Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join with you and Senator Collins as the primary cosponsors of the tripartisan Clean Power Act, legislation that will set practical limits on the power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide. This bill will provide the utility industry with the flexibility and certainty they need to make business decisions while avoiding adverse environmental and public health impacts, which we will hear about today. If we can enact such multi-pollutant legislation, more Americans will be able to enjoy fishing in our rivers, swimming in our streams, and breathing cleaner air, all goals embodied in the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts. I look forward to working with you, Senator Smith, and Senator Voinovich to craft a multi-pollutant bill that can be signed into law.
Unfortunately, I have been troubled by indications that the Bush Administration will propose legislation in the coming months that will resemble the Clean Power Act, but with one significant omission: a requirement to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. While I applaud the Administration's attention to critical air quality issues, I cannot support legislation that fails to address carbon dioxide emissions, the most abundant greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming.
As the Bonn conference on the Kyoto Treaty reminds us, global warming is one of the most serious and pressing environmental challenges faced by the United States, and the world. The Earth's temperature is anticipated to rise between 3 and 10 degrees Fahrenheit in the next century, with a host of adverse environmental impacts, if we do not act to address this problem. While close to 200 nations agreed on a strategy for combating global warming, one did not. We are the one. Because the Kyoto agreement has set rules that were drafted without consideration of the interests of American industry or our environment-- I am afraid that we will pay a big price for our isolationism. As a leader of the industrialized world and the world's largest emitter of carbon dioxide, we have a responsibility to do better.
If we do not include carbon dioxide in a multi-pollutant bill, our industry will most certainly suffer as a result. To cite one example, a number of major utilities have expressed the concern that if they go forward with large capital investments now, relying on legislation that is inconsistent with addressing global warming, they may be faced with another round of regulation when this country eventually decides to join the rest of the world in controlling greenhouse gas emissions. Because of the real risk that today's investments would be rendered obsolete, they are reluctant to modernize.
James Rogers, Chief Executive Officer and President of Cinergy, recently testified before our committee. This is what he had to say on this subject: "My company seeks comprehensive multi-emission power plant legislation because we want long-term clarity and certainty built into our environmental compliance planning process . . . Without some sense of what our carbon commitment might be over the next 10, 15 or 20 years, how can I or any other utility CEO think we have the complete picture of what major requirements our plants may face?"
We would like to avoid that circumstance and provide utilities with the certainty they desire and their customers with the clean air they deserve.
Indeed, the U.S. utility sector, which is responsible for 40 percent of domestic and 10 percent of international carbon dioxide emissions, must be part of the solution. In fact, many of the most cost-effective measures to reduce emissions are available in the utility sector.
Finally, when all of the various ramifications of multi-pollutant legislation are considered comprehensively, as was done in five recent studies, the net economic impact of the legislation is modest. Just recently, the International Project for Sustainable Energy Paths released a report finding that the United States could meet the national carbon emissions reduction targets set forth in the Kyoto Protocol while still increasing economic growth from baseline projections.
We have a very real opportunity to work in a bipartisan, or should I say tripartisan, manner to pass meaningful clean air legislation in this Congress. I look forward to working with all members of this committee to draft comprehensive legislation to address emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, mercury and carbon dioxide from power plants. We have the opportunity to provide certainty and flexibility to our nation's utilities while at the same time protecting our environment and public health, and we must seize it.