[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 76 (Wednesday, May 21, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1035-E1036]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             TESTIMONY OF BOB MURRAY ON THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. RICHARD W. POMBO

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 21, 2003

  Mr. POMBO. Mr. Speaker, on May 13, 2003 the House Committee on 
Resources held a field hearing in St. Clairsville, OH on the proposed 
Kyoto Protocol's impact on coal dependent communities in Ohio.
  Congressman Bob Ney, who lives in St. Clairsville, did a marvelous 
job locating excellent witnesses representing organized labor, industry 
and local government. Among them was Mr. Robert E. ``Bob'' Murray, who 
a very prominent leader within America's coal mining industry. I 
encourage my colleagues to read this testimony that puts a human face 
on how the Kyoto Protocol will impact working men and women in the Ohio 
Valley and throughout the United States.

Statement of Mr. Robert E. Murray Before the Committee on Resources of 
   the House of Representatives Field Hearing on the ``Kyoto Global 
  Warming Treaty's Impact on Ohio's Coal Dependent Communities,'' St. 
                    Clairsville, Ohio, May 13, 2003

       Chairman Pombo and Congressman Ney, my name is Robert E. 
     Murray, and I am President and Chief Executive Officer of 
     Murray Energy Corporation (``Murray Energy''), which employs 
     about 2,500 persons in the most economically depressed areas 
     of the United States. Our Subsidiaries, American Energy 
     Corporation, Maple Creek Mining, Inc., and The Ohio Valley 
     Coal Company, employ about 1,400 persons in the tri-State 
     Ohio River Valley area, and nearly 1,000 people here in 
     Belmont County.
       Studies at the Pennsylvania State University have shown 
     that up to eleven (11) secondary jobs are created for each 
     coal industry position that we provide, thus making our 
     Companies responsible for almost 17,000 jobs in this tri-
     State area, and nearly 12,000 positions in Eastern Ohio.
       But, this is not where our tremendous beneficial impact on 
     this region stops. Our mining employees typically earn twice 
     the average household wage in Ohio and two-and-one-half times 
     the median wage for this area. American Energy Corporation's 
     Century Mine here in Belmont County is the largest single 
     economic development in Ohio in recent years, representing an 
     over $300 million investment in our area.
       The subject of the ``Kyoto Global Warming Treaty'' is a 
     human issue, not an environmental matter, to me, Chairman 
     Pombo and Congressman Ney. You see, I know the names of many 
     of the people whose jobs, standards of living, and lives 
     would be destroyed in this area if the United Nations' 
     ``Kyoto Global Warming Treaty'' were ever adopted by the 
     United States.
       This region is desperate for good paying and well-benefited 
     jobs. Our people just want to earn a reasonable living with 
     honor and dignity. Our young people want to stay in the area 
     and have good employment. Many times grown men and women have 
     broken down and cried in my office when I told them that we 
     had a job for them. They know that, with the high pay and 
     excellent benefits provided by coal mining, they can build 
     the lives of their dreams, be with their families, and retire 
     with dignity.
       But, this region came close to being economically 
     devastated, as the Administration of Bill Clinton and Albert 
     Gore signed the United Nations' Kyoto Protocol on so-called 
     global warming and for years urged its passage by the United 
     States Senate. Wisely, the Senate would not ratify their 
     draconian treaty. Passage of the United Nations Kyoto 
     Protocol would have eventually eliminated the U. S. coal 
     industry and the 17,000 primary and secondary jobs for which 
     my Companies are responsible in this tri-State area. Indeed, 
     the Clinton/Gore Administration had a motto that they were 
     going to ``dial out coal.''
       Fortunately, President George W. Bush condemned the United 
     Nations' Kyoto Protocol soon after he took office and 
     announced that our Country would no longer be a part of this 
     flawed agreement. On March 13, 2001, President Bush said:
       ``As you know, I oppose the Kyoto Protocol because it 
     exempts eighty (80) percent of the world, including major 
     population centers, such as China and India, from compliance, 
     and would cause serious harm to the U.S. economy.''
       President Bush has chosen an entirely different way to 
     address the climate issue, one based on research, technology, 
     and voluntary action. This path will encourage economic 
     growth, not stifle it. It will allow greater use of our 
     Nation's most abundant and lowest cost energy source, coal, 
     rather than devastate the industry and this area.
       The President has received much pressure from radical 
     environmentalists and no-growth advocates in the U.S., as 
     well as the international community, to reverse his decision. 
     But, even the most ardent of supporters of the Protocol, the 
     members of the European Community, who are using this issue 
     to gain economic advantages over the U.S. for their products 
     in the global marketplace, are having difficulty achieving 
     the mandatory carbon dioxide emissions reductions that they 
     set for themselves. And, it is important to point out that 
     the Kyoto Treaty has yet to go into force.
       Very importantly, there is no scientific consensus that so-
     called global warming is even occurring. Moreover, there is 
     no scientific evidence that human activities are responsible.
       As an engineer, I have followed the so-called global 
     warming matter for more than two decades. The best analysis 
     that I have read is that prepared by Professor Bjorn Lomborg, 
     an academic who is a former Greenpeace member and devoted 
     environmentalist. Dr. Lomborg has compared the projected 
     changes in the world's temperatures for the next one hundred 
     years--both with the Kyoto Treaty and without. Dr. Lomborg 
     has concluded that:
       If we observe the Kyoto Treaty by enforcing all of its 
     provisions, by the year 2100 (when our new granddaughter will 
     be 97 years old), the temperature is expected to increase by 
     1.92 degrees Celsius.
       Without implementation of the Kyoto Treaty, the temperature 
     will reach that level by 2094 (when our granddaughter will be 
     91 years old), six (6) years sooner than with the Protocol.
       In 2010, compliance with the Kyoto Treaty will cost $350 
     billion per year, increasing to nearly one trillion dollars 
     annually by 2050. To put this into perspective, Professor 
     Lomborg calculates that, for $200 billion per year, every 
     human being on Earth could have clean drinking water and 
     sanitation, saving two million lives each year.
       Mandatory restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions, whether 
     imposed by the United Nations' Kyoto Protocol or by 
     restrictions such as those currently being proffered by some 
     Senators, would have a devastating effect on the communities 
     in this tri-State area. The Kyoto Treaty would require a 
     reduction of greenhouse emissions to seven percent (7%) below 
     1990 levels by 2008, notwithstanding that there is no 
     scientific evidence that proves that such reductions are 
     beneficial or necessary. Our Nation would have to reduce 
     emissions by close to forty percent (40%) from current levels 
     in just five (5) years to meet the draconian Kyoto Treaty 
     goals. We applaud President Bush for recognizing the Kyoto 
     Treaty for what it is, a political agreement pushed by the 
     Clinton/Gore Administration with no regard for America's 
     economy or citizens, and particularly those in this area.
       Regarding the economic devastation of the ill-conceived 
     Kyoto Treaty, the most recent

[[Page E1036]]

     study by the Heartland Institute showed that if emissions had 
     to be reduced to 1990 levels--and that is not as low as the 
     Kyoto Treaty would have required--the Ohio state government 
     would lose a minimum of $1.2 billion in revenue annually, and 
     consumers and businesses in our State would pay $3.2 billion 
     and $32 billion, respectively, more for federal and state 
     programs to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
       Furthermore, based on the Heartland Institute study, each 
     household in Ohio would pay over $8,000 per year for just the 
     reduction to 1990 levels, and reaching the Kyoto Treaty 
     targets would cost every Ohio household $14,000 annually. 
     Clearly, these numbers prove the folly of even thinking about 
     agreeing to mandatory carbon dioxide controls in any form.
       As for coal, there would be very little production of this 
     fuel in the United States under a Kyoto type regime. The 
     Energy Information Administration of the U. S. Department of 
     Energy, analyzed the affects of a Kyoto Treaty on the energy 
     markets and determined that it would cause a sixty-seven 
     (67%) reduction in National coal production levels by 2010, 
     and a 90% drop by 2020.
       In short, by 2020 there would be no coal industry in Ohio, 
     from which eighty-seven percent (87%) of the State's 
     electricity is generated. Furthermore, coal fired electricity 
     costs about one-third (\1/3\) that from natural gas fired 
     generation, and is even more economical than this over 
     nuclear generated electricity.
       A better way to address the climate issue is by the plan 
     outlined by President Bush in February, 2002, which, as I 
     have stated before, is based on science, research, 
     technology, efficiency, and voluntary actions. Such an 
     approach will determine whether carbon dioxide emission 
     reductions are beneficial or necessary, or not. If carbon 
     dioxide reductions are proven to be necessary, we will be on 
     our way. If they are not, we will still be moving well down 
     the road to the more efficient use of coal with new 
     technologies.
       There currently are several initiatives in Washington that 
     will directly keep coal in the energy mix. On the 
     Congressional front, the U.S. House of Representatives has 
     just passed H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2003. This 
     legislation includes two important provisions that we need to 
     get advanced clean coal technologies into existing coal fired 
     electricity generating plants and to build new ones. H.R. 6 
     also includes authorization for basic coal research and for 
     the President's $2 billion Clean Coal Power Initiative, which 
     will demonstrate advanced clean coal technologies.
       The aforementioned two provisions are also included in the 
     Senate Bill, S. 14, that is now being debated on the Senate 
     floor. But, S. 14 includes a third important element that was 
     left out of the House passed legislation. The Senate Bill 
     will include very important production and investment tax 
     credits for a limited number of plants to encourage rapid use 
     of new advanced clean coal technologies. It is important, Mr. 
     Chairman and Congressman Ney, that you support the inclusion 
     of these tax provisions in the final bill that goes to the 
     President's desk.
       Another important initiative that the Administration has 
     announced is the FutureGen Program, which is a $1 billion, 
     ten (10) year, demonstration project to create the World's 
     first coal-based, zero emissions, electricity and hydrogen 
     power plant. The plant will capture carbon dioxide emissions 
     and will be coupled with carbon sequestration so that it is 
     literally a zero emissions plant. Over the long term, coal 
     can be the major source for hydrogen energy for our Country.
       Mr. Chairman, not only is the coal industry opposed to 
     mandatory reductions of carbon dioxide emissions, we are also 
     opposed to programs that would require mandatory reporting on 
     emissions, as well as schemes that would lead to carbon 
     dioxide emissions trading. The voluntary approach that the 
     industry is supporting will be the best way to preserve Ohio 
     and tri-State area jobs and hold down electric rates for our 
     households and our factories that must compete in the global 
     marketplace.
       The coal industry in the United States, at this time, is 
     being economically devastated. Practically all of the major 
     eastern U.S. coal producers are unprofitable or are currently 
     in bankruptcy. This is largely the result of the depressed 
     economy, huge amount of construction of new natural gas fired 
     electricity generating units during the Clinton/Gore years, 
     and importation of cheap coal from South America. This is the 
     worst possible time for some in Congress to be advocating any 
     mandatory requirements regarding carbon dioxide emission 
     measuring, reductions, or trading.
       Mr. Chairman and Congressman Ney, we commend you for 
     holding this field hearing on the devastating effects that 
     any attempt to put restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions 
     would have on the people and communities in this tri-State 
     area of the Ohio River Valley. As I stated previously, the 
     Kyoto Treaty and proposed carbon dioxide emission reductions 
     is a human issue with me, rather than environmental, as I 
     know the names of many of the individuals in this area whose 
     jobs, lives, and quality of life would be destroyed under the 
     Kyoto Treaty or any other program for mandatory reductions in 
     carbon dioxide emissions.

                          ____________________