Mr. President, I rise today to support the Climate Stewardship Act of 2003. As a cosponsor of S. 139, I commend Senators Lieberman and McCain for their bipartisan efforts to craft an important first step in addressing the serious issue of climate change. I also support the proposed amendment which establishes an emissions reporting database, provides climate change research grants, and requires a freeze on current levels of greenhouse gas emissions using a cap and trade system. I compliment Senators Lieberman and McCain for their continued leadership on this issue.
The United States makes up less than five percent of the world's population, but releases the largest amount of greenhouse gases of any country. The U.S. accounts for roughly 25 percent of the world's global emissions. In 2001, the National Research Council conducted a study on greenhouse gases at the request of the Bush Administration. The Council reported that concentrations of greenhouse gases are increasing as a result of human activities. In other words, elevated levels of carbon dioxide are not due solely to natural climate variations. One example is the increase in energy production from the burning of fossil fuels.
The Council concluded that increased concentrations of greenhouse gases are causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise. As you can see in the first chart, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) shows an increase in combined land and ocean temperatures during the past 120 years. If we look farther back in the historical record, the second chart shows a dramatic spike in air temperature just after the Industrial Revolution.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a premier international working group, predicts an increase in air surface temperature. The IPCC estimates the increase would be between 2.5 to 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit from the year 1990 to 2100. The Panel also predicts that climate change will likely affect the distribution and availability of regional water resources. My colleagues should recognize that all the varied climate models and scenarios used by the IPCC show a continued increase in air surface temperature. Strong evidence of increased atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases and climate change is obvious in my home state. Mr. President, the global warming debate began in Hawaii. Over 30 years ago, the Mauna Loa Climate Observatory documented evidence of increased carbon dioxide levels. This graph clearly shows an undeniable upward trend of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
It is interesting to note, however, that island communities account for less than one percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Major population centers and infrastructure are located along or near coastal areas. As a result, Pacific island nations are highly vulnerable to increased impacts of climate change. Scientists predict an increase of extreme climate change events such as hurricanes, floods, and droughts. The impacts of these events on business and agriculture in Hawaii and Pacific islands could be particularly severe and devastate our tourist-dependent economies.
In just the past 100 years, Honolulu's average temperature has increased 4.4 degrees Fahrenheit while precipitation has decreased by 20 percent. In Hawaii we have seen that "El Nino" events can have strong influences on our climate, causing prolonged periods of drought that hurt Hawaii's agricultural industry. Some climate projections show that the Pacific may actually transition into a more persistent "El-Nino"-like state, causing dramatic changes to the ecosystem. This change would not only affect farmers, but perhaps even permanently destroy many coral reefs and their associated fisheries throughout the Pacific. In the mid-1990s, El Nino events destroyed at least one-third of Palau's coral reefs. Mr. President, the costs of inaction on climate change far outweigh the costs of this bill.
Sea level rise is also a tremendous concern for Pacific island communities. It can greatly accelerate coastal erosion and saltwater intrusion into groundwater supplies. For many Pacific island nations facing severe shortages of drinking water, sea level rise is a devastating prospect. In Hawaii, sea level has risen six inches in Honolulu and nine inches in Hilo. The IPCC predicts that sea level will rise another one to two feet in the Pacific by the year 2100. The impacts of even a relatively small sea level rise on Pacific nations and atolls, some with maximum elevations which are less than ten feet above sea level, can be severe. As recently as 2001, rising sea levels caused the loss of land areas in Kiribati and Tuvalu, Pacific nations with low-lying atolls. In the Pacific, cultural activities were interwoven with the conservation of the environment. These traditions allowed the survival of dense populations on small land areas. Today, the global issue of climate change extends beyond our borders and threatens the livelihoods of these nations. Climate change is an important challenge and high priority for immediate action in the Pacific.
Mr. President, the U.S. has tried initiatives such as the Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program. These voluntary programs have not succeeded in reducing or even stabilizing total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Although program participants committed to reduce certain portions of their carbon dioxide emissions, many entities had substantial increases in their overall emission levels. This rise in emissions was due to increasing demands for their products and services. According to the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, total greenhouse gas emissions have increased approximately 12 percent between the years 1990 and 2001. Emissions are projected to increase another 42 percent by 2020. The United States needs to address climate change in a significant way. We must implement a responsible and reasonable policy to stop greenhouse gas emissions from rising.
Under the Lieberman-McCain amendment, the United States would adopt a uniform, federal program to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions. The amendment would require all major electric power, industrial, or commercial facilities that emit over 10,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas per year to take action. A program that uses emissions trading would provide these sectors with the flexibility needed to determine the most cost-effective and practical approaches to stop greenhouse gas emissions from rising. The U.S. has already demonstrated that a cap-and-trade system can be both environmentally and economically effective. The primary example is the Acid Rain Program which was established in 1990 to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide.
Four U.S. corporations are already taking the lead in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. BP (British Petroleum), the largest oil and gas producer in the U.S., and DuPont, a $24 billion/year corporation that produces chemicals, materials, and energy, have already taken on emission reduction strategies. Both BP and DuPont have claimed to save millions of dollars in the process. Cinergy, the largest burner of coal in the U.S., has pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by five percent with the belief that they can meet this target at no additional cost to the company or ratepayers. American Electric Power, the largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the U.S., has joined the Chicago Climate Exchange. This marketplace trades greenhouse gas emissions with a target of reducing emissions. The governors of ten Northeastern states developed a regional greenhouse gas trading program because of the lack of national leadership on climate change. Their program requires a mandatory cap on power plants in July of this year. In total, carbon reduction initiatives are already underway in 27 states.
Mr. President, we must take this first, critical step to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. If we fail to address the issue of climate change now, the U.S. may have to face catastrophic and expensive consequences. A relatively small investment today is far wiser than spending vast amounts in the future to replace destroyed homes and infrastructure, restore altered ecosystems, and reinvest in collapsed agricultural economies. Scientists at MIT (the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) conducted a study that analyzed the proposed costs of the Lieberman-McCain amendment to S. 139. They estimated the cost to be less than $20 per household per year.
The United States has the technological capabilities and intellectual resources to lead the world in an effort to reduce future greenhouse gas emissions. Mr. President, the Lieberman-McCain amendment demonstrates to the international community our serious commitment. The European Union (EU) has recently adopted a mandatory cap and trade program with a carbon dioxide reduction target of eight percent by the year 2012. The proposed amendment only calls for a stabilization of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. The compliance costs of the EU greenhouse gas reduction program are expected to total less than 0.1 percent of their GDP (Gross Domestic Product). Therefore, the EU predicts a minimal effect on their economic growth even under a rigorous approach.
Mr. President, I thank Senators Lieberman and McCain for recognizing the importance of climate change and taking the lead on legislation to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions. Research shows that our climate is changing due to human activities. It is clear that piecemeal, voluntary approaches have failed to reduce the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Now is the time to send a strong message that the U.S. is serious about the impacts of climate change. A policy of inaction on climate change is not acceptable and will cost the United States more than preventive policies. I firmly believe that we can have economic growth while protecting the global environment. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to support the Lieberman-McCain amendment to S. 139.
