O P E N I N G S T A T E M E N T
Senator George Voinovich
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
---------------------------------
Hearing on Risks Associated with Greenhouse
Gas Emissions
March 13, 2002
--------------------------------
Mr. Chairman, thank
you for holding this hearing today on the economic and environmental risks
associated with increasing greenhouse gas emissions. I think it is always important to try and understand the risks
associated with the various policy decisions we grapple with here in the
Senate.
However, I want to
make sure we don=t rush past the underlying assumptions on the
science of greenhouse gases and climate change and jump immediately to the
worst-case scenario effects. In courtroom
terms we are in danger here today of passing a sentence before we have fully
deliberated the evidence.
Over the last year I
have chaired one Hearing on Climate Change and have now attended three
others. There is no question in my mind
that there is a real difference of opinion between the scientific experts on
climate change. It is amazing to me how
certain groups have bought into the idea that everything is settled and they
close their mind to conflicting evidence.
Greenhouse gas
emissions and the climate change debate are real issues which deserve our
attention and the attention of the best and brightest scientists in our country
and the world. There are a number of
issues which need to be addressed before we plan what to do about the
worst-case scenarios such as:
<
What do the
models tell us about the past changes in climate patterns and how well suited
are they to predict future changes?
<
What do we know
about the predicted range of climate temperatures due to man-made emissions
over the next 50 to 100 years?
<
If something
needs to be done today, what are the available technology options and what
would the cost be to society to implement them?
<
Finally, if we
were to implement changes, what would the impact be. I am told if we were to implement the Kyoto Treaty completely, we
would only avert the expected temperature change by .06 degrees Celsius over
the next 50 years. That hardly seems
significant.
1
I would also like to
say a brief word about the President=s Climate Change Initiative. I
know today=s hearing was planned for the anniversary of
the President=s announcement on Kyoto. Instead of dwelling on Kyoto, which was a
failed Treaty and would never have passed the Senate, we should look at his
Initiative. To me it seems to be a
very reasonable approach and it is the only credible alternative proposed to
date.
<
It provides the
necessary funding for both the science and the technology research.
<
It encourages
companies to register their CO2 emissions.
<
It sets a
national goal to reduce our carbon intensity, which is the best way to protect
our economy and begin to address the issue.
Finally, in terms of
the Multi-Emissions Strategy I have said repeatedly that I would support
addressing CO2 in a voluntary way which encourages new technologies and
practices such as carbon sequestration.
I will not support a mandatory CO2 reduction cap. I think it is important that we do not let
the CO2 issue stand in the way of meaningful reduction of SO2, NOx, and
mercury.