committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear today.
+ I am Rich Powell, Executive Director of ClearPath, a
+nonprofit that develops conservative policies that accelerate
+clean energy innovation. ClearPath supports flexible low-carbon
+technologies, nuclear, hydropower, carbon capture for both coal
+and gas, and energy storage.
+ Climate change is an urgent challenge that merits action at
+every level of the government and private sector. It is too
+important to be a partisan punching bag. Climate change
+deserves a pragmatic and technology-inclusive agenda to make
+the global clean-energy transition cheaper and faster. It is
+conservative to hedge for this risk.
+ Heavy industry is aggressively moving onto solutions to
+deal with climate issues. Southern Company is reducing their
+emissions in half by 2030, and will be low- to no-carbon by
+2050. Shell also aims to cut emissions in half by 2050.
+Notably, senior executives from Southern, Shell, and just last
+week BP are linking their pay to hitting emissions targets.
+These examples illustrate that the Federal Government should
+enable private-sector solutions through market-oriented
+policies.
+ Crucially, we must also remember that climate change is a
+global problem. A molecule of CO2 emitted on the
+other side of the world has the same impact as one released
+here. Since 2000, coal power generation in China nearly
+quadrupled. Bloomberg reports that new Chinese coal capacity
+remains planned roughly equivalent to the entire U.S. coal
+fleet. Abroad, China is financing another 100 gigawatts of coal
+in at least 27 countries. The expected emissions growth from
+developing Asian countries by 2050 alone would offset a
+complete decarbonization of the U.S. economy.
+ More broadly, the share of global energy supplied by clean
+sources has not increased since 2005. Despite significant
+renewables growth, global emissions continue to rise. In other
+words, clean development is only just keeping up with economic
+development. Clean is not gaining ground. Clean tech available
+today is simply not up to the task of global decarbonization.
+It must represent a better, cheaper alternative so developing
+nations consistently choose it over higher-emitting options.
+ We have a choice: That the Chinese and their partners shut
+down their coal-fired power plants at the expense of economic
+growth, or develop, demo, and export U.S.-based emissions
+control technologies.
+ This technologies challenge is evident in the most
+ambitious plan yet from a major U.S. utility. Xcel Energy
+recently announced plans to reduce carbon emissions 80 percent
+by 2030 and 100 percent by 2050. Xcel noted they will require
+innovation to reach their 100 percent goal while remaining
+reliable and affordable for their customers. Growing their
+already impressive portfolio of renewables won't be enough.
+ A serious debate on climate solutions must include a dose
+of political and technical realism. Let's not rush toward any
+impracticably hasty, exclusively renewable strategy in the U.S.
+that will be both costly and unlikely to reduce global
+emissions. If supporters of a Green New Deal truly believe
+climate change is an existential threat, they should focus on
+policies that reduce global emissions as quickly and cheaply as
+possible.
+ So how do we change our trajectory? Well, we have done it
+before. There is no reason that clean technology needs to be
+more expensive or worse performing than higher-emitting
+technology.
+ Take America's shale gas revolution, rooted in decades of
+public-private research partnerships. This R&D, coupled with a
+$10 billion alternative production tax credit, yielded combined
+cycle turbines, diamond drill bits, horizontal drilling, and 3D
+imaging. Markets took up the technology, increasing gas from 19
+to 32 percent of our power between 2005 and 2017, lowering
+emissions 28 percent.
+ The same ingenuity that produced the shale boom can make
+that gas fully clean. Near Houston, NET Power is successfully
+demonstrating a groundbreaking zero-emission natural gas power
+plant. More broadly, it is an immensely promising time for
+public-private partnerships in U.S. clean innovation. Some
+examples:
+ Form Energy is developing cheap, long-duration energy
+storage that may enable many more renewables. NuScale is
+licensing a small modular nuclear reactor, while Oklo and X-
+Energy partner with our national labs on microreactors.
+ The last Congress hasn't received the credit it is due for
+boosting low-carbon technologies. Your broadly bipartisan
+agenda enhanced critical incentives for carbon capture,
+renewables, and advanced nuclear, invested in clean R&D at
+record levels, and reformed regulations to accelerate the
+licensing of both advanced nuclear reactors and hydropower. One
+example: The 45Q tax incentive for carbon capture was supported
+by a vast bipartisan coalition, from environmentalists to labor
+to utilities to coal companies. Notably, seven national unions
+just collectively restated the need to include carbon capture
+and nuclear in any national climate policy.
+ Going forward, given the scale of the climate challenge, we
+need to greatly increase the pace and ambition of our efforts.
+Let's not shy away from smart investments in technology
+moonshots to deliver lost-cost, high-performing, clean
+technology. Let's create stronger incentives to commercialize
+cutting-edge companies and deploy their technologies globally,
+and remove regulatory barriers to rapidly scaling clean
+technology.
+ Bipartisan cooperation on climate change is essential under
+divided government, and attainable. In fact, it is the only
+chance our Nation will have to play a significant role in the
+global solution.
+ Thank you again for this opportunity, and I look forward to
+the discussion.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Powell follows:]
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Mr. Powell.
+ And next we will move to Mr. Rick Duke. You are recognized,
+Mr. Duke, for 5 minutes.
+
+ STATEMENT OF RICHARD D. DUKE
+
+ Mr. Duke. Thank you, Chairman Tonko, Republic leader
+Shimkus, and members of the committee for inviting me to
+testify on the prospects for reducing greenhouse pollution
+through American leadership on technology and diplomacy. It is
+an honor to share with this committee my confidence that we can
+still contain the most costly and destabilizing climate
+impacts, but only if we choose to act to put our Nation on a
+path to net-zero greenhouse gas pollution by mid-century.
+ In short, rapid climate action is strategic for both our
+economy and our national security. And we urgently need strong
+Federal policy to make it all happen.
+ This is a momentum game--the faster we act, the easier it
+gets. Early support for emerging green technologies gives
+American entrepreneurs the chance to cut costs as they scale up
+production and learn by doing. As these costs come down, bigger
+markets open up, including for exports to countries that raise
+their ambition in response. And this in turn allows further
+cost reductions in global-scale economies.
+ This virtuous cycle spurs the incredible progress we are
+seeing for climate solutions ranging from super-efficient
+lighting to renewables. And many of these originated in
+American labs and start-ups. To build on this momentum, we need
+to double down on cutting greenhouse gas pollution in the
+United States. And we know exactly what to do. It starts with
+quickly scaling up zero-carbon electricity. We have to broadly
+electrify vehicles, buildings, and much of industry, and we
+also have to cut non-CO2 greenhouse gases.
+ Over time, solutions that remove carbon dioxide from the
+atmosphere will play an increasingly important role. This
+includes restoring farmlands and forests through increased
+economic productivity, while also storing carbon in healthier
+soils and vegetation. At the same time, we need to kick start
+promising emerging technologies to directly extract
+CO2 from the atmosphere and safely sequester it.
+ These carbon dioxide removal solutions will allow us to
+achieve net zero by balancing out certain emissions that we
+don't know how to eliminate currently, such as methane and
+nitrous oxide from agriculture.
+ Despite the imperative to get moving, though, some argue
+that other countries aren't doing much so we should hold off on
+cutting our emissions. But the facts are that our competitors
+are already moving. Every country other than the U.S. remains
+committed to the Paris Agreement. The EU and Canada both have
+carbon pricing in place that is strong.
+ Mexico is moving to 35 percent clean electricity by 2024.
+And China has over 80 strong technology deployment policies in
+place that are propelling up to nearly $130 billion in
+renewables investment in 2017 alone. That is triple the level
+in the U.S.
+ At the same time, China already accounts for well over half
+the electric vehicle sales, and two of the top three electric
+vehicle manufacturers in the world. Tesla is still in the
+number one slot, and GM is in the top ten.
+ All this investment is driving down low-carbon technology
+costs globally, including batteries and solar electricity, both
+of which have come down about 80 percent since 2010. It has
+never been easier to cut greenhouse gas pollution. And all 50
+States can act now. In fact, at least 45 States have already
+installed utility-scale solar and wind at increasingly prices
+that are below conventional power. And we are making progress
+with carbon capture and storage, including the zero-carbon
+natural gas electricity pilot in Texas, and cleaner ethanol in
+the Midwest.
+ But, unfortunately, we are not moving fast enough. Last
+year our energy CO2 emissions were up over 3 percent
+after a decade of falling about 1.5 percent per year. And now
+Federal policy is creating headwinds. The last two budget
+proposals sought to cut energy R&D by as much as 70 percent.
+Thankfully, Congress strategically increased funding on a
+bipartisan basis.
+ On deployment, the current administration is seeking to gut
+the Clean Power Plan, weaken vehicle standards, thereby
+threatening to cost drivers billions at the pump in higher
+gasoline consumption, and undermining measures to cut energy
+waste and methane leaks from our oil and gas systems. Instead
+of rolling back standards, we need stronger Federal investment
+in policy, both new legislation and vigorous implementation of
+existing law, to propel all low-carbon solutions forward.
+ Many different policy packages could get the job done, but
+this ideally starts with at least doubling clean energy R&D,
+plus legislation that puts a price on pollution and equitably
+and productively uses resulting revenue. And we absolutely can
+and must do right by workers and others on the front lines of
+this transition, including those struggling with the decline of
+coal, and communities most impacted by pollution. Added all
+together, we could cut our emissions in half by 2035, on track
+to net zero by mid-century, while bolstering our technological
+and diplomatic leadership.
+ Thank you. Look forward to the discussion.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Duke follows:]
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you very much, Mr. Duke.
+ And now we will move to Reverend Leo Woodberry. Reverend,
+you are recognized for 5 minutes.
+
+ STATEMENT OF REVEREND LEO WOODBERRY
+
+ Reverend Woodberry. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Tonko,
+and thank you distinguished members of the committee.
+ I have been doing this work now for over 25 years dealing
+with issues of climate and environmental justice. I could begin
+by talking about being too big to fail. But if we talk about
+that, then we can also talk about how we should not have moved
+away from kerosene to electric lights, or how we should have
+protected the carriage and buggy whip industry rather than
+developing the auto industry. Or we could have said, et's keep
+the typewriter industry going and never develop a computer
+industry.
+ So those are topics I can talk about. But what I would like
+to talk about is what we found last year when we conducted the
+Justice First Tour and went through 12 southeastern States and
+25 cities and talked to people on the front line, people who
+have been suffering the impacts of carbon emissions, pollution,
+and the impacts of climate change.
+ So I am talking about people like the 90-year-old woman in
+Sellers, South Carolina, in Marion County who now has to
+elevate her home 7 feet in the air.
+ I am talking about people who labored in our fields,
+cleaned our homes, and worked for employers who never paid into
+their Social Security and have to live off SSI checks of $600
+and $800 a month.
+ These are the people who are being impacted. We don't have
+to wait 12 years for a switch to be flipped. Americans are
+suffering the impacts of climate change right now. People being
+displaced, communities are being destroyed. And we come here
+issuing the clear clarion call of hope. We need policy change.
+We need to desperately put our people to work.
+ We can, like in the town of Sellers, South Caroline, they
+said that the flooding impacts were worse because of large-
+scale logging, losing our natural defenses against flooding.
+Because the ditches had not been cleaned out in 25 years in
+this rural community.
+ We can put our people to work elevating homes, cleaning out
+ditches, building bioswales to minimize flooding. We can pass
+legislation that will put in place community-based climate
+solutions. It is time to move beyond the false narrative that
+equates big utilities with renewable energy.
+ Let's look at the justification. Utilities said, ``We could
+not exist in a competitive environment because we have to build
+such large infrastructure that we might not get a return on our
+investment.'' Solar and wind can exist in a competitive
+environment. We don't have to look just towards macro
+solutions. If we can put timers and do energy efficiency in 10
+million homes and reduce energy generation by as little as 200
+kilowatt hours a year, we will have made a significant
+difference. But in order to do this we have to be able to look
+towards people who desperately need work.
+ We have counties, like Marion County, like Dillon County,
+like Darlington County, like counties all across this country,
+rural communities where people have to drive 25, 30, 40 miles
+each way every day because there are no engines of economic
+development in their community.
+ I came here today to talk about the people along the Black
+Belt, the people of Flint, Michigan, the people along the I-95
+corridor of shame, the least among us, those who were forgotten
+about, who we turned our gaze away from while the same
+polluting facilities were allowed to be sited in their
+communities that have led to climate change, and the
+possibility of humanity no longer having civilization as we
+know it. We can debate forever whether or not climate change is
+real. But the problem is here. The problem is now. And we need
+to build a wall of protection around the citizens of this
+country, a wall of mitigation, a wall of adaptation, and a wall
+of resilience.
+ Because the science is clear, whether we are looking at
+the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or we are looking
+at our own National Climate Assessment, the storms are going to
+get worse. The hurricanes are going to become more intense. And
+we have to keep our forests standing in the ground because they
+are the greatest carbon sinks on this planet. And we don't have
+enough time to see whether or not some technologies might work.
+ Mr. Tonko. Reverend, if you could wrap up.
+ Reverend Woodberry. And so I just want to close by saying
+this: The time for action is now. And if we don't take action
+today, then we do a great disservice for generations to come.
+ Thank you very much.
+ [The prepared statement of Reverend Woodberry follows:]
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Reverend.
+ And now we will move to Mr. Barry K. Worthington. Mr.
+Worthington, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
+
+ STATEMENT OF BARRY WORTHINGTON
+
+ Mr. Worthington. Thank you, Chairman Tonko, Ranking Member
+Shimkus, and members of the Subcommittee on Environment and
+Climate Change. My name is Barry Worthington. I am the
+executive director of the United States Energy Association. I
+have been in this role for 30 years, and have another dozen
+years in the energy business.
+ The U.S. Energy Association has worked in transitional
+economies in developing countries for 25 years, over 25 years,
+with the U.S. Agency for International Development, and also
+with the Department of Energy, to expand the use of clean
+energy technology. Our members include energy production
+companies, energy efficiency companies, but also engineering,
+finance, legal, research, and consulting organizations. Our
+purpose is to convey information about the realities of global
+energy issues in the 21st Century.
+ We are not a lobbying organization. We are not an advocacy
+organization. We are an educational association both by
+function and IRS tax status. My intent today is to offer
+information and observations to you and to convey an offer that
+the U.S. Energy Association is available to be a resource for
+you and your staff as you begin to tackle the priorities of the
+116th Congress.
+ The risks of climate change are real, and industrial
+activity around the globe is impacting the climate. Addressing
+climate change is a challenge for our country. It affects every
+world citizen. While the industry adjusts to climate change, it
+continues to ensure American citizens have access to
+increasingly safe, affordable, reliable, and clean energy,
+which we all do in this great country.
+ We are fortunate here. But we have between a billion and a
+billion-and-a-half global citizens with no access to commercial
+energy. Women in developing countries spend all day forging for
+sticks and animal dung to generate their cooking, lighting, and
+heating. This is dangerous. Burning firewood and animal dung
+indoors kills children. Indoor air pollution causes asthma and
+other health problems.
+ Access to energy, on the other hand, provides improved
+health, education, economic development, and allows mothers and
+fathers to spend more time with their family instead of
+scrounging around to find animal dung to burn in their--inside.
+ Central to energy access is lighting, for example. In
+developing countries, simple lighting reduces thefts, rapes,
+personal assaults, and other crimes. Access to energy paves the
+way for economic development in businesses such as simple cell
+phone charging enterprises, refrigeration for vaccines. Energy
+access improves people's lives.
+ And our members are volunteering their time to work with
+their counterparts in developing countries to share technology
+and management practices in the developing countries. And we
+are trying to do our part.
+ Our industry's challenge is to double the provision of
+energy services globally while reducing greenhouse gas
+emissions by 80 percent. Though there are 1 to 1.5 billion
+people with no access to energy, recognize there are also
+another 1.5 billion with inadequate access. And considering a
+global population growth of 2 billion leaves the energy
+industry to provide 5 billion more energy consumers access to
+energy services by mid-century.
+ Many of these consumers will utilize fossil fuels because
+they are domestic, abundant, and affordable. We should work
+harder towards helping them use high-efficiency/low-emissions
+technology. USEA has been doing this for 25 years.
+ And domestically we are expected to reduce greenhouse gas
+emissions by 80 percent. Our industry has undertaken a wide
+range of initiatives to reduce and avoid greenhouse gas
+emissions, and we are proud of our progress.
+ For example, electric power carbon dioxide emissions
+declined 28 percent from 2005 to 2017. Methane emissions
+declined 18.6 percent from 1990 to 2015, even though we
+increased domestic natural gas production by 50 percent.
+ We think the solution to the dual challenges of climate
+change and global access to safe, reliable, and affordable and
+clean energy is technology. And an all-of-the-above approach is
+essential. This means all of the renewables as well as all of
+the traditional fuels, including nuclear and fossil fuels. We
+need to work harder towards assuring that fossil fuel
+utilization uses high-efficiency/low-emissions technology,
+including carbon capture and storage.
+ Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Worthington follows:]
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you very much, Mr. Worthington.
+ And finally, from the BlueGreen Alliance, Mr. Michael
+Williams. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
+
+ STATEMENT OF MICHAEL WILLIAMS
+
+ Mr. Williams. Thank you, Chairman Tonko, Republican leader
+Shimkus, distinguished members of the committee. I am honored
+to be here alongside my fellow panelists and with you all as we
+strive to find common comprehensive solutions.
+ As the chairman noted, my name is Mike Williams. I am the
+deputy director of the BlueGreen Alliance, a national
+partnership of labor unions and environmental organizations.
+BlueGreen Alliance unites America's largest labor unions and
+its most influential environmental organizations to solve
+today's environmental challenges in ways that create and
+maintain quality jobs and build a stronger, fairer economy.
+ We believe that Americans don't have to choose between a
+good job and a clean environment or a safe climate. We can and
+we must have both.
+ The world's leading scientific organizations have been
+unambiguous that climate change is a dire and urgent threat.
+And we need comprehensive action and solutions to rapidly drive
+emissions down now. I am heartened by the common commitment to
+action I am hearing today.
+ Our communities bear the burden of climate change in
+wildfires, hurricanes, heat waves, droughts, and sea level rise
+it spawns. At the same time, our Nation is struggling with deep
+and crippling economic inequality. The majority of American
+families are less able to deal with these problems as their
+wages have fallen and their economic mobility and power in the
+workplace has declined.
+ For too long the debate on the economic impact of climate
+action has been framed as either disaster or miracle, yet
+neither aligns with the complicated realities in which American
+workers live. This flawed debate has prevented us from
+addressing climate change at a level commensurate with the size
+of the challenge. The driving forces behind the challenges of
+climate change and inequality are intertwined, and we must
+tackle them together as equal priorities and place good jobs
+and working families at the center of a massive economic
+transformation.
+ Thankfully, we are starting to see examples across the
+country of the kinds of solutions needed to achieve this
+outcome and justice for all Americans. Take Buy Clean
+California, a landmark law that requires State agencies to
+consider the embedded carbon emissions of industrial products.
+This law will reduce emissions globally, while also leveling
+the playing field for domestic manufacturers who are investing
+in clean, efficient manufacturing technologies and processes.
+ Or in the State of Illinois, where the Future Energy Jobs
+Act provides sweeping changes to boost renewable energy and
+energy efficiency while protecting the jobs of workers at
+current energy generation facilities in the State, including
+existing nuclear power plants, and establishing standards for
+the solar industry to use a skilled and qualified workforce.
+ Finally, critical Federal efforts, like America's landmark
+fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards for cars and trucks,
+drive investment, innovation, and job growth. Our research
+finds more than 1,200 U.S. factories and engineering facilities
+in 48 States, and 288,000 American workers, building
+technologies that reduce pollution and improve fuel economy for
+today's innovative vehicles.
+ As significant transformation is needed to truly address
+climate change and inequality at the speed and scale demanded
+by the scientific reality and the urgent needs of our
+communities, it will require bold ideas and a guarantee that no
+worker or community is left behind. And instead of leaking jobs
+and pollutions overseas, we invest in our industries and our
+people here.
+ This is a big task. But I cannot stress firmly enough that
+no solution to climate change or inequality will be complete if
+Congress does not move forward with an ambitious plan to
+rebuild and transform America's infrastructure so that it is
+ready for the significant transformation we need to tackle
+climate change. This plan must address all aspects of our
+infrastructure needs, from strengthening the electric grid and
+modernizing our water systems to reducing methane leaks in the
+natural gas distribution sector, improving surface
+transportation, investing in natural infrastructure, and making
+our schools, hospitals, and other buildings safer, healthier,
+and more energy efficient.
+ These investments can reduce air and water pollution and
+make our communities more resilient to the impacts of climate
+change. They will also create millions of good jobs. But we
+have to make sure we tackle this challenge the right way.
+ This means ensuring all products are subject to Buy America
+and Davis-Bacon; using project labor agreements and community
+benefit agreements, and local hire provisions; prioritizing the
+use of the most efficient, resilient, and cleanest materials
+and products; enhancing workforce training and development
+programs; increasing pathways to economic opportunities for
+communities and local workers, especially people of color and
+low-income communities; and prioritizing public funding and
+financing.
+ Repairing America's infrastructure systems should be a
+bipartisan legislative priority for the 116th Congress.
+ In closing, I want to reiterate that tackling the crisis of
+climate change, if done right, is a significant opportunity to
+ensure a more equitable society, increase U.S. global
+competitiveness, and create quality, family-sustaining jobs
+across the country.
+ We look forward to working with this committee as you move
+forward with your agenda for the 116th Congress. Thank you
+again for the opportunity to testify.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Williams follows:]
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Mr. Tonko. I thank you, Mr. Williams, and your fellow
+panelists, who have provided great information.
+ So that concludes our opening statements. We will now move
+to Member questions. Each Member will have 5 minutes to ask
+questions of our witnesses. I will start by recognizing myself
+for 5 minutes.
+ The United States emits around 6.5 billion metric tons of
+greenhouse gas each and every year. That pollution will outlast
+us by decades, and even centuries. As is clear from testimony,
+Americans are already feeling the effects of climate change,
+but most of the people in this room will be long gone when the
+worst consequences hit. The decisions we make today will
+determine the conditions for generations not yet born.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel, I would like you to expand upon why it is so
+important that we start drastically reducing emissions now.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Thank you, Chairman Tonko.
+ Essentially what you said is correct, that for 20 percent
+of the carbon dioxide emissions it could be trapping heat day-
+in, day-out for centuries. And also methane, nitrous oxide,
+these are the very important pollutants to get out of the
+atmosphere. In part, because you may have noticed that coastal
+properties is one of the big sectors for damage. And if you
+reduce emissions you can take over a 20 percent bite out of
+that. And it is because the legacy of sea-level rise has
+already been baked in with the historical emissions of heat--
+trapping gases into our atmosphere.
+ So think about what else we have baked in. It is very
+important to reduce emissions now so we have a chance at taking
+a 60 percent bite out of damages and extreme heat mortality in
+the labor sector, 50 to 60 percent. It is critical for saving
+lives to reduce emissions as soon as possible. Delay is super
+costly.
+ Mr. Tonko. And the difference between a high-emissions or
+business-as-usual scenario compared to a low-emissions one,
+what basically is that difference?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. So, for example, in damage to the U.S.
+economy, the loss of labor cost, the range could be $20 to $200
+billion per year by the year 2090.
+ If we went on the low-emissions pathway, we could take
+nearly a 60 percent bite out of that, or 50 to 60 percent. And
+that doesn't include adaptation. If we add adaptation in the
+mix, we can lower the costs immensely,.
+ What we see is, in general, a very tight relationship with
+each global average surface temperature increase, a bigger bite
+out of the U.S. percentage GDP.
+ Now, Ranking Member Walden mentioned some of the costs to
+transition to a clean energy economy. You compare that against
+some of these annual costs, you start realizing that an
+investment in reducing emissions is a very good investment.
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you.
+ And, Mr. Duke, you have done a lot of work on
+decarbonization strategies. I, for one, believe we cannot take
+solutions off the table at this point. I hope today we can hear
+about the merits of many different options.
+ Given all the potential pathways to decarbonize our
+economy, at this stage in the process how would you recommend
+Congress approach this challenge?
+ Mr. Duke. Thank you, Chairman. I would start on two tracks
+to address this challenge, starting with the easiest part
+first. And that would include at least doubling clean energy
+and clean solution research and development investment. And I
+appreciate the bipartisan move in that direction over the last
+year or two.
+ And at the same time, in the near term it is possible to do
+quite a bit of harvesting of low-hanging fruit. That includes
+things like measures to cut energy waste, to scale renewables
+even faster because they do need to go even faster than today's
+pace. We need to modernize the electricity grid, as has been
+noted. And do things that save consumers money, and cut energy
+waste, and build on what the States are already doing.
+ At the same time, we need to go the next step. And the next
+step on a second track would be putting in place comprehensive
+policies that start with a price on carbon sufficient to put us
+on that path to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by mid-
+century. And we need to do this in a way that ensures that all
+communities benefit equitably and that we're investing the
+resulting revenue in a smart way. This will create broad-based
+economic incentives that help our entrepreneurs and innovators
+scale up and bring down costs yet further and create that
+global momentum that we need.
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you very much.
+ I share the sentiment that we need to make progress now
+while we can, while developing our comprehensive economywide
+solution.
+ I mentioned before that it has been a decade since the
+House last seriously attempted to address climate change. What
+has changed over the past 10 years that indicates that this
+time it can be different, Mr. Duke?
+ Mr. Duke. Thank you for the question. There is quite a bit
+on the technology front that is worth just briefly summarizing.
+ We have got all kinds of cost-effective solutions today,
+from wind and solar to energy efficiency. And electric vehicles
+are even cost effective for some drivers in high-mileage
+applications, like taxi drivers. You see them even here in DC.
+ And you have got demand flexibility solution as well that
+are helping with the intermittency of some renewables.
+ Down the line we see all kinds of things coming soon, like
+emerging technologies that electrify heating buildings through
+heat pumps, and electric vehicles that are cheap enough to
+compete on first cost with internal combustion engines, and
+dominate in terms of life cycle costs, will be available by
+many estimates within 5 years.
+ And so this kind of technology solution set is a game
+changer and making it easier to act to cut pollution today.
+ On the policy side, we have also learned a lot. And I think
+it is worth noting that pricing pollution clearly works. And
+what we have seen, in fact, is that countries that have done
+this, for example the European Union or our own States in the
+Northeast or California, have routinely seen that innovation
+means that the cost of the tradable permits under a cap-and-
+trade system is much lower than they initially anticipated.
+ And so we should think about that as a lesson to create
+investor certainty when we have these kinds of programs. We
+might want to add a price floor on those kinds of mechanisms.
+And in general we need to ratchet up standards regularly for
+things like efficiency so we don't lose momentum on fuel
+economy or appliance efficiency. And we need to stretch
+incentives further with competitive mechanisms like clean
+electricity standards.
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Duke.
+ And I now recognize Representative Shimkus as the
+Republican leader of this subcommittee for 5 minutes to ask
+questions.
+ Mr. Shimkus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to turn my
+questions to Mr. Worthington.
+ You state that the challenge for the energy industry is to
+double the provision of energy services globally while reducing
+greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent. Can you break this down
+for me? What is driving the increase in global energy demand?
+And why are fossil fuels projected to remain the dominant
+source for energy globally?
+ Mr. Worthington. Thank you, sir, for that question.
+ Driving demand is multifold. It is a 2 billion population
+increase by the middle part of the century. It is providing
+access to energy for a billion to 1.5 billion people who don't
+have it now. This is captured in the United Nations
+Sustainability Goal Number 7. And it is increasing the
+availability of energy to those citizens today who don't have
+reliable, affordable access to energy.
+ There are countries in, for example, in Africa and Asia
+where electricity might be available 3 to 4 hours a day. And
+that just renders an economy helpless. You can't operate
+industrial facilities with electricity only being available 3
+or 4 hours a day.
+ So those are the drivers of demand.
+ On the production side, you know, we work in dozens and
+dozens of countries. We are in touch daily with the people who
+operate energy systems in other countries. And in China, India,
+Indonesia, Vietnam, South Africa, Colombia, so on and so forth,
+they all tell us they have every intention of continuing to use
+their domestic fossil energy resources because they are
+domestic, they don't have to be imported, they are abundant,
+and they are affordable.
+ And I have had business people tell me, ``Don't pay
+attention to what our government leaders say about us, we are
+going to use fossil''----
+ Mr. Shimkus. OK, wind this up because I have got a couple
+more questions for you, so.
+ Mr. Worthington. OK. ``We are going to continue to use
+fossil energy.''
+ Mr. Shimkus. Thank you. What is the scale of transition
+that would have to take place to reduce energy system emissions
+by 80 percent?
+ Mr. Worthington. Well, we would have to deploy every type
+of low-carbon/no-carbon technology that is possible. This truly
+becomes an all-of-the-above, and recognizing that countries are
+going to continue using fossil fuels.
+ Mr. Shimkus. Well, let me ask this: Can the world do that
+with existing technology? Can they do it now?
+ Mr. Worthington. We can't do it today, no. We need
+technology advancement all across the board, advanced nuclear
+systems, better energy storage, better renewables, and carbon
+capturing and the like.
+ Mr. Shimkus. Which I think it speaks to the research and
+development equation that a lot of you have supported. Because
+we can't do it now, but with R&D and continued dollars we may
+be able to get there eventually. Correct?
+ Mr. Worthington. If we can put a man on the moon, we can
+solve the climate problem.
+ Mr. Shimkus. My friend McNerney would say it is an
+engineering problem, right? He is right there. He is a
+Californian, so.
+ That is right. You are going to be a long time before you
+get to ask questions.
+ Some climate change proponents want to move fully away from
+fossil energy. Is your experience in this reasonable?
+ Mr. Worthington. Impossible.
+ Mr. Shimkus. Is there another way at the problem where the
+benefits of affordable energy help us actually address climate
+risk?
+ Mr. Worthington. Yes. By deploying technologies that reduce
+the CO2 output from fossil energy: high-efficiency/
+low-emissions technologies.
+ Mr. Shimkus. Yes, I think you weaved a great story in your
+opening statement. I think we all know people who are in
+different aspects, maybe in the mission field in underdeveloped
+countries. And I think understanding--and the Reverend is
+here--and we are concerned about our brother, and we are
+supposed to be our brother's keeper, bringing electricity to
+underdeveloped countries helps their livelihood, helps them
+develop, helps them or their State.
+ So that is part of the whole discussion as we deal with
+this, not just as a United States solution but as a solution
+that will affect the entire world.
+ You are the current chairman of the Committee on Cleaner
+Electricity Production for Fossil Fuels for the United Nations
+Economic Commission for Europe and a member of the Sustainable
+Energy Committee for the U.N. Commission. How would you
+describe the role of fossil fuels in meeting U.N.
+sustainability goals?
+ Mr. Worthington. The U.N. Sustainability Goal Number 7 is
+energy access. And the use of traditional fuels all around the
+world are critical to achieving that goal.
+ Mr. Shimkus. Thank you.
+ Mr. Chairman, I will give you the 2 seconds left.
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you. Thank you. The gentleman yields back.
+ Now the Chair recognizes Representative Pallone, full
+committee chairman, for 5 minutes to ask questions.
+ Mr. Pallone. Thank you. I just wanted to emphasize, Mr.
+Chairman, the priority for our committee in addressing climate
+change. And to that end, I do believe we can work together, and
+it will strengthen the economy and create more good-paying jobs
+in addition to protecting the environment through investments
+in clean energy and resilient infrastructure.
+ So I want to start with Dr. Ekwurzel. What does the Fourth
+National Climate Assessment say about the anticipated effects
+of climate change on our Nation's infrastructure?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. It is we do need to build a more resilient
+infrastructure in the United States to deal with the earlier
+snow melt in the western mountains, and providing water that is
+escaping out of water sheds that we could instead harness for
+water resources, fighting wildfires, and other aspects. We need
+to upgrade our 20th century infrastructure to deal with the
+21st century climate impacts. And that is a wise investment.
+ Mr. Pallone. Well, I believe very strongly that if we are
+going to do something on a bipartisan basis to address climate
+change that a major infrastructure bill and putting provisions
+in that bill will probably be the thing that we can most easily
+do on a--maybe ``easy'' is not the word, but that we can most
+likely do on a bipartisan basis and get President Trump to
+sign.
+ But do we have the tools to address this? In other words,
+how do we make--how can we build and repair infrastructure in
+ways that reduce pollution? Give us some ideas and how feasible
+that is.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Sure. When you take climate change risks into
+account, you end up having solutions, such as on the coastal
+areas, of nature-based solutions that are more resilient to the
+different types of hazards that climate-induced extreme events
+throw your way, and they suck up more carbon. So that is
+important and helps reduce emissions.
+ However, if we do other types of infrastructure decisions
+that do not take into account the risks or the increased
+emissions that may result, we could make it, you know, have
+maladaptive options. We have to learn as we go and start as
+soon as possible.
+ Mr. Pallone. You are saying that we have to be careful if
+we do a major infrastructure bill that we actually, you know,
+build in these provisions that will help address climate
+change, otherwise it might make it worse?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Yes. And we have a lot of folks that are
+stepping up with lots of interesting designs once these
+incentives are unrolled.
+ Mr. Pallone. All right, let me ask Mr. Williams about job
+opportunities associated with expanding clean and renewable
+energy. How do we ensure that, you know, that what we do with
+clean and renewable actually creates jobs and supports and
+strengthens the middle class?
+ Mr. Williams. Sure. I appreciate the question, Mr.
+Chairman.
+ Mr. Pallone. And, again, by reference to infrastructure, if
+you could.
+ Mr. Williams. Yes, absolutely. Infrastructure is a
+phenomenal way to do that. So direct investment in
+infrastructure across systems, especially in the electricity,
+in the energy grid, so both the deployment of energy for
+heating and transportation, as well as electricity. So directly
+investing in that area of infrastructure is incredibly
+important. But doing so in a way that advances strong labor
+standards or incorporates strong labor standards.
+ So what we think of as basic items like prevailing wage
+standards, buy American, standards that make sure that when
+direct Federal investment goes into these projects that we are
+ensuring that high quality----
+ Mr. Pallone. Give me some examples. You mentioned the
+electricity grid. What else? What about pipelines? What about,
+you know, electric vehicles?
+ Mr. Williams. Absolutely. So, for us to deploy electric
+vehicles across the country, we will need a massive upgrade in
+electric vehicle infrastructure, charging stations, so on and
+so forth, across the country. That is an incredibly important
+one.
+ You mentioned pipelines. Water infrastructure is absolutely
+critical. We often don't realize the amount of energy we use
+pumping water through our system. And when you are leaking
+water out of leaky old systems, you are losing energy and
+increasing pollution. So, simply by upgrading water
+infrastructure systems, we actually would save energy and
+reduce pollution. And all of that could and should be high-
+quality job creation.
+ Mr. Pallone. And I, you know, I hear in New Jersey there
+are all kinds of pipelines being built. And, you know,
+different people are for it or against it. But I keep reminding
+them that, rather than focusing on new pipelines, why not focus
+on repairing existing, even for the natural gas? I mean, you
+can do a lot with maintenance and repair there that makes a
+difference in terms of climate change too, right? It is not
+just water, it is also natural gas and----
+ Mr. Williams. Yes. So we have long had a campaign for a
+number of years on repairing and replacing natural gas
+distribution systems, the distribution systems under the city
+that deliver natural gas to homes and businesses so that they
+can heat properly. And those systems are old and they are leaky
+and they can be dangerous, so repairing them should be an
+absolute priority, not only because of the pollution that would
+save but the high-quality job creation, as well as the safety
+concerns.
+ Mr. Pallone. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ The Chair now recognizes Representative Walden, full
+committee Republican leader, for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Walden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thanks----
+ Mr. Tonko. Five minutes to ask questions.
+ Mr. Walden. Thank you. And thanks again for having this
+hearing. I want to thank our panelists. Your testimony really
+will inform our work, and we appreciate it.
+ And, Mr. Williams, I appreciate your comments about, I
+believe you talked about the grid and improving drinking water
+supplies and things of that nature. I think we did 12 hearings
+in the last 2 years on grid adequacy, security. As we look to
+integrate new resources onto the grid, we have got to make sure
+it will handle the new renewables and the spikes in power. And
+so, I think the committee did good bipartisan work there. And,
+of course, we reauthorized, for the first time in about a
+decade, the modernized Safe Drinking Water Act to deal with
+some of these issues.
+ And we tackled some of the pipeline siting issues as well.
+And small-scale hydro and irrigation districts that have put
+their open canals into pipes, pressurized the systems, and put
+a little hydro facility in and now generate enough power for
+3,000 homes just in central Oregon. So we streamlined some of
+the licensing there for hydro, which is an area where we get,
+you know, carbon-free renewable energy. And to your point, we
+manage that precious water very carefully.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel, I am curious. You mentioned wildfires. My
+district is subject to it. As I pointed out, this is habitat.
+The committee twice held hearings on the human effects of the
+wildfire smoke. And scientists told us between 2,500 and 25,000
+people die prematurely every year from consuming wildfire
+smoke.
+ And we had other forest scientists tell us that part of the
+problem in the west is overstocked stands, that historically
+you would have 70 trees per acre and today you have 1,000 trees
+per acre. And, of course, we know trees are pumps, they take
+water out of the ground.
+ As you look at some of this science is that--knowing the
+effects of wildfires--is that something your organization would
+advocate for, is modern forest management practices to reduce
+excess fuel loads?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. I had the opportunity to be in Oregon with
+Forest Service scientists while fires were going. And seeing
+the sort of native practices to maintain more healthy forest
+reserves, definitely prescribed burns, other types of actors,
+are really important. At the same time you want to keep the
+carbon of the forests being a net storage for a long time----
+ Mr. Walden. Right.
+ Ms. Ekwurzel [continuing]. Rather than we really do need
+advances in understanding how to keep wildfires safe and keep
+populations down-smoke, shall we say. Because there were
+studies that it is almost like smoking several packs of
+cigarettes----
+ Mr. Walden. Oh, it is awful. Awful.
+ Ms. Ekwurzel [continuing]. If you are in a summer situation
+breathing this smoke.
+ Mr. Walden. Yes.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Which we did breathe some of that Oregon
+smoke.
+ Mr. Walden. We were suffering under this for 6 weeks. Worst
+air quality in the world, absent Beijing. Or I mean, there were
+a couple of countries around the world that just at different
+periods had worse. But my district faced this all summer,
+summer after summer.
+ And we know the prescription is going to reduce--we are
+always going to have fire, we are always going to have
+hurricanes, what do we do, though, to minimize the impacts? So
+thank you for that.
+ Mr. Powell, as you have indicated, we have been pursuing
+policies on the committee to promote a range of clean
+technologies from nuclear energy, hydropower, grid
+modernization, energy efficiency, and battery storage. But,
+clearly, we all know what work needs to be done.
+ The chart on page 2 of your written testimony shows the
+transition to a zero-emissions energy system is not yet
+happening globally, that clean energy is just keeping up with
+energy demand. And we heard that, I think, from Mr.
+Worthington, too, about the demand out there. But nations still
+strive for simply having electricity.
+ How do we build on what we have done domestically so far to
+increase the pace and scale of technological innovation? And
+can we do this without imposing economically harmful
+regulations? And how does deregulatory policy help in
+innovation?
+ Mr. Powell. If we are taking a global lens on this
+problem--first, thank you for your leadership in the last
+Congress to expand many of these policies--we are taking a
+global lens on this problem, the key is making clean technology
+cheaper, not traditional energy more expensive. If we are
+making clean technology cheaper, then we are focused on things
+like, to Chairman Tonko's point, moonshot programs to set very
+aggressive technology goals, for example, at the Department of
+Energy, and develop most of our resources toward achieving
+those very aggressive cost and performance goals. And then we
+can do more to set targeted incentives that work with markets
+to help scale up these technologies and get some of the scale
+and learning-by-doing benefits that Mr. Duke discussed.
+ Then we can still do a great deal, for example, in
+streamlining permitting for new hydro projects. It still,
+despite the great work of this committee, takes far too long to
+put a new pumped hydrostorage facility in place or to relicense
+an existing dam, or to power up a nonpowered hydro facility.
+ Mr. Walden. It seems to me we have led in energy
+development, clean energy around the globe. And certainly with
+fracking and natural gas replacing 16 gigawatts of coal, that
+has made a difference around the world and here at home. And I
+just want to see America lead in these efforts. And obviously
+we know industries are going to have to step up to the plate
+here too, but I sense they are willing to.
+ So thank you, Mr. Chairman, again. My time has expired. And
+I appreciate all the testimony of our witnesses. Thank you for
+participating.
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you. The gentleman yield back.
+ The Chair now recognizes Representative Peters from
+California.
+ Mr. Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having
+this hearing.
+ We all know the causes of climate change. I respect and
+appreciate hearing from the witnesses. Now we need to identify
+the practical ways to stop it, whether that is through
+regulation, deregulation as in the example of hydropower,
+putting a price on carbon--I think that is probably useful--
+carbon capture, R&D, or some combination. Some of these are
+more feasible than others. But let me be clear, feasible is not
+a euphemism for lack of ambition, it is just the opposite.
+Feasible means achievable.
+ And I want to say from the bottom of my core is that we
+have to do this in a bipartisan way. What I have learned here
+is that if it is not bipartisan, it won't pass. And if it is
+not bipartisan, it won't last. And I really want to make sure
+that we get everyone on board.
+ If it was up to me, we would enact a national version of
+SP100, which commits California to 100 percent carbon
+neutrality by 2045. We would take those steps. It is not up to
+me. It is not up to any single one of us to do that. So I am
+looking forward to working with everyone on this committee to
+make progress.
+ We know we have to transition to a clean energy economy.
+There is not widespread agreement in either party what clean
+energy means. Maybe it's 100 percent renewables to some people,
+renewable electricity for some other people. And whether
+renewable electricity is all zero- and low-carbon sources of
+renewables or net zero, we can talk about that. But there is a
+need to move.
+ And I also just want to, finally, note the presence of
+Reverend Woodberry here. There is a moral component to this
+too. And I am aware of Pope Francis speaking out on this as
+well as the Evangelical Environmental Network.
+ Let me ask a couple questions of the witnesses. I will
+start with Mr. Powell.
+ Climate models show that we are going to need significant
+deployment of current and new clean energy technologies,
+including renewables, nuclear, carbon capture renewal, removal.
+While regulation is an important driver for technology
+deployment in the U.S. to help global emissions reductions, one
+of the most important things we can do is to lead on clean
+energy innovation.
+ What is the Federal Government not doing right now that we
+should be doing to accelerate the deployment of these
+technologies?
+ Mr. Powell. Well, first let me thank you, Representative
+Peters, for your leadership, especially in nuclear innovation
+and cosponsoring the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities
+Act, which we were pleased to see passed through Congress last
+year. That set a good precedent for creating a test bed in the
+Federal Government for developing and expanding these
+technologies.
+ And so now I think the next step is, well, how can we go
+further? And how can we use other powers of the Federal
+Government to ramp these up more quickly? I think a good idea
+would be something like the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act,
+which takes the next step. It sets an aggressive goal to
+demonstrate multiple advanced reactor technologies within the
+next decade.
+ It expands the power of the Federal Government to use its
+PPA authority to purchase some of the power from those
+reactors, to get them set up, and to get them financed.
+ It expands the availability of fuel that they would use.
+ And I think we could take those kinds of approaches and
+apply it across all of the different clean energy technologies
+in order to scale them up more quickly.
+ Mr. Peters. OK. I am interested in talking to all of you
+about deployment as well on other technologies.
+ Mr. Williams, I believe action on climate change is an
+opportunity to create economic growth. But it is undeniable
+that a shift away from fossil fuels will have an impact that is
+tough on certain sectors. I think we need to provide workers in
+those sectors with a path to jobs that pay just as well or
+better, including retirement benefits and protections, the kind
+of jobs that can support families.
+ In your testimony you talked about specific things the
+committee could do in an infrastructure package. What do you
+see as the most important things for Congress to include in any
+climate legislation to protect workers?
+ Mr. Williams. Thank you for that question, Mr. Peters. We
+agree completely. That is a critical issue. In my verbal
+testimony I made sure to lean into the statement that we cannot
+let any workers or communities be left behind in this effort.
+ There are a number of ways to do that. And the best way--
+among the best ways--is to direct the investments that would
+come from this to workers and communities that may be harmed,
+but just generally a commitment that we want to actually retain
+as many jobs as possible, first and foremost. And then, if that
+is unavoidable, make sure that there is that deep commitment,
+as you mentioned, to ensure that wages, benefits, healthcare,
+so on and so forth, people are taken care of throughout that
+process and that there is significant economic development in
+communities that see that dislocation.
+ Mr. Peters. We have seen, I think, a lot of progress in
+California that we can learn from as well on that front.
+ Finally, I just want to say with respect to Mr.
+Worthington, I haven't had a chance to ask you a question, but
+we talk about all the people who are underserved in terms of
+energy around the world, it strikes me that the cell phone is a
+good thing to look at. You know, a lot of places without phones
+didn't build out whole set of sort of telephone grids,
+analogous to the energy grid, they did essentially microgrids
+with cell phones.
+ And I would suggest that a large part of our foreign policy
+should be the deployment and promotion of microgrids, just like
+the United States Marine Corps has at Camp Pendleton near my
+district, that don't rely on a centralized fossil fuel-based
+source but can rely heavily on renewables and on storage. And I
+think it is very feasible that we should really make that part
+of the mix.
+ Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ The Chair recognizes Representative McMorris Rodgers.
+ Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and all of the
+witnesses that are here today. I appreciate you being here and
+sharing your perspective on the environment.
+ As you may know, I come from Washington State. And we are a
+leader in hydropower production. And because of research and
+innovation, new technologies, we are seeing even better salmon
+returns because of the fish, new, improved fish ladders and
+turbines. You know, we could double that hydropower without
+building a new dam in America simply by investing in
+hydroelectricity also. Only 3 percent of the dams actually
+produce electricity. And this is a clean, renewable, reliable,
+affordable source of electricity.
+ So I wanted to start with a question to Mr. Powell. In the
+last Congress, I led legislation to streamline the hydropower
+licensing process. It takes on average 10 years to relicense a
+dam right now in America, compared to 18 months for natural
+gas. In your view, how does hydropower fit into the bigger
+picture? And what are we risking with proposals such as the
+Green New Deal that ignore the positive environmental benefits
+of hydropower?
+ Mr. Powell. First, thank you, Representative McMorris
+Rodgers for your leadership on hydropower and preserving and
+expanding this very important resource. As you know,
+historically hydropower has been the most important of our
+renewable resources in the United States, and is appropriately
+viewed as a renewable energy resource right alongside wind, and
+solar, and biomass, and geothermal, and other renewables
+resources.
+ In many ways it is the most valuable renewable resource for
+three reasons:
+ First, it has the highest capacity factor of the renewable
+resources, so it is available for more of the year.
+ Second, it is a flexible resource. It can be turned on and
+off, and ramped up and down in a way that many other renewables
+resources cannot be.
+ And third, it can also be part of a storage solution. So
+pumped hydropower can serve as a, you know, vast battery. In
+fact, the very largest storage facilities in the United States
+are pumped-storage hydro facilities.
+ So we see expansion of hydropower, either by powering up
+nonpowered dams or certainly ensuring that our existing
+hydropower facilities around the country are relicensed, and
+that we can continue to get good use out of them, and
+modernizing those facilities as key priorities of the clean
+energy portfolio.
+ Mrs. Rodgers. What do you think Congress could do to
+expand hydropower production in the United States? And why do
+you think that should be a part or a central part of a climate-
+focused policy?
+ Mr. Powell. So it needs to be a central part of a climate-
+focused policy. As Chairman Tonko said, at this point the
+climate challenge is too urgent to leave any of our tools off
+the table. And so certainly the largest renewable resource
+can't be left out of that solution.
+ The idea that we would depower all of that hydropower,
+which I believe powers between 6 and 8 percent of our power
+grid right now, and replace it with new power, you know, the
+billions of wasted dollars that would be spent in doing
+something like that would be very counterproductive to a
+climate solution, and would certainly not be a cost-effective
+way to advance climate policy.
+ Mrs. Rodgers. As we add more intermittent renewables to the
+grid like wind and solar, grid-scale energy storage will be
+critical to ensuring a flexible and resilient system that can
+deliver affordable and reliable electricity to consumers when
+the wind isn't blowing or the sun isn't shining. I share
+ClearPath's goals to expand energy storage.
+ Last Congress, we passed legislation. Mr. Griffith led it.
+We have also upped research dollars for new, innovative energy
+technology. I rep--or I am very close to the Pacific Northwest
+Laboratory. They are doing a great work in this space.
+ Can you just help us understand more about what is going on
+in the private sector and what specifically we need to do here
+in Congress to accelerate innovation in energy storage?
+ Mr. Powell. Sure. Well, first I should acknowledge PNNL's
+leading role in the energy storage innovation space. They have
+pioneered some of the most promising new technologies that are
+already being scaled up and commercialized in grid scale energy
+storage.
+ I think the first thing to remember is that energy storage
+is far more than just batteries, right? It can also include
+things like pumped-storage hydro. It can include innovative
+ways of using water pressure to store energy underground. It
+can include heat storage and many other solutions. So I think,
+first and foremost as we fund against that priority for our
+Federal R&D engine, we should be thinking of what we want to
+come out of a storage solution as opposed to the necessary
+technology that would go into the storage solution.
+ And I think we can set very aggressive goals against that,
+as some legislation introduced in the past Congress did, and
+then drive most of our dollars and coordinated activity across
+the Department of Energy toward achieving those performance
+milestones.
+ Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you. With that, I am going to yield my
+time. And I appreciate your sharing that info.
+ Mr. Powell. Thank you.
+ Mr. Tonko. The chairwoman yields back.
+ The Chair now recognizes Representative Barragan.
+ Ms. Barragan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Last night at the State of the Union, the President may
+have ignored the threat of climate change. But with Dems in
+control of the House, this committee and Congress will no
+longer ignore the threat of climate change.
+ I also want to take a moment to thank Reverend Woodberry
+and Mr. Williams for mentioning the impact to communities of
+color and low-income communities that climate change is having.
+When I think of climate change, I don't think in terms of
+green. I think in terms of black and brown. When I think of
+climate change, I think of my black and brown constituents who
+make up 88 percent of my district and who are
+disproportionately impacted by negative impacts of climate
+change.
+ I think of black and brown communities throughout the
+Nation forced to live under discriminatory environmental
+policies that cripple their cities and towns economically, and
+leave them vulnerable and dependant on the very companies that
+are polluting our neighborhoods.
+ When I think of climate change, I think of black and brown
+people who are confined to communities where decades of lax
+environmental policies and enforcement have literally sickened
+entire generations. I think of black and brown people across
+the country, this Nation, who face the painful reality of
+shortened lifespans filled with health complications caused by
+the toxic environment in which we live.
+ I think of black and brown children forced to live in
+neighborhoods where the air quality standards are astonishingly
+low and the use of asthma inhalers is alarmingly high. I think
+of black and brown communities and children whose asthma
+diagnosis amounts to nothing more than a death sentence, with
+brown children in these communities having 40 percent or more
+likely to die from the affliction than their white
+counterparts.
+ So, ultimately, when I think of climate change, I do not
+see an environmental crisis, I see a systematic environmental
+racism that needs to be acknowledged and addressed.
+ Reverend Woodberry, do you acknowledge that environmental
+racism is a real threat to black and brown communities?
+ Reverend Woodberry. Yes. Thank you for your question.
+ Absolutely. And we want to urge Congress that, as we move
+forward with legislation, we ensure that we are not replicating
+models of injustice. Let me give you an example.
+ Last year in August, we cut a ribbon on a solar farm, small
+solar farm in Dillon County on Highway 9 in the middle of a
+soybean field. But we were very careful while working with Duke
+Progress Energy, the utility, over a 2-year period to make sure
+that this solar farm was built in a just and equitable manner.
+And so, out of the 1,200 households that will be supplied with
+energy from this community solar farm, we made sure that one-
+third of the residents who were 200 percent of the Federal
+poverty limit had the $250 emission connection fee waived.
+ And in addition to that, we have to be careful that, as we
+move toward renewable energy or we do energy grid upgrades,
+that we are not once again replicating models of injustice. So
+we were able to get the utility to do 1,500 free energy
+efficiency upgrades. Because whether an environmental justice
+home is connected to fossil fuels or renewable energy, if that
+home is energy inefficient and they are heating and cooling the
+outdoors and paying a disproportionate amount of their income
+on energy costs, we have not solved the problem.
+ And what we want to avoid is creating an energy divide the
+way that we have done in the past by creating an educational
+and digital divide.
+ Ms. Barragan. Thank you, Reverend Woodberry.
+ If I could with the last 20 seconds, Mr. Williams, what are
+your recommendations to the committee to address environmental
+inequalities in black and brown and low-income communities,
+including opportunities to create these clean jobs?
+ Mr. Williams. Sure. Well, first, thank you so much for your
+statement and your question. If we put forward a wholehearted
+effort to solve climate change but in the process do not remove
+toxic chemicals and other forms of pollution from workers'
+communities, then we haven't succeeded. So we agree.
+ So there needs to be a significant, comprehensive effort
+that incorporates that into efforts to reduce greenhouse gas
+emissions as well.
+ In terms of job creation in those communities, absolutely,
+targeted investments in disadvantaged communities, previously
+overlooked communities, absolutely needed. Policy items like
+community benefits agreements, local hire provisions, all are
+absolutely critical as we invest in trying to find new
+solutions.
+ Ms. Barragan. Thank you. I yield back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentlewoman yields back.
+ The Chair now recognizes Representative McKinley.
+ Mr. McKinley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Powell, I would like to have a conversation with you or
+some interaction with my remarks here. I think we have heard on
+the panel so far most Republicans and Democrats agree that
+there is a--the climate is changing, and that industrial
+activity is a major contributor to that. But I think the
+reinforcement is that we strongly disagree with solutions on
+how that might be.
+ Would you agree that America acting alone is going to make
+a difference to the global environment?
+ Mr. Powell. It will not.
+ Mr. McKinley. Thank you. Let me add to that.
+ So I want to add that, if anyone thinks that decarbonizing
+America is going to save the planet, whether that is 10 years
+or 20 years from now, you are delusional. Just 3 years ago, the
+EPA Administrator said that, her quote was, ``American action
+alone will not make the difference needed to impact global
+climate change.''
+ The Cato Institute came out and said that decarbonizing the
+United States would lower the global temperature by just one-
+tenth of 1 degree Celsius by the year 2050.
+ But without this global commitment that everyone seems to
+be ignoring, this is what we are having to deal with. Do we
+really think, any of you on this panel, that if we decarbonize
+America we won't be faced with severe weather, we won't have
+droughts, that coastal communities won't be flooded? How can we
+say that without the rest of the world on board?
+ Here is what is going on, as CRS has already published.
+ [Slide follows:]
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Mr. McKinley. This is what is going on, that China from
+2000 to 2016--China has increased its global emissions--or its
+emissions--by 290 percent. India, 235 percent. And at the same
+time America has reduced it by 16 percent.
+ Are you familiar with the MIT report, their technology
+review report that--maybe you are. And what that said was--and
+it was just a recent report--it came out and said that, unless
+India reduces its emissions, the result will be a climate
+catastrophe regardless of anything the United States does.
+ I want to make sure we always keep this in context. We
+don't live in a vacuum. We don't live in a little microcosm
+here that the air of the United States is, if we can get it
+clean we will be fine. We involve from the globe on this.
+ So we get down to, what are our solutions or what are our
+options? And so if I could from you--you and I have had this
+conversation--it appears that most of the Democrats or people
+on the other side of the aisle are saying that they want to use
+a hammer approach. Let's put more regulations, cap in trade,
+carbon taxes, some kind of hammer approach. Isn't that what you
+are hearing as well primarily, Mr. Powell, that it is a hammer
+approach to solve this problem rather than a carrot and
+incentives for innovation?
+ Because I think if we could do the innovation that we
+started last year with 45Q, with 48A, we could go on with that.
+Look, we have already talked about the Allam cycle, the net
+power plant, the turbine efficiency. Aren't those things going
+to be really the best solution rather than the hammer approach?
+ Because I am assuming you are aware of the hammer approach
+throughout Europe, France particularly lately with the yellow
+vests, what happened there when they rejected that notion of a
+hammer approach. So, if we could just continue this innovation,
+this effort for research, I think many of you talked about the
+research concept, if we could do that we could, America, use
+our science and technology that we have used to do space,
+medicine, healthcare, all, and implement a strategy. Wouldn't
+it be something that we then could export to the other nations
+so that--like Mr. Worthington was saying, a billion to a
+billion five that don't have energy--if we develop the
+technology to reduce emissions and we could see that, export
+that technology and give them a chance for a better life,
+wouldn't that make more sense than a hammer approach that
+people are rejecting?
+ Mr. Powell. So technology is the genie you can't put back
+in the bottle. And the political will for climate solutions
+will come and go here in the United States and around the rest
+of the world, but technology will last.
+ Mr. McKinley. OK.
+ Mr. Powell. So we can export the technology and we can have
+a higher confidence that that will be taken up around the
+world.
+ Mr. McKinley. I just hope that everyone on the panel will
+recognize that what we do here is, we are just part of a big
+system. We have got to get the rest of the world engaged in
+this, otherwise we are still going to have severe weather, we
+are still going to have drought, and we are going to have
+flooding of our coastal communities.
+ Thank you very much.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ The Chair recognizes Representative McEachin for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. McEachin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I want
+to start by thanking you for your leadership in the fight to
+stop climate change. I can't think of a more important
+discussion with which to begin the new Congress. And I also
+would like to thank our panelists, especially Reverend
+Woodberry, who has been a great champion for environmental
+justice, and Mr. Williams, whose organization has helped show
+that organized labor and the environment movement share the
+same goals and can succeed by working together.
+ And in that vein, Mr. Williams, I would start with you and
+build a little bit on the question that Mr. Pallone stole from
+me, quite frankly.
+ You know, one of my proudest accomplishments as a State
+legislator was to help clear the way for an offshore wind farm,
+which means well-paying jobs for Virginia workers. And I
+believe that we can replicate that success across the country.
+So how do we ensure that the coming green energy revolution
+helps all workers, even those who right now are working in the
+fossil fuel industry? That is the part I want you to build onto
+your answer that you gave Mr. Pallone.
+ Mr. Williams. Sure. Offshore wind--well, first, thank you
+for your leadership, Mr. McEachin, it has been extraordinary.
+And we are already seeing benefits in Virginia for offshore
+wind investment and those policies working. Offshore wind is an
+extraordinary opportunity and one where we have seen,
+especially from the labor movement and the environmental
+movement, really the cobenefits percolating up in such a
+beautiful way.
+ There is only one project currently built. But there are
+thousands of megawatts on the cusp of being built up and down
+the east coast. That is going to create high-quality union jobs
+in coastal areas up and down the east coast. But then going
+into the country, the supply chain potential of that and
+helping build out and support American manufacturing is just
+critical and incredibly impressive.
+ We think that there needs to be significant support to make
+sure that that industry keeps moving forward and that policies
+deployed ensure that these projects are using project labor
+agreements, that they are, if needed and if possible, targeting
+it to communities that certainly need economic investment.
+ So I just couldn't agree more, offshore wind is an
+absolutely critical part of this conversation.
+ Mr. McEachin. Thank you.
+ Reverend Woodberry, we know that environmental injustice
+hurts minority, rural, and low-income communities. But does
+facing unique challenges mean those communities also enjoy
+unique opportunities? For example, if we use the policy process
+to create new green-collar jobs, can we expect those jobs to be
+created in an economically just way? And if not, are there
+steps that we can take to make sure that they are, that they
+are done in an economically just way?
+ Reverend Woodberry. Absolutely. Thank you for that
+question.
+ What we need to do is work on a macro level but also on a
+micro level so that we are putting in place community-based
+climate solutions and also doing community in-place training.
+So we have seen this done successfully in Buffalo, New York,
+with Push Buffalo where, in the community that was being
+gentrified, they were able to get a building that was abandoned
+and convert that building into housing for senior citizens as
+well as offices for NGOs and a community center.
+ We also have seen it done, we had some training back in
+2017 where we did a train-the-trainer for a solar installation
+for nonprofit leaders from Georgia, from your State in
+Virginia, from Mississippi, and South Carolina. And they have
+gone back in their communities to do solar projects and low-
+income, people-of-color communities.
+ As a matter of fact, Monday I had the privilege of speaking
+at the University of Virginia. And we are going to be launching
+a solar project in the Buckingham community in June.
+ And we can actually take these small-scale, community-based
+successful programs and projects and actually export them
+overseas. So I cochair an 88-year-old organization called
+Agricultural Missions, Incorporated. We are just completing an
+8-year project in Sierra Leone and Liberia where we brought
+community water pumps to 47 towns and villages. And we will be
+going to Sierra Leone and Liberia in April so that we can work
+with those same community leaders and organizations in these
+towns that have never had electricity so that we can work on
+implementing a 4-phase solar project in those towns and
+villages.
+ So we can export the technology. We can also export
+community-based climate change solutions with renewable energy,
+providing jobs and opportunities for low-income communities and
+people of color in this country and around the world.
+ Thank you for your question.
+ Mr. McEachin. Thank you, Reverend.
+ And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ The Chair now recognizes Representative Long for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Long. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And before I begin my
+remarks, I would like to ask for everybody to keep John and
+Debbie Dingell in their thoughts and prayers. Debbie had
+tweeted out this morning that ``Friends and colleagues that
+know me and know I would be in Washington right now unless
+something was up. I am home with John and have entered into a
+new phase. He is my love and we have been a team for nearly 40
+years. I will be taking each day as it comes. We thank people
+for their friendship and support and ask for prayers and
+privacy during this difficult time.''
+ I know reading this in an open hearing may not be privacy,
+but she tweeted it so I am assuming that she would be OK with
+that. And John was sworn into Congress the year I was born,
+1955, and Debbie has followed in his footsteps. And very good
+friends of my wife, Barbara, and I. So just want everyone to
+keep John and Debbie in their thoughts and prayers, if you
+will.
+ I want to focus my questioning here today on how to reduce
+carbon dioxide emissions while keeping energy and commodity
+prices low, particularly in rural and agricultural communities
+like those that I represent. I have a large rural area.
+ Mr. Worthington, coal represents 81 percent of Missouri's
+power generation in 2017. And two of the biggest industries in
+my district are farming and trucking. And from what I have seen
+with the New Green Deal wants to completely replace fossil
+fuels with renewable energy and decarbonize our economy, which
+would be a very worthy goal if it was anywhere near possible
+within the time frame they want to do it.
+ Do we currently have any technology to decarbonize the
+farming and trucking industries while continuing to produce and
+move goods to market without harming consumers?
+ Mr. Worthington. That technology does not exist today at
+scale to accomplish those goals. We can possibly get there,
+given time and given tremendous investments in research and
+technology. Agriculture presents a significant percentage of
+greenhouse gas emissions. You might think of them as being
+naturally occurring in the agricultural business. I don't think
+we are going to change that component over time. There is no
+technology fix for the emissions out of agriculture.
+ We have a long, long way to go to develop the technology
+that would allow for a 100 percent renewable economy.
+ One recent report that came out in December, part of a
+scientific journal called Joule, indicated that, if such energy
+storage options existed, $100 a kilowatt hour for lithium ion
+batteries, for example--that is a third of the current cost--
+the cost would be $7 trillion. Seven trillion dollars, just the
+storage component of a 100 percent renewable system. Seven
+trillion dollars is 19 times the amount that Americans spend on
+electricity in 1 year. Nineteen times the amount of electricity
+in 1 year.
+ And that would be, again, a cost of lithium ion batteries
+that is a third of what the cost is now. So, even with
+additional R&D investments, the cost is still going to be
+staggering----
+ Mr. Long. OK.
+ Mr. Worthington. [continuing]. For the Green New Deal.
+ Mr. Long. Thank you.
+ And, Mr. Powell, I will turn to you. And I travel quite
+extensively with my duties here in Congress. Been to China
+several times. And I think one time I have seen the sun while I
+was there. I mean, sun dials are not big sellers because you
+can't tell if the sun is up or not or what part of the sky that
+it is in. So anyone in their right mind wants clean air to
+breathe, clean water to drink, and I hope that hearings like
+this will bring out commonsense solutions that we can all agree
+on as Republicans and Democrats and come together to eventually
+reach these goals.
+ And, Mr. Powell, I share your desire to reduce carbon
+emissions, as any right-thinking person would, I would think.
+And in your opinion what is the right way to do that? Should
+Congress encourage market-based solutions to encourage cleaner
+energy? Or should we follow the New Green Deal, which would
+raise taxes and impose the stringent mandates that have
+potential costs we just heard about to communities and
+industries like those that my district deals with?
+ Mr. Powell. Well, first, Representative Long, thank you for
+your leadership on advancing nuclear power and solutions to the
+spent fuel issue and your work with Leader Shimkus on that
+issue.
+ Market-based solutions, all things being equal, should be
+the more cost-effective solution to the problem both here in
+the United States and also the things that we can export to
+other economies like China. It is very difficult for us to
+export our policy over there. They do their own thing. But they
+are happy to buy, and take, and scale up our technology. In
+fact, the real risk is that the Chinese in many of these things
+are actually moving very quickly and attempting to take also
+parts of the global market in those technologies as well.
+ And So I think from the U.S. economic competitiveness
+perspective, there is a real priority that we stay competitive
+with these technologies alongside the Chinese.
+ Mr. Long. OK, thank you. I am past my time. I yield back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
+recognizes Representative Blunt Rochester for 5 minutes.
+ Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I want
+to thank you for your leadership and also for your charge to
+the committee that we rise to the challenge. I want to thank
+you for that. I would like to thank the witnesses as well.
+ I can think of no more pressing topic for us to be
+addressing than climate change. Actually, as we were sitting
+here, over my phone a New York Times article came out to say
+that it is official, 2018 was the fourth warmest year on
+record. It is happening to us right now.
+ And in Delaware we are the lowest-lying State in the
+country. We are urban, we are rural, we are suburban, and we
+are also coastal. So the consequences of climate change and sea
+level specifically impact my State directly.
+ I also wanted to just say a word about the global
+conversation that we are having as well. I actually did live in
+China, and I actually do think that we need to stay
+competitive. But the real issue is not whether the world
+recognizes it, it is do we recognize it? When we get out of the
+Paris Climate Accord, we send a message to the world.
+ My first question is to Dr. Ekwurzel. And if you can just
+talk a little bit about the potential impact of sea-level rise
+for a State like mine if we don't immediately take steps to
+address carbon emission and climate change more broadly?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Delay in action on reducing global emissions
+is absolutely critical for the State of Delaware. As you know,
+the low-lying communities, we also have situations where there
+are churches that the parking lots--people can't even get to
+church on Sundays.
+ Ms. Blunt Rochester. Yes.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. It is really affecting the daily lives. And
+we have been working with communities to share those stories
+and to figure out how can we adapt.
+ Adaptation is really key for the State of Delaware for
+doing coastal resilience.
+ Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you so much.
+ And I would like to turn it to Reverend Woodberry. And
+thank you also for your work.
+ One of the things, a lot of people think that sea-level
+rise really only impacts those coastal communities and beaches.
+But, as was said, in Delaware we have areas that are considered
+environmental justice communities. And I was hoping, Reverend
+Woodberry, if you could just talk about strategies that you
+have seen that are effective in helping those communities get
+their voice out there and also advocate for themselves, actual
+strategies.
+ Reverend Woodberry. Actual strategies. So we have to look
+at being more proactive rather than waiting for climate impacts
+to take place. And thank you for lifting that up. And sea-level
+rise impacts even freshwater. So we are finding waterways,
+estuaries that are becoming more brackish. It is impacting sea
+life. It is impacting fishing. A lot of low-income people
+actually don't fish for sport, but they fish because they need
+the food in order to survive and feed their families.
+ Some of the solutions that we discussed recently in New
+Orleans after experiencing the Hurricane Florence and Hurricane
+Michael, was that we need to work desperately to put people to
+work to make our homes more resilient to deal with adaptation.
+So I mentioned briefly in my statement that we can look at
+doing bioswales. In a lot of our communities, we have
+brownfields that are being polluted by industries that are gone
+that we can actually create bioswales and use plants for
+remediation that can draw out heavy metals and toxins, and
+actually provide drainage and pools so that urban areas or
+rural areas do not have to be as flooded as they are now.
+ Also, it is very important that we keep our forests and our
+trees standing, particularly along our river areas. Hardwood is
+very valuable. But what we are finding is that a lot of low-
+income communities are actually losing their forests and their
+trees. We have a lot of folks, particularly people of color,
+who have their property that is owned by several families, and
+oftentimes they are not able to pay the property taxes, and the
+only option that they have is to have the trees cut down.
+ Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Reverend.
+ Reverend Woodberry. So adaptation reserve is really
+important.
+ Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you so much.
+ And, Mr. Williams, my last question is really about, in
+relation to Reverend Woodberry, many of these communities like
+Southbridge where we live in Delaware bear the brunt of these
+economic impacts. Can you talk about jobs that can be created
+to help mitigate and also strengthen the community?
+ Mr. Williams. Sure. And thank you for the question.
+ Again, this is an infrastructure discussion. This is
+directing investments directly towards those communities. We
+should target them to communities that are going to be hardest
+hit, are already hard hit economically, and we should make sure
+that we are not just tossing money and saying, ``Go forth.''
+ But there should be standards there to make sure that there
+are good jobs and they are lifting up people who haven't had
+the opportunities, whether it is building sea walls, or
+retrofitting buildings, or even working in healthcare and such,
+just making sure investments get targeted there.
+ Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you. I am out of time. I yield
+back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentlewoman yields back.
+ The Chair recognizes Representative Flores.
+ Mr. Flores. Thank you, Chairman Tonko. And thank you,
+Chairman Tonko and Leader Shimkus, for hosting this meeting
+today. I was pleased that all the panel and almost everybody up
+here on the dais has agreed that climate change is real. The
+question is, how do we deal with it?
+ Reverend Woodberry, I want to thank you for your closing
+comments where you said that we have got to focus on
+mitigation, and adaptation, and resilience. And then you
+further closed by saying that forests are by far the best
+carbon sink that is available today, and that we need to not
+forget about that as a source of carbon capture.
+ I would--I want to say this--you know, we have already
+heard this, the U.S. leads the world in emissions reduction.
+And everybody keeps talking about Paris. And the EU countries
+that are part of the Paris Accord have failed to meet their
+carbon reductions.
+ We, on the other hand, have been leaders in this. And it's
+in large part to technology that has created that American
+success story, partially because of the transition to cleaner-
+burning natural gas and the development of cost-effective
+renewables.
+ For my own part, I am doing my part. Right before I ran for
+Congress, I didn't know I was going to run for Congress, but I
+commissioned the largest residential solar system on my house
+in Central Texas. And so I am glad to be part of that. And over
+the course of the last 3 years, I have converted over 90
+percent of my light fixtures to computer-controlled LED
+technology. So I have one of the lowest emissions footprints
+per square foot of anybody up here on this dais.
+ That said, you have got to be careful how you do this. I
+don't think we get it through a chaotic, headlong rush toward
+decarbonization. I think we get it through thoughtful use of
+technology and figuring out what is the pathway for this
+moonshot, and what is the realistic time period that it gets
+there.
+ One of the things that--one of the technologies I think
+that gets us there is nuclear. We hear a lot of projections
+about replacing the existing fossil energy power generation
+with solar and wind. But there are mixed messages about the
+role of nuclear energy in the future. And it seems to me that,
+if we are really serious about climate change, we need to get
+serious about the role of nuclear power.
+ I don't understand why some advocates for that chaotic
+decarbonization do not take nuclear seriously. They are
+ignoring the role of next-generation nuclear power as a
+significant source of baseload zero-emissions power with a much
+smaller land and environmental footprint than nonbaseload power
+sources like wind and solar.
+ Mr. Powell, your organization, ClearPath, is doing a
+significant amount of work in the nuclear area. What is your
+organization focused on in this form of clean energy over
+others?
+ Mr. Powell. Well, first, Representative Flores, thank you
+for your leadership on advanced nuclear energy, both in
+promoting solutions for advanced nuclear fuel----
+ Mr. Flores. We are going to bring it up again, too.
+ Mr. Powell. Appreciate that. And also for cosponsoring the
+nuclear moonshot approach that Representative Higgins has
+brought to the House Science Committee.
+ We think that a number of priorities are necessary to scale
+up the next generation of nuclear power. Obviously, we need the
+fuel for those reactors.
+ Mr. Flores. Right.
+ Mr. Powell. We already have a test bed that has now been
+established in the last Congress. Now we need a moonshot goal
+to demonstrate multiple advanced reactors and deploy most of
+our resources through the Department of Energy towards
+achieving that goal.
+ We also need to use the full resources of the Federal
+Government, like its PPA authority to scale it up.
+ And then, lastly, to this global problem we need to be
+thinking about how we use nuclear as a tool of diplomacy and
+economic development around the world and how we use new
+authorities like the BUILD Act and the Development Finance
+Corporation to start exporting that good U.S. nuclear
+technology to other countries and help them solve their
+emission problems with 24/7/365 clean energy.
+ Mr. Flores. The United States is developing advanced next-
+generation nuclear technologies. But it has also been
+demonstrated that we have a great record for our current light
+water reactor fleet. The United States nuclear reactors have
+operated for over 4,000 reactor years without a major accident,
+according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
+ If this knowledge and successful safety record can be
+shared with the rest of the world, we could make great strides
+in reducing emissions through safe nuclear power, particularly
+next-generation nuclear power, to generate clean, zero-
+emissions electric power.
+ So, Mr. Worthington--and then I will ask you the same
+thing, Mr. Powell--should the U.S. promote more nuclear as part
+of a global emissions reduction scheme?
+ Mr. Worthington. Absolutely.
+ Mr. Flores. OK. Mr. Powell? Pretty simple answer.
+ Mr. Powell. Yes, absolutely.
+ Mr. Flores. OK. For both of you, has anyone looked at the
+environmental impacts of scaling up to 100 percent renewables?
+My home State of Texas is the Nation's leader in wind
+production. But then we have got a lot of land, open land in
+West Texas that makes it feasible to do that where it is not a
+problem.
+ Wind, however, is intermittent and does not provide always
+long baseload power. And so, when we saw that with the impact
+of the power demands coming out of the recent polar vortex,
+what are the environmental and land use impacts of wind and
+solar versus nuclear and natural gas? Mr. Powell?
+ Mr. Powell. Well, certainly nuclear is a more compact
+solution.
+ Mr. Flores. Right.
+ Mr. Powell. It produces more power on a smaller amount of
+land. And in terms of the broader environmental impacts, there
+are tradeoffs with all of these technologies.
+ So renewable technologies and the storage that would have
+to go along with them have a lithium problem and sort of a
+lithium sourcing problem for where they come from. Just as
+nuclear has a spent fuel problem.
+ Mr. Flores. Right.
+ Mr. Powell. All of these technologies have their own local
+environmental impacts, and all of those need to be managed as
+part of a holistic solution.
+ Mr. Flores. Mr. Worthington?
+ Mr. Worthington. What we are worried about is, with the
+rapid deployment of solar photovoltaics, these systems have a
+shelf life. And after they no longer function, they are going
+to have to be recycled. And there are some pretty nasty
+chemicals that are contained when they are manufactured.
+ And so we are concerned that we don't really have the rules
+in place necessarily to safeguard that those units are recycled
+properly and the chemicals are properly disposed of. I think
+that is something that has not been adequately studied and----
+ Mr. Flores. Right.
+ Mr. Worthington [continuing]. Warrants some more review.
+ Mr. Flores. Thank you. I do agree that, as we have future
+hearings on this subject, we need to consider the gnarly
+environmental footprint that some storage technologies have.
+ Mr. Chairman, thank you for your forbearance. I yield back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ The Chair recognizes Representative DeGette.
+ Ms. DeGette. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
+ You know, I really want to thank you for having this
+hearing as your first hearing of this committee. I have been on
+this committee for many, many years and seen the, shall I say,
+evolution of thinking about climate change. And this panel is
+the perfect example of that.
+ And so I want to start out in the grand tradition of our
+beloved friend and mentor, John Dingell, and ask you all a
+couple of questions that will only require a yes-or-no answer.
+ The first question is, do you all agree that climate change
+is real and that human activity contributes to it? Doctor?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Yes.
+ Mr. Powell. Yes.
+ Mr. Duke. Yes.
+ Reverend Woodberry. Yes.
+ Mr. Worthington. Yes.
+ Mr. Williams. Yes.
+ Ms. DeGette. Thank you. That in itself is a revolutionary
+step for this committee. Thank you all for that.
+ My second question is, do you all agree that we need to
+address climate change in a way that builds the resilience of
+our communities, especially of those most vulnerable to climate
+impacts, while growing our economy and providing well-paying
+jobs? Doctor?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Resounding yes.
+ Mr. Powell. Yes.
+ Mr. Duke. Yes.
+ Reverend Woodberry. Absolutely yes.
+ Mr. Worthington. Yes.
+ Mr. Williams. Unequivocally.
+ Ms. DeGette. Thank you. My last yes-or-no question--so far
+you are all getting 100 percent. My last question is, do you
+agree that driving innovation in clean energy is an essential
+part of the solution, and that it is time that we committed
+ourselves to doing that?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Yes.
+ Mr. Powell. Yes.
+ Mr. Duke. Yes.
+ Reverend Woodberry. Yes.
+ Mr. Worthington. Yes.
+ Mr. Williams. Yes.
+ Ms. DeGette. Thank you very much.
+ You know, all of this agreement here in this panel with the
+Democratic and Republican witnesses makes me really hopeful
+that, as what Mr. Powell said, bipartisan cooperation on
+climate change can be attainable. And I want to thank all of
+you for committing to this.
+ I just have a couple of more questions.
+ One of my questions for you, Dr. Ekwurzel, is, as you know,
+I am from Colorado and the last few years we have had the 30-
+year low in snow pack. And what is even worse than that is that
+the snow is melting earlier, and so the water is going down.
+Can you let us know what kind of impact climate change is going
+to continue to have on the snow pack in the western United
+States?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Thank you. And that snow pack is a critical
+water resource for Coloradans and all downstream----
+ Ms. DeGette. Right.
+ Ms. Ekwurzel [continuing]. In the Southwest.
+ I want to say that there are three things that climate
+change does to the snow pack. It causes it to melt earlier. We
+have a shorter snow season. Even if you have an atmospheric
+river delivering wonderful amount of snow, the extra heat in
+the winter season is causing it to melt, and sublimate, and
+evaporate into the atmosphere.
+ We have what is called a hot drought in the Colorado River.
+We could lose up to 50 percent of that flow just from the
+climate change impacts if we were to do unabated, you know,
+course that we are on now.
+ Ms. DeGette. Second, so thank you, a second issue that we
+have, in particular in my congressional district, which is
+primarily Denver, is a persistent smog problem. And of course
+we all know what the issues with smog are in terms of asthma
+and the work and school days, outdoor recreation days, et
+cetera. But what can you tell us--and you talked, we talked a
+lot and we know in the West about the impact of wildfires--what
+can you tell me about the impact of climate change on air
+pollution and smog?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. We call it the climate penalty of smog. One
+of the ingredients you need for greater ozone ground-level
+production is warmer temperatures. The warmer it is, the more
+smog you produce if you have those precursors of volatile
+organic carbon. And you need sunlight.
+ Therefore, if we were to reduce global emissions, we would
+reduce the future climate penalty that could only get worse
+with climate change.
+ Ms. DeGette. Thank you.
+ Mr. Chairman, I just want to respond to a couple of the
+things our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been
+saying. The first thing they have been saying is that, well,
+the rest of the world is not coming along.
+ Well, number one, we are the ones that pulled out of the
+Paris Climate Accord, not them. And so I would suggest maybe
+one of the first things we could do is get back into the Paris
+Climate Accord.
+ And the second thing I will say is, just because other
+people aren't moving as quickly as we are, the President said
+last night in the State of the Union, America is the best
+country in the world. Why don't we be the trendsetter? Why
+don't we be the one exporting all of our technology to China
+and India? Why don't we be the one setting the standard?
+ And the last thing I will say is, these other countries do
+want to act. Their citizens are demanding action for the same
+reason why we are demanding action. And I think that that is
+why this committee--this is just the first step, and I know you
+intend to work on legislation, and all of us intend to work on
+that with you because we are actually going to move this
+through. And I know we can do it in a bipartisan way.
+ I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentlewoman yields back. And we thank you
+for your comments.
+ The Chair now recognizes Representative Carter.
+ Mr. Carter. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank all of
+you for being here. This is an extremely important subject. I
+believe that my colleague just asked all of you a question on
+whether you believe that climate change is real or not. And I
+think, if you were to ask that same question to everyone up on
+this dais, they would say the same thing: Yes, it is, it is
+real. It is something that we have to address.
+ There may be some difference of opinions on how much of it
+is man-made. But regardless of how much of it is man-made, we
+still have to address it. There may be some who want to say
+that it is just cyclical in nature and that if you look back
+over time and this happens, well, that may be true too. But
+regardless of that, we still have to see the impact and have to
+address the impact that man is having on this.
+ These are all givens. These are all things that I think all
+of us agree on and all of us are working toward.
+ I want to start--and for that I want to thank all of you
+for being here and thank all of you for your interest and for
+your work on this, because it is extremely important. We all
+recognize that.
+ I want to start, if I could, with Mr. Worthington and just
+ask you, I have always been one who subscribes to an all-of-
+the-above-type energy policy. I think it is extremely important
+for a number of reasons for us to have safe, and secure, and
+dependable, and affordable energy. And it is important for our
+national defense. It is important for our citizens. It is just
+very important.
+ I know that you mentioned in your testimony that you
+believe that an all-of-the-above approach is essential as well.
+Once we get beyond solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, and even
+beyond the traditional fuels, what are some areas that we
+should be looking for to play a greater role in the all-of-the-
+above fuels mix?
+ Mr. Worthington. Well, one of the, one of the promising
+technologies is hydrogen. And we have been dealing with
+hydrogen for decades now. We are not at a stage where it is
+economical, but it has tremendous potential, both to serve
+transportation issues as well as electricity. It needs more
+work. It needs more research. But it is a very promising area
+that we are watching very carefully.
+ Mr. Carter. What about biomass? Let me ask you about that.
+I represent South Georgia. We have got a number of things in
+abundance in South Georgia, one of which is pine trees. And we
+have got a number of biomass manufacturers. And what about
+biomass, is that something we should be looking at?
+ Mr. Worthington. Absolutely. We are actually using biomass
+now in many different applications. We are using it directly to
+produce electricity. We are mixing it with coal to reduce the
+CO2 emissions from a coal plant. And we are actually
+pelletizing wood and shipping it to Europe. There are many,
+many countries in Europe heat their homes with American wood.
+ Mr. Carter. Why is that it is used in Europe but not
+necessarily as much here in America? I always found that
+interesting. I have visited a number of these plants in South
+Georgia, and that is what they tell me: We ship it to Europe.
+ Mr. Worthington. Yes, it is a very good question. I am not
+sure I know the answer. It may be a matter of convenience. Our
+industry has made heating with fuel oil and natural gas very
+convenient. We have liquefied petroleum gas.
+ I think it is--I have never answered that question before,
+but I would have to say it is probably because we have more
+options than what the Europeans do. And particularly now with
+our abundant shale gas resources, we are just literally awash
+in gas.
+ Mr. Carter. Right.
+ Mr. Worthington. And it is inexpensive, it is affordable,
+and it is going to be available.
+ Mr. Carter. OK. Mr. Powell, I am going to you and ask you,
+and to kind of follow up on my colleague from Texas, nuclear
+power is certainly something I feel like we need to be looking
+at. Georgia Power right now has the only two nuclear reactors
+under construction in our country. That is something that we
+are depending on and something I think we should look at very
+carefully.
+ Can you tell me the role that you see nuclear power as
+playing in our country's energy future?
+ Mr. Powell. Absolutely. And, first, let me thank you for
+your leadership in nuclear power, for the State of Georgia's
+commitment in getting those reactors built. That is incredibly
+important for keeping the national nuclear supply chain robust
+and strong going forward.
+ I think the next generation of nuclear power in the United
+States will be much smaller, less capital intensive, and more
+flexible. So I think the future of nuclear power----
+ Mr. Carter. We are certainly glad to hear that in Georgia.
+ Mr. Powell. Yes, exactly. I think it is unlikely we will
+build more gigawatt-scale reactors like the great technology
+going up in Plant Vogtle. I think it is much more likely we
+will build small modular and microreactors that can be combined
+together in the same way that wind turbines are combined
+together in large arrays with hundreds of units. I think that
+is the future of nuclear power.
+ Mr. Carter. Right. Again, let me thank each of you for
+being here. I appreciate it. This is extremely important,
+something that we all agree on that we have to address in a
+reasonable and a rational way that is going to provide for
+safe, secure, dependable, affordable energy for our citizens.
+ And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ The Chair recognizes Representative Schakowsky for 5
+minutes.
+ Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, after 6
+long years, having a hearing directly on global warming, on
+climate change. And I wish it were that all of us agreed. Maybe
+this tweet from the President, who never mentioned this crisis
+last night in the State of the Union, is a joke. I would like
+to think so, but maybe not.
+ During the polar vortex he tweeted, ``What the hell is
+going on with global warming? Please come back fast, we need
+you!'' Not so funny to me. I was in Chicago at the time anyway.
+ But I want to talk about transportation and its
+contribution to climate change. The transportation sector is
+the largest source of carbon pollution in the United States,
+and only getting worse. And I am very interested in improving
+our fuel economy standards and decreasing carbon emissions.
+ The past four decades the corporate average fuel economy,
+what we call the CAFE standards, have been an extremely
+valuable tool in reducing greenhouse emissions. Unfortunately,
+this administration is attempting to weaken vehicle fuel.
+ So let me ask you, Dr. Ekwur--you know who you are. I will
+leave it at that. If you could talk to me about the importance
+of the CAFE standards and making them perhaps even stronger
+than they are.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Absolutely. We do need to double down on
+lowering the carbon, decarbonizing our transportation sector,
+increasing incentives for electrification of the transport
+sector in cars, and buses, and trucks.
+ And what we see is that it is also going to lower the
+ground-level smog as well. It lowers emissions to the
+atmosphere that causes climate change. And also, we improve the
+health of incentives, reduce the inequities with asthma
+sufferers and so forth.
+ Ms. Schakowsky. I am wondering if you can explain this to
+me. What we have seen over the recent years, some decrease in
+carbon emissions and global emissions, but we saw last year
+just in the 1 year that internationally 2.7 percent increase
+over the previous rates. One scientist called it a speeding
+freight train. And then in the United States last year, 1 year,
+marked the largest increase in 8 years, 3.4 percent increase.
+ So what is going wrong here?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Absolutely. The U.S. was decoupling our
+growth from a high-carbon economy. We have a lower-carbon
+economy. However, that turned around and now the U.S. is
+emitting more than it did in the prior few years.
+ So we cannot take our foot off the pedal, so to speak, on
+incentives that reduce and have cleaner options for when we
+move around, or power, or turn on the lights.
+ Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
+ Mr. Duke, what impact will rolling back efficiency
+standards have on greenhouse emissions?
+ Mr. Duke. Thank you for your attention to the extraordinary
+benefits that come from fuel economy standards on light-duty
+and heavy-duty vehicles. And if we just look at the sweep of
+history on this program, I think it is important to recognize
+that it was actually Republican President Ford who put in place
+the first commitment to double our fuel economy back during the
+initial oil crisis.
+ And that worked. We got immense consumer benefits and
+national security benefits out of those efforts. Unfortunately,
+we then hit the skids on the program when we failed to update
+the standards for a 25-year period until 2010. And that cost us
+by some estimates a trillion dollars in additional expenditure
+at the pump.
+ So the good news is that we have a set of standards now in
+place for heavy-duty vehicles that are proceeding and that are
+going to be helping us transition to advanced technologies for
+super trucks and the like that will save quite a bit of fuel
+for industry and our economy.
+ The bad news is, as you suggested, there is a rollback
+under consideration which, frankly, goes much further than the
+automakers themselves requested in engaging with the
+administration on this. And that is because they know that they
+need to compete with China. China already has 60 percent market
+share on electric vehicles. Our automakers need to be
+competitive, and they can be competitive. Tesla retains the
+number-one spot. GM is in the top 10. But we need standards
+that are clear and steadily improving to drive progress and
+make sure we stay in the game on technology. And fuel economy
+is part of that.
+ Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you. I want to thank all the
+panelists. This has been really enlightening.
+ Yield back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentlewoman yields back.
+ The Chair recognizes Representative Duncan.
+ Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ If the Green New Deal policies are adopted, the price of
+utilities will inevitably go up. How would the increased cost
+of utilities as a result of this proposed Green New Deal--
+carbon tax, cap and trade, high costs associated with renewable
+energy generation--improve the lives of, say, those in Marion
+County, South Carolina, that Reverend Woodberry spoke of?
+People who Reverend Woodberry said were living on fixed incomes
+of $600 to $800 a month.
+ The average median income in Marion County is $30,562. And
+the average median income in my district is $47,000 a year. But
+the carbon taxes levied on South Carolinians' electricity, gas,
+et cetera, will increase. These increased costs will impact
+every person and business in the State and, unfortunately,
+would disproportionately impact those in the lower-income
+communities.
+ And at the end of the day, people care about things that
+are tangible to them: how much it takes to fill up their gas
+tank, how much their electric bill will be, and if they have
+any money left over at the end of the month to put food on the
+table. That is what my constituents care about.
+ We here in America, we take for granted what is known as
+365/24/7 baseload power supply always on. That always-on power
+is generated primarily in three ways: hydroelectricity, nuclear
+power, and fossil-fuel-generated power. Everything else is
+intermittent. The sun doesn't always shine, the wind doesn't
+always blow. And we don't have the technology available yet to
+hold large quantities of power in some sort of battery to
+provide power when it is needed. We take for granted that 365/
+24/7 baseload always on power.
+ But there are people all over the globe that don't take
+advantage of that. And those are in some European countries, by
+the way. But think about how the United States can be a leader
+in improving the quality of lives of so many people around the
+globe with the export of our fossil fuels so that these folks
+can have always-on power.
+ Think about the infant mortality rate across the globe
+where people don't have a steady 24/7 baseload power supply.
+They can't keep the incubators on to keep the babies alive.
+ If we want to improve the quality of life--Mr. Worthington
+mentioned 1.3 billion people in the world don't have power--
+think about the quality-of-lives issues that he was bringing up
+earlier. Air quality. Air quality kills, what, 400,000 people
+around the globe annually because of bad air quality. They are
+cooking on charcoal, and dung, and wood products. They can't
+keep food fresh because they don't have electricity to have a
+refrigerator to keep the food fresh, so the foods spoil, and
+they are having to eat it and constantly replenish it.
+ They can't keep windows in the window spaces because they
+don't have electricity to provide air conditioning, so at night
+they are trying to keep cool, mosquitoes fly in. When
+mosquitoes fly in, they bring diseases that kill so many people
+around the globe every year.
+ Food safety, preparation of food, cooking of that food, air
+conditioning, lights to read to their children and have their
+children read to them, these are quality-of-life issues that we
+take for granted here in America that fossil-fuel-generated
+power can provide for people around the globe. But yet we want
+to vilify and demonize fossil fuels that make our lives so much
+better.
+ Doctor, you are from Massachusetts; right?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. I live right here in DC.
+ Mr. Duncan. OK. Well, Cambridge, Massachusetts, is where
+the organization is located?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Yes.
+ Mr. Duncan. Unless you all rode a bike here today, you came
+in some fossil-fuel-generated power, whether it was an electric
+car, probably the electricity that went into that car was
+provided by some sort of power generation. Could be nuclear,
+could be hydro, but generally it is probably fossil-fuel-
+generated.
+ Many people in this room who came to this hearing today may
+have gotten on an airplane. And I know just about every Member
+in this committee got on an airplane to fly here. An airplane
+is running on a fossil fuel. Folks, your cars, your trains,
+your planes, are all generated, are all powered by fossil
+fuels. And we have got a lot of work to do if we are going to
+make those airplanes fly on electricity. We have got a lot of
+work to do if we are going to provide electricity through
+intermittent power supplies to give us that 24/7 baseload
+power.
+ But it is not the Government's role to incentivize or
+penalize companies and individuals that aren't investing in
+this, it is up to the marketplace. And I am going to use Elon
+Musk, because I think he is a leader in two areas. He is a
+leader in EVs with Tesla, but he is also a leader in space
+exploration. And guess what? He is not being incentivized that
+I know of for space exploration. He actually said let's pull
+away from NASA and the bureaucracy and let's think outside the
+box and figure out how we can save costs, make renewable
+rockets so that we can travel to the moon and then, ultimately,
+to Mars. He didn't do that with the Government forcing him to
+do it. And he didn't do that with the Government incentivizing
+him to do it. He did it because he had a desire to do that, and
+he brought the best people together in a capitalist, free
+market environment to think and come up with a solution.
+ That is the solution if we truly believe in global warming
+and improving the lives of so many people around the globe. We
+do it through the innovation and the innovators, not through
+punitive or incentives from Government.
+ Mr. Chairman, with that I yield back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ Reverend Woodberry, you were made mention of. Do you want
+to respond in a minute or less, please?
+ Reverend Woodberry. I will say that I do believe that
+innovation, I do believe that America could move quickly. My
+family is actually from Marion County. In the 1960s my
+grandparents, my grandfather was a sharecropper. He used
+kerosene lamps. They had a stone fireplace and a wood-burning
+stove for heat. In 20 years we went from having two roads paved
+to every road paved, everybody moving from outhouses to indoor
+plumbing. No more kerosene, but instead having electricity for
+everyone.
+ We can move quickly and we can use technology. We can use
+the Government to help because that is who made this happen.
+ Thank you.
+ Mr. Tonko. The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from
+California, Representative Matsui.
+ Ms. Matsui. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I really do
+appreciate the witnesses here today.
+ I find this really refreshing at this point, because I
+think everybody believes that climate change is real. There
+seems to be that agreement. And I think that is, in essence,
+great progress. This is agreement of a National Climate
+Assessment, which really said that it is real and the risk is
+now.
+ And it really concludes that greenhouse gas emissions from
+human activities are the explanation for global warming over
+the last 60 years. And for the second year in a row, the
+transportation sector was the largest emitter of greenhouse
+gases in the United States. And the International Energy Agency
+has found it is the only sector that has become less energy
+efficient over the last 15 years.
+ My colleague Ms. Schakowsky brought this up, and I want to
+have a further conversation on this about fuel economy and
+decreased auto greenhouse emissions. That is what the Obama
+administration did for light-duty vehicles through 2025, and
+how important it is in combatting climate change. These
+standards were written in 2012 with the support of the auto
+industry, the environmental groups and the States.
+ Now, these are good for consumers, who save billions of
+dollars at the pump over the life of their vehicles. And they
+are good for the American workers, who benefit from the
+development of innovative technologies that create profits and
+support jobs. The standards are projected to reduce gas
+emissions by 540 million metric tons and reduce oil consumption
+by 1.2 billion barrels, and nearly double the fuel economy of
+light-duty vehicles to an average of about 54 miles per gallon.
+ Now, at a time when our country desperately needs to become
+more resilient when it comes to adapting to climate change, I
+am really disappointed that the Trump administration moved to
+reverse much of our progress with their proposal to roll back
+the curtain on fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards. And
+that is why I was pleased to introduce the Clean and Efficient
+Cars Act yesterday which will protect our fuel economy and
+greenhouse gas emission standards through 2025.
+ My legislation maintains the Federal Government and auto
+manufacturers' promise to the American people, a promise for
+clean, efficient cars that cost less at the pump, better for
+the environment, the health, and the future of our children and
+grandchildren.
+ Mr. Duke, you mentioned in your testimony that, despite our
+clean technology edge, the United States is not moving quickly
+enough to reduce carbon pollution. What effects do you believe
+the Trump administration's proposed rule to freeze the current
+fuel economy and greenhouse gas standard have on climate-
+related environmental impacts?
+ Mr. Duke. Representative Matsui, thank you for the question
+and thank you for your leadership on this crucial topic. It is
+absolutely correct that the transportation sector has now
+emerged as the most emitting sector of our economy. And it is
+one where there are extraordinary solutions today and on the
+horizon to deal with the challenge.
+ What industry needs in order to scale up these solutions is
+clarity and certainly against which they can make their
+investment decisions. And we had that, for example, in that
+President Ford's initial push to double fuel economy the first
+time----
+ Ms. Matsui. Right.
+ Mr. Duke [continuing]. Provided exactly that clarity. And
+we saw the industry deliver. We saw the Big Three at that time
+deliver.
+ Once again we have the potential to double fuel economy
+with the 2010 standards for light-duty vehicles and, with that,
+also move into the electric vehicle competition with China in a
+complete way where I am confident that our automakers can win
+the day.
+ What is troubling is that, with the proposed rollbacks--
+which, again, really exceed what industry itself was calling
+for, maybe not what certain other industries were calling for
+but what the autos themselves were calling for--with those
+rollbacks, it basically makes it harder for us to compete in
+this global marketplace. Again, China has a 60 percent electric
+vehicle share, so we don't want to cede that ground.
+ And I should also note that there is plenty more that can
+be done and should be done to improve internal combustion
+engine vehicles as well. There are opportunities to cut
+emissions from those conventional vehicles much more than we
+already have today, and cost-effectively. And so we need to
+stick with the plan that we had in place and keep that investor
+certainty in place so that we can continue to compete.
+ Ms. Matsui. Exactly right. Because we keep moving forward
+and we have the momentum, and we have to pull back. Business
+does not like a lack of consistency. We all know that.
+ Mr. Williams, you mentioned in your testimony that millions
+of American jobs depend on continuing American leadership on
+clean vehicle technology that includes over 250,000 Americans
+employed across 500 U.S. factories and engineering facilities
+that build technologies that improve fuel economy and reduce
+pollution. Can you really on a global scale discuss what this
+will do, just this simple kind of pullback that we have?
+ Mr. Williams. Sure. One of the immediate impacts of it, the
+agency's own analysis says that it will cause, result in the
+billions less in technology investment that supports 50,000 to
+60,000 jobs in the U.S. that we would immediately potentially
+lose.
+ But the other piece of it is that this is devaluing the
+investment that a number of other companies across the supply
+chain have made based upon those 2010 standards. So, whether
+you look at ALCOA making aluminum in Iowa and Tennessee, or
+ArcelorMittal Steel making steel for the auto sector in
+Illinois, those investments they made because of the need and
+the standards set forth to make more efficient vehicles. If we
+step back, countries like China and countries in Europe and
+throughout the world will take over this industry and
+completely leave us in the dust.
+ Ms. Matsui. Thank you. I have run out of time. I yield
+back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentlewoman yields back.
+ The Chair recognizes Representative Johnson, 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Johnson. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ You know, last Congress we began a discussion on our
+domestic nuclear industry's ability to compete on the world
+stage, particularly with state-backed enterprises coming from
+countries like China and Russia. I hope to continue that
+discussion in this session of Congress.
+ And I also would like to point out a similar issue
+occurring on the coal front. As Mr. Powell's testimony states,
+China is financing about 100 gigawatts of coal projects in at
+least 27 countries. Like with our nuclear energy deployment, I
+worry the U.S. is missing an opportunity here, especially as
+ongoing public/private work is driving down the cost of carbon
+capture and storage technologies, as well as making
+nonsupercritical projects feasible here in the U.S.
+ In other words, the United States is capable of solving
+these technological problems, but we have got to make sure that
+we stay engaged on the global front in doing that.
+ So, Mr. Worthington, can you discuss why so many countries
+are looking to China for their energy needs?
+ Mr. Worthington. Yes, sir. Thank you very much for that
+question.
+ The World Bank made a decision a couple years ago that they
+were going to refuse to consider financing for a new coal
+plant. There are countries in the world that coal is their only
+option. Kosovo is a great example. Kosovo has a 50-year-old
+coal plant that badly, badly needs to be replaced. The World
+Bank made a commitment to finance a new project. And as soon as
+they made that commitment, they started figuring out how they
+were going to get out of their commitment.
+ The Chinese have stepped in in Asia, Africa, and South
+America, and they have been willing to finance projects that
+the World Bank refuses.
+ Mr. Johnson. And I have heard from our State Department and
+from our former U.N. ambassador, Ambassador Haley, China is
+doing this kind of stuff.
+ Mr. Worthington. Right.
+ Mr. Johnson. I mean, they are doing this kind of stuff all
+over the world, all over their region. And they are using these
+energy projects as a way to get their foot in the door. And
+then they have big influence in those countries.
+ So are the technologies supplied by China the most advanced
+fossil technologies in the world?
+ Mr. Worthington. Not what they are selling to other
+countries.
+ Mr. Johnson. Right. Exactly. Would it benefit these nations
+if the United States participated in these markets, could we
+bring the best to the table?
+ Mr. Worthington. There is no question. And the other thing
+that the Chinese do is, they insist that the developing country
+buy Chinese products.
+ Mr. Johnson. OK.
+ Mr. Worthington. So they are not just financing, they are
+providing all, they insist on providing all of the equipment.
+ Mr. Johnson. Right, right. So how can the U.S. do better
+from an international engagement standpoint? What should we be
+doing?
+ Mr. Worthington. Well, we have tools ourselves with the
+Export-Import Bank, Overseas Private Investment Corporation,
+Trade Development Agency and so forth. Some of these U.S.
+agencies over the last number of years also adopted an
+antifossil energy----
+ Mr. Johnson. Right.
+ Mr. Worthington [continuing]. Approach. I believe that is
+being reversed. And I believe that they are open for business
+now for fossil projects.
+ But the key becomes the new president of the World Bank.
+President Trump should identify a new president of the World
+Bank shortly. Hopefully he or she will not have the antifossil
+bias that the predecessor did.
+ Mr. Johnson. OK. Mr. Powell, have you got any comments on
+that before I move on to another question quickly?
+ Mr. Powell. I think we can use the new instruments that we
+created in the BUILD Act, like the Development Finance
+Corporation. And to your point about sort of China using this
+strategically, I think we should remember with a nuclear plant,
+for example, 10 years to build, 80 years to operate, 10 years
+to decommission. That is a centurylong relationship----
+ Mr. Johnson. Oh yes.
+ Mr. Powell [continuing]. That they are getting with that
+other country. We have that opportunity as well in so may
+countries, and it does seem like we are squandering that
+opportunity.
+ Mr. Johnson. Absolutely.
+ Mr. Worthington, your testimony states that natural gas
+emissions have declined while production has increased. And
+that is thanks primarily to technological innovations
+throughout the industry. I know eastern and southeastern Ohio
+have benefitted greatly from this increased production,
+especially as proposed new ethane crackers and other new job
+opportunities, ethane storage hubs, et cetera, continue to
+emerge.
+ So how can we ensure other countries and the world benefit
+from these technological advances? And what role can U.S. LNG
+play?
+ Mr. Worthington. U.S. LNG can play a pivotal role. We have
+got a couple units exporting now. We have four more that are
+coming online either still this year or the early part of next
+year. We have an opportunity to more than double our LNG
+exports and to countries like Poland, China, India, Italy, even
+the U.K. So it is a tremendous opportunity.
+ We are a dependable supplier. We don't use LNG, we don't
+use natural gas as a political weapon the way some of our
+competitors do. And we should just do everything we can to
+expedite the next fleet of LNG export facilities.
+ Mr. Johnson. Yes. Russia in particular, they get about, Mr.
+Chairman, they get about 50 percent of their revenue from the
+sale of oil and gas, much of that to our allies in the region.
+ I yield back. Thank you very much.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ I now would recognize Representative McNerney from
+California for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. McNerney. I want to thank the chairman and I thank the
+panel for your testimony this morning.
+ First I would like to observe how reasonable the
+Republicans sound today on the issue of climate change. There
+must have been a conversion on the road to Damascus recently.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel, do you agree that most or all climate models
+consistently underpredict the climate change rate?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Yes. Because there is a double-edged sword of
+uncertainty with climate change. The best-case scenario is, we
+could do that well. But the worst-case scenario tends to keep
+surprising us. It is a bigger error bar on that.
+ Mr. McNerney. And given the lag between CO2
+emissions and its impact on the climate, do you believe there
+is a realistic way we can avoid temperature increase of less
+than 2 degrees C by carbon reduction emissions alone?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. We have to have a mix of emissions
+reductions, all sources of carbon storage as well that we can
+think that is safe for communities so we can get to a net-zero
+situation by mid-century.
+ Mr. McNerney. So then what our alternatives to reduce
+emissions to avoid climate catastrophe? What are our emission
+alternatives?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. As been said, we have to manage our forests
+so that they don't go up in flames and lose the carbon they are
+sequestering. We have to increase the land sink in agriculture
+practices. We also have to perhaps carbon capture and
+sequestration, there may be a bridge for innovation through
+utilization; however, it has to transition. We have to figure
+out to sequester the carbon and keep it out, away from the
+atmosphere.
+ Mr. McNerney. Well, considering climate intervention or
+geoengineering such as injecting sun-reflecting particles into
+the stratosphere, how much understanding do we have of climate
+intervention as to its effectiveness or its possible side
+effects?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. We have a lot to do with the social sciences
+of the governance of such an issue of just injecting stuff into
+the stratosphere that would affect perhaps monsoon rains and
+all sorts of consequences around the world and give us perhaps
+hazy skies, beautiful sunsets but hazy skies and other
+consequences. We need more research in this space before.
+ Mr. McNerney. Well, what do we need to do to develop
+sufficient expertise in climate intervention to even decide if
+it is a possible way to manage climate change while we reduce
+our carbon emissions?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. First of all, make sure we invest in NASA and
+NOAA and our infrastructure to make sure that every time a
+volcano emits anything that we are able to track it and figure
+out what the consequences are, because that is the modern, the
+natural analog to what these experiments would say. And there
+are many other ways we can study this problem before we would
+do some other experiments.
+ Mr. McNerney. Well, then, do agencies such as NOAA and NASA
+and the DOE have the capabilities to generate a baseline
+understanding of the stratosphere?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Absolutely. And there are sensors and
+satellites we would love to have deployed and to double down on
+science investment on these persnickety problems, as you say.
+ Mr. McNerney. Well, I might be proposing legislation to do
+that.
+ And before I finish, I just want to say, Mr. Shimkus, thank
+you for attributing the quote to me that it is just an
+engineering problem. But I have to say that was taken out of
+context. I was referring to nuclear waste being an engineering
+problem, but I also said that nuclear waste will need a
+political solution. Now, that whole context also applies to
+climate change. There are engineering solutions that need to be
+addressed, but we need to have the political will to put those
+solutions into effect. And so instead of just sounding
+reasonable, please work with us to find solutions that are
+sufficient to the threat.
+ I yield back.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ The Chair now recognizes Representative Ruiz of California
+for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Ruiz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel, the National Climate Assessment outlined many
+severe public health effects of climate change due to increases
+in air pollution and expansions in the ranges of disease-
+carrying organisms. I ask this question because I am an
+emergency physician with a public health expertise as well.
+ In addition, a study recently published in the New England
+Journal of Medicine by Haynes and Christie found that in the
+United States it is estimated that almost 60 percent of the
+excess deaths may be caused by the use of fossil fuel from
+power production and traffic. A previous study in 2009 from the
+same journal, the New England Journal of Medicine, found that a
+decrease in air pollution is associated with an increase in
+life expectancy of more than nine months.
+ This is real. This has real effects for individuals back
+home when they ask, how does this affect me? It is not an
+esoteric, ideological, partisan kind of conversation. This is
+real, pragmatic life effects on your relatives and your
+children.
+ In Riverside County, where I am from and represent, ranks
+amongst the worst in the Nation for ozone pollution. High-ozone
+days contribute to many hospital admissions, especially for
+children who suffer from asthma, and seniors with COPD. I know
+because I personally have treated many of them in the emergency
+department.
+ Let me ask you a question. Isn't it true that climate
+change is making it more difficult to improve air quality?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Yes. The ozone, ground-level ozone with
+higher temperatures, we call it kind of a climate penalty on
+health.
+ The other thing is that Southern California and Arizona
+have a situation with the extra dust, and the conditions in the
+spring lead to something that is called a Valley Fever that
+people can be in hospital emergency rooms. We lose lives to
+things that are climate influenced.
+ Mr. Ruiz. And as a public health expert, I am concerned
+about the impact climate change is having on the spread of
+vector-borne diseases. Is it true that climate change is
+expected to influence the spread of vector-borne diseases? And
+what kind of new illnesses will Americans be at risk for and/or
+have succumbed to more?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. What we see is that a lot of the pests and
+some of the disease-carrying situations in the tropics are
+moving into southern parts of the United States.
+ Mr. Ruiz. Like what?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Such as dengue fever and other mosquito-borne
+illnesses.
+ Other things like West Nile Virus that used to be in a part
+of the U.S. is now spreading northward and westward.
+ Mr. Ruiz. Yes. So dengue fever, describe the symptoms,
+would you?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Yes. I defer to your medical expertise on
+those symptoms.
+ Mr. Ruiz. Well, I mean it is not pleasant, put it this way.
+So because we are running out of time.
+ As a physician I have seen firsthand that the public health
+infrastructure serving people in rural areas and in other
+vulnerable communities, underserved communities, is often
+underresourced and overburdened, working over capacity. And the
+residents of these areas, like in my district, are often coping
+with multiple challenges that make their health conditions more
+severe.
+ So the National Climate Assessment discusses the special
+problems and increased vulnerabilities of individuals in
+underserved communities. Can you describe these problems?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Sure. Climate change exacerbates the
+historical inequities. And we have to consider these solutions
+to help. Low-income communities, children, older adults, people
+of color are often at greater risk. And low-income communities
+are often exposed to these risks and due to historical
+decisions.
+ And the health impacts, it is really important that we
+ensure the vulnerabilities of front-line communities are
+identified and extra precautionary measures are taken to keep
+people safe.
+ Mr. Ruiz. So oftentimes decisions are made by, you know,
+governments or corporations to start a business with some
+potential air pollution without the consent or the meaningful
+consultations with the communities that they are going to
+affect currently and in the long term. These communities, like
+those in my district, have a very bad physician shortage
+crisis. They don't have clinics to go to. They already are
+experiencing high asthma rates because of the living conditions
+in which they exist. And they face a higher morbidity and
+mortality at a younger age than other folks.
+ That is why I introduced an Environmental Justice Act which
+will specifically address this issue for vulnerable populations
+with Senator Cory Booker. We have introduced that together.
+ So we are all well aware that prevention is far less
+expensive than treatment and is obviously much more beneficial
+to patients. I hope we will listen to the warnings of the
+National Climate Assessment and the IPCC report and start to
+address climate change. It is not only an environmental
+problem, it is clearly a significant public health threat with
+real consequences for real people. I know, because I treated
+them in the emergency department.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back?
+ Mr. Ruiz. Yes.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ And we recognize Representative Soto from Florida for 5
+minutes.
+ Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I want to thank
+Dr. Ekwurzel for defining the challenge that we have to avoid
+surpassing 1.5 degrees Celsius. Global carbon dioxide emissions
+would have to drop around 45 percent below 2010 levels by 2030,
+and reach net-zero emissions by around 2050.
+ And, you know, I was thinking about those dates. And it may
+seem far off for a lot of us. However, I want to put it in
+perspective. And we have a special guest that I want to
+recognize here, Lincoln, who just came in. A name that both
+Democrats and Republicans can get behind, by the way. So, by
+2030, Lincoln will probably be just a teenager by then. And by
+2050 he will be in his 30s. Relatively young and still starting
+his life.
+ This question, this challenge is not about the folks behind
+the dais. It is not about most of the folks in the audience. It
+is about Lincoln and his generation and what we are going to
+do. In 2050 we are going to look back and say, did we do what
+we needed to get done to protect Lincoln and his generation? Or
+did we let it slip past us in an irrevocable fashion?
+ So what is the cost? The cost is the long-term survival of
+the human race. That is the cost. And the threat is
+existential.
+ And this is the greatest country in the world. We should be
+leading on energy policy, not defining it by the worst
+polluters on the planet.
+ So I think this isn't science fiction to get to these
+levels. I think we already know what we have to do, a mix of
+nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, and perhaps biofuels. Imagine
+utilities adopting all this. Electric plug-in cars, and trucks,
+and ships, and planes, and trains running on it. That we
+resolve the energy storage crisis with a massive energy
+efficiency effort.
+ So I want to ask each of you all in a yes-or-no question:
+If we gave you the resources with that mix, could we get to the
+45 percent drop?
+ First, Dr. Ekwurzel, could we get there?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. If we start now, it is a challenge but we
+have a chance.
+ Mr. Soto. I also want to ask Mr. Williams, could we get
+there if we had the resources with that mix?
+ Mr. Williams. We need to start now.
+ Mr. Soto. Reverend Woodberry, do you think it would be
+possible?
+ Reverend Woodberry. Possibly, but we must start now.
+ Mr. Soto. With the Lord's help, right?
+ Reverend Woodberry. Absolutely.
+ Mr. Soto. And Congress' help.
+ And, Mr. Duke, do you think we could do that with that mix?
+ Mr. Duke. We could get it done, and could get it done
+cheaper and faster with a broader mix.
+ Mr. Soto. Mr. Powell, would it be possible with that mix?
+ Mr. Powell. I would second the broader mix getting it done
+cheaper and faster.
+ Mr. Soto. And then, Mr. Worthington, with the mix I
+referred to, could we get it done?
+ Mr. Worthington. I think you would have to add carbon
+capture and storage to the technologies that you suggested.
+ Mr. Soto. OK. Well, thanks for your opinions on that.
+ It is my belief the only resource we really need is the
+will of this committee to meet the challenge of climate change
+now for Lincoln and his generation. And I believe we have been
+elected to do just that.
+ With that, thank you, Lincoln, for being here today. Look
+at that. See, he has got his political career starting today.
+And I yield back, Chairman.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentleman yields back.
+ Lincoln and I have met in the past. And, Lincoln, it is
+great to have you here again. And thank you for being super
+inspiration.
+ Now to the very patient Representative Castor from Florida.
+We offer you 5 minutes to question the panel.
+ Ms. Castor. Thank you, Chairman Tonko and Ranking Member
+Shimkus. I look forward to tackling these issues with you.
+Thank you to all of our witnesses.
+ We are facing the crisis of our generation. The climate
+crisis threatens all of our districts, all of our communities,
+as well as America's national security, our economic
+prosperity, the health of our families, and the world that our
+children will inhabit. I appreciated my colleague from Florida
+Mr. Soto's remarks. We feel like we are in the bullseye in
+Florida.
+ And my district in the Tampa Bay area is one of the most
+vulnerable in the country to the impacts of climate change.
+Hotter and longer summers, deadly storm surge risk because of
+rising sea levels, more intense hurricanes. It is all impacting
+the water we drink and even down to the stormwater and
+wastewater systems that we all rely on every day.
+ But we are not alone. This is impacting everyone across
+America. And the costs are very high. Chairman Tonko and I have
+often talked about the costs of inaction. And right now people
+are bearing the brunt of higher property insurance costs, flood
+insurance costs, electric bills. The list goes on and on.
+ But the good news is there are solutions. We have seen
+major advances in energy efficiency, renewable energy,
+innovation, and other strategies to reduce greenhouse gases.
+The Fourth Climate Assessment Report said that future risks
+from climate change depend primarily on decisions made today.
+And it has been heartening to hear some of our Republican
+colleagues talk about a new understanding of what is at stake.
+ But, you see, the time is short. The time is short now to
+avoid the worst impacts and the escalating costs of the climate
+crisis.
+ And to my colleague Mr. Duncan, who kind of symbolizes a
+lot of the discussion we hear on the other side: No, it is
+absolutely vital that the Congress and this country provide
+some bold national policies to get there and to tackle the
+challenges ahead. We have got to tackle the challenges of
+reducing greenhouse gases, especially in the electric
+generation sector and transportation sector.
+ So, to close out, I would like Mr. Duke and Dr. Ekwurzel to
+talk to us a little bit about that. In the past decade, the
+average costs of wind and solar electric systems have dropped
+dramatically and the markets are rapidly growing. With your
+best can-do spirit, talk to us about the opportunities ahead
+for this country and communities when it comes to clean energy
+and the jobs we will create with it.
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. I will be real short on the resiliency
+aspect, then I will turn it over to Mr. Duke. Because this is
+really important. When those are senior citizens that are
+trapped inside the facility after a hurricane because there is
+no power because it was disrupted, and the fuel supply lines
+are disrupted, when the storm passes, the sun comes up and the
+air still is blowing wind, and you can have a renewable, you
+know, community solar community wind that can get you back up
+on your feet, and you can be more independent as you deal with
+the climate impacts.
+ Mr. Duke. Thank you, Representative, for the question.
+ And I just want to underscore how much progress we have
+made and how much opportunity we have now to cut emissions
+faster than ever before. The CEO Jim Robo of the largest
+utility in America predicts that, within a few years,
+renewables, wind and solar, with storage will be 2 to 4 cents a
+kilowatt hour and able to broadly compete with conventional
+power. That is an indication of what we have got in front of us
+as we seek to electrify all of our end uses, and building, and
+vehicles, and beyond.
+ And I also want to note that there is lots of innovation
+happening in other sectors. The industrial sector is more
+complicated. It is one that is hard to get your hands around
+sometimes, but I want to give an indication of what is going on
+there.
+ There is a company in Boston that is creating metals out of
+electricity in a way that can be cost-competitive even for
+steel down the line. You have got companies that are using
+CO2 to strengthen cement in buildings in Atlanta and
+all across the country. And much more coming in terms of
+CO2 utilization as part of the overall toolkit.
+ And, of course, we have long known how to cut energy waste.
+And increasingly what companies are doing is getting into the
+system so that they can help with demand response, with
+flexible loads. For example, there is no reason why you have to
+charge your electric vehicle right now whenever you first plug
+it in. It is easy to have that respond to the kinds of rate
+variations that California is now sending to consumers so that
+you can charge your electric vehicle when the electricity is
+most plentiful and cheap.
+ And this is just a small snapshot of the innovation that is
+happening right now. Much more to come from small modular
+reactors to carbon capture and storage, precision agriculture.
+We can and are in many ways still leading on this, but we need
+the same kind of 90-plus major policies that China has to make
+sure that our industries can continue to scale with confidence
+on all these solutions.
+ Mr. Tonko. The gentlewoman yields back?
+ Ms. Castor. Yes.
+ Mr. Tonko. You do.
+ The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland,
+Representative Sarbanes, for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Sarbanes. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
+appreciate you all being here today. I am sorry I couldn't be
+here for a good portion of the hearing, but I did get notes.
+And I know it has been a very rigorous examination of what we
+need to do in terms of addressing climate change. And I want to
+thank the chairman for bringing this hearing and bringing
+attention to these issues.
+ Having gotten all the questions that you have received and
+responded to them over the course of the hearing, I invite you
+to kind of give a wrap-up perspective on what you think will be
+the most--pick one, two things--the most effective things that
+we can do in the nearest term to try to address this crisis of
+climate change.
+ And I am also particularly interested, Mr. Duke, in your
+views on what we can do to incentivize progress on this point
+other than to the detached issues that have been discussed. If
+you can start with that and then we can have others give a kind
+of final perspective.
+ Mr. Duke. Thank you, Representative, for the closing
+questions.
+ I would like to underscore that the United States has been
+and really remains the most important player on the world stage
+for dealing with climate change. It really was the United
+States and China jointly announcing their targets in 2014 to
+cut emissions, with China committing to peak their emissions
+for the first time--and they are delivering on that, by the
+way--that is what kick started the move to the Paris Agreement,
+and that is the kind of leadership that we had shown
+historically and can and will show again.
+ To be in the position to do that, though, we need to have
+the right incentives in place that are as far-reaching and
+market-based as possible. The best way to do that is with a
+price on carbon that is congressionally bipartisan and that
+reinvests the revenue that comes out of that carbon price in
+order to create the right infrastructure, from transmission to
+electric vehicle charging stations, and to do right by the
+communities that are on the front lines of this transition,
+whether it is coal communities or low-income communities
+suffering from pollution today.
+ And I can tell you that when we do that, not only will we
+lead on technology and on the diplomatic stage again, but we
+will also clean up our public health problems in a dramatic
+way. When you move to clean energy, you clean up everything>
+You don't just clean up CO2, you clean up all the
+public health contaminants as well. And I look forward to
+seeing bipartisan action on a carbon price that makes all that
+happen and that allows our business to do their job and compete
+with China and the rest of the world.
+ Mr. Sarbanes. Any other closing observations, this last?
+ Dr. Ekwurzel. Don't forget the damages of climate change
+and global emissions. When you stack that up against these low
+costs per kilowatt that are already happening, invest in the
+science, invest in the social science. This is big
+transformation that I think is going to be a cleaner, healthier
+world ahead when we act now.
+ Mr. Williams. Mr. Sarbanes----
+ Mr. Sarbanes. Yes.
+ Mr. Williams [continuing]. It was mentioned on both sides,
+the moonshot. And I think it is important to note that the
+moonshot involved Federal intervention, Federal targets, and
+date-specific goals that was connected with investments and
+incentives. We need the same thing for climate change.
+ Mr. Sarbanes. Reverend Woodberry.
+ Reverend Woodberry. Community-based solutions that will
+provide energy efficiency, renewable demand-side management
+tools that will create jobs, and also a price on carbon,
+ensuring that that money goes to communities that have a legacy
+of abuse and pollution.
+ Mr. Powell. I will say I heard broad agreement that climate
+change is a real and urgent problem that we need to address,
+that we need much higher-ambition policies than we currently
+have, that we need a full toolkit of solutions to solve the
+problem, we can't take anything off the table, and that
+innovation is a really good place to get started.
+ Mr. Worthington. I guess I am last. I would just reiterate
+that both from an energy production side and the efficiency
+side, we need all of the above. We need every technology that
+is economically available. Plus, we can't ignore or take any
+technologies off the table, both on the supply and the
+utilization side.
+ Mr. Sarbanes. Thank you all. Mr. Chairman, again, thanks
+for the hearing. I think we agree that we have to move super
+aggressively in the direction of the side of the portfolio that
+has to do with green, sustainable energy. The testimony we
+received today will help us do that.
+ I yield back.
+ Mr. Tonko. Thank you very much. And the gentleman yields
+back.
+ I believe that completes the list of Members who chose to
+question the members of the panel. I do thank, very much thank
+the witnesses for their participation in today's hearing, my
+first hearing as chair. So I appreciate your cooperation
+immensely. Thank you for the great inclusion of ideas and
+thoughts and opportunities that lie before us. We appreciate it
+greatly.
+ I remind Members that, pursuant to committee rules, they
+have 10 business days to submit additional questions for the
+record to be answered by the witnesses who have appeared. I ask
+each witness to respond promptly to any such questions that you
+may receive.
+ And then, finally, I request unanimous consent to enter the
+following documents into the record. They include testimony of
+Jason Hartke, President of the Alliance to Save Energy, Climate
+Change in the Great Lakes Region: An assessment of Great Lakes
+Integrated Sciences; a January 8, 2019, letter from the
+Alliance to Save Energy that was forwarded to Speaker Pelosi,
+Leader McCarthy, Senate Majority Leader McConnell, and Senate
+Minority Leader Schumer; a letter from TechNet; a letter from
+the Advanced Energy Economy; a slide that was provided today by
+Representative McKinley in his questioning; and, finally, a
+presentation of slides by the witnesses that accompanied
+today's involvement.
+ [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
+ Mr. Tonko. So, with all of that, we again thank everyone
+for their participation and my colleagues for their interest in
+the issue. And at this time the subcommittee is adjourned.
+ [Whereupon, at 1:13 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
+ [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
+
+ Prepared statement of Hon. Debbie Dingell
+
+ Thank you Chairman Tonko and Ranking Member Shimkus, for
+holding this hearing today to discuss the urgent threat from
+climate change we all face and the way forward.
+ Sea levels are rising. Average temperatures are warming.
+Ice is disappearing at alarming rates. Extreme weather is
+intensifying and becoming more frequent--from stronger
+hurricanes to colder winters.
+ The world's top scientific minds have made it clear: the
+time for debate is over-urgent and decisive action is needed
+now on a significant scale to address climate change. The will
+of one city, one county, one State, or one country will not be
+enough to meet the challenge ahead.
+ In the Great Lakes, we are already seeing increased
+variability in lake water levels, more harmful algae blooms,
+and wildlife habitats adversely impacted, which will continue
+to negatively affect the region's economy and way of life long-
+term.
+ It is critical the United States rejoint the rest of the
+industrialize world as a member of the Paris Climate Accord and
+take immediate steps to ensure this Nation is transitioning
+across all sectors to a carbon-zero economy. Repealing, rolling
+back, or weakening the Clean Power Plan, Clean Air Act, clean
+car standards, or any other effort to reduce greenhouse gases
+only exacerbates the climate crisis we need to solve.
+ With 2018 listed as one of the hottest years on record, the
+American people have demanded immediate action. Allowing
+greater climate pollution threatens our public health, our
+economy, and our national security.
+ We need bold, new ideas to create a pathway to a clean
+energy future and create new, good-paying jobs at the same
+time. We need to make the necessary investments in
+infrastructure, workforce, and education to mitigate, adapt,
+and reverse the growing climate threat.
+ Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today at this
+important hearing. I am looking forward to working with my
+colleagues--Republicans and Democrats--on the Energy and
+Commerce Committee to take serious action and pass meaningful
+climate legislation this Congress.
+ We must have the courage to act--the consequences of
+inaction are real, and all future generation are put at risk
+each day we do nothing.
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+
+ From: Richard J. Powell, Executive Director, ClearPath
+
+[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+
+
+
+