[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 22 (Thursday, February 9, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S487-S489]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NEW ENERGY AGENDA
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I am on the floor today to discuss
something that has been a top priority for me in the Senate; that is,
the critical need to get serious about building a new energy agenda for
America, one that keeps our businesses competitive in the global
economy, preserves the integrity of our environment, and restarts the
engine that has always kept our country moving forward--and that is
innovation. I am specifically focused on the energy tax extenders,
those that are so necessary for us to keep going in the area of
homegrown and renewable energy.
We all know there is no single solution for getting us there. What we
need is not a silver bullet; we need a silver buckshot, as we like to
say in Minnesota.
I have talked about the need with many of my colleagues to continue
developing alternative resources such as hydro, geothermal, biofuels,
solar, wind, and we have also talked about how we need to continue to
develop existing technologies such as domestic oil and gas production
while enforcing appropriate safeguards. This is the very ``all-of-the-
above'' approach we need to take in order to keep all options on the
table.
This means exploring some of the new proposals we have seen with
promising technologies such as the smart grid. But it also means
extending the critical tax incentives that have been so important in
advancing the development of the next generation of biofuels and the
next generation of renewable energy. That is why I have pushed to
ensure that we have the right policies in place for encouraging clean
energy innovation, including the biodiesel tax credit which supports
over 31,000 jobs and has allowed domestic production to more than
double since 2011. It means the production tax credit, which made it
possible for wind power to represent over one-third of all new
electricity generation capacity in the United States last year.
Think of that figure. Think of the strides we have made and where we
can go in the future. The advanced energy manufacturing tax credit has
leveraged
[[Page S488]]
$5.4 billion in private investment, boosting growth and creating new
U.S. manufacturing jobs by producing components and equipment for the
burgeoning global renewable energy industry.
Extending these critical tax credits will help strengthen our
country's clean energy businesses so they can continue to grow and
thrive. But they are just one part of the equation. Again, there is no
silver bullet solution to our Nation's energy challenges, and that is
why we need to be willing to come together to hammer out a
comprehensive strategy for moving forward. We cannot afford to keep our
heads buried in the sand. We cannot afford to let yet another golden
opportunity pass us by. Sadly, too many have already come and gone.
Over the years, I believe there have been--especially in this last
decade--several moments when we could have acted but didn't when we had
the full support of the American people who had wanted a new direction
in energy policy. The first was immediately after 9/11 when President
Bush--if he had made a new energy policy one of the challenges to the
country in addition to invading Afghanistan and combating terrorism, I
believe we could have moved forward. But that didn't happen, and there
is no need to dwell on it today.
The second moment was before the arrival of the Presiding Officer in
the Congress, and that was in the summer of 2008 when we did take
action to raise gas mileage and energy-efficiency standards--something
I like to call building a bridge to the next century--but we didn't
make the kind of comprehensive progress on a comprehensive energy plan
that we should have made.
The third moment was when President Obama first came into office. At
that time, I advocated for a clean energy standard that I believe could
have passed in the first 6 months. It could have been combined with
some of the other comprehensive things we were talking about. We had a
bipartisan group going at the time, a group of 14 of us. But, instead,
a decision was made to focus on cap and trade later, instead of
starting with that clean energy standard and building from that.
Those were missed opportunities, a chain of missed opportunities. But
until we get serious about building a newer energy agenda for America,
we are going to continue to struggle with the consequences which have
created a vicious cycle of economic and environmental costs, not least
of all those caused by climate change.
Climate change, as the Presiding Officer knows, is not just about
melting glaciers and rising ocean levels. Shifting global trends have
the potential to wreak intense havoc on local economies, particularly
those anchored in agricultural. The facts stand for themselves.
In January 2010, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said for
the first time that public companies should add climate change to the
list of possible financial or legal impacts that they actually disclose
to investors.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis, at the Department of Commerce,
estimates that at least one-third of the U.S. gross domestic product is
weather and climate sensitive, with a potential economic impact of $4
trillion a year. Much of that impact would be wrung out of our farm
communities and from States with large rural populations, such as my
own. Any farmer will tell you a change in weather can mean the
difference between a bumper crop and a complete disaster--regardless of
how hard that farmer works. So it goes without saying that any kind of
significant swing in climate--paired with increasingly unpredictable
rainfall--could pose a problem to Americans who make their living off
the land.
In 2008, Minnesota's farms, forests, and ranches produced $18 billion
in goods and exported close to one-third of that. This is a sector that
is critically important to our economy, and we cannot afford for it to
be jeopardized. We also cannot afford the rising costs of fire
management, as forest fires have become increasingly intense in recent
years.
The current path is not sustainable. That is why I am on the floor,
in the hope that we can spark a meaningful conversation, but, most
specifically, that we look at extending those energy tax credits.
I believe we can take a page from our State, the State of Minnesota.
My home State is proof that policies promoting homegrown energy can
also promote business growth and job creation. The unemployment rate in
the State of Minnesota is 5.7 percent--well below the national
average--and part of that is thanks to our energy policies. In fact, a
recent report by the Pew Charitable Trust showed that in the last
decade Minnesota jobs in this sector grew by 11.9 percent, compared to
1.9 percent for jobs overall.
As I travel around the State, I can see the progress that has been
made. I think of places I have visited, such as Sebeka, MN, where a
small telephone company felt their customers who were in extremely
rural areas needed backup power supplies. So what did they do? They
found a way to combine wind turbines and solar panels so their
customers could actually purchase backup power. They did it themselves,
and they sold it to their customers.
It was very popular, and at one point an 80-year-old man came to see
them, and he said: I would like to purchase more. I want to do my whole
house in solar. The telephone company said: Sir, you can do that, but
it will take you about 10 years to get your investment back, but it is
going to be worth it. Do you mind if we ask how old you are? The man
said: I am 80 years old but I want to go green.
That is one of those true stories from the State of Minnesota.
Then there is Pentair, a Minneapolis-based water solutions company
that has donated a custom-designed Rain Water Recycling System to the
new and great Target baseball field. That technology will capture,
conserve, and reuse rainwater, saving the ballpark more than 2 million
gallons of water each year.
In one of General Mills' manufacturing plants, they have developed
their own innovative way to reuse water--diverting it to the local
municipal golf course to water the grass.
These are just a few examples of Minnesota's commitment to energy
innovation. There are countless stories out there, but it is not just a
Minnesota story, it is an American story.
I would note that the renewable energy standard in Minnesota--25 by
25--is one of the most aggressive in the country--30 percent for Xcel--
and yet our unemployment rate is so much better than the rest of the
country.
The quest to develop clean, sustainable, homegrown energy is not
specific to just one part of the country or, for that matter, just one
political party. Our renewable energy standard was actually nearly
unanimously adopted by the legislature--Democrats and Republicans--and
signed into law by a Republican Governor, Governor Pawlenty. This is an
issue I believe can and should unite us, and it is a way to address
these concerns because it builds a coalition across a broad spectrum;
that is, energy policy. It saves money. It is better for the
environment. It is certainly better for our national security,
producing our own homegrown energy.
In the past, Democrats and Republicans have managed to come together
to confront tough challenges--from the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s,
to keeping Social Security solvent in the 1980s, to welfare reform in
the 1990s.
But perhaps the most fitting example, in the context of combating
climate change, is the Clean Air Act. As the Presiding Officer knows,
that landmark bill took the first steps to address acid rain and
expanded efforts to control toxic air pollutants.
When the bill passed in the 1990s, it had strong bipartisan support
from Democrats and Republicans alike. It is worth mentioning that all
10 Members of the Minnesota delegation at the time, which included 5
Democrats and 5 Republicans--that was our Federal delegation--supported
the bill, including Republican Senator Dave Durenberger, who was among
its chief authors and staunchest supporters.
Since then, the Clean Air Act has helped prevent more than 18 million
child respiratory illnesses and 300,000 premature deaths.
Policies to protect our rivers, lakes, and streams have also had a
positive impact on people's health.
Coming from the ``Land of 10,000 Lakes,'' I have a unique
appreciation for the importance of clean water. It is the resource that
sustains our lakes and rivers, that provides critical habitat to
countless fish and millions of
[[Page S489]]
migratory birds, that fuels our thriving outdoor economy.
Hunting and fishing are more than just hobbies in our State, I say to
the Presiding Officer. They are a way of life, and they are critically
important to our economy.
Every year, nearly 2 million people fish our lakes and our streams,
and close to 700,000 people hunt our fields and forests.
Nationwide, the hunting and fishing industry is valued at $95.5
billion a year, and it brings in $14 billion in revenue. Clean water is
a fundamental pillar in supporting this economic sector and protecting
people against dangerous toxins such as mercury.
Minnesota has passed some of the most stringent mercury rules in the
country. In 2006, our State legislature passed laws requiring our
largest powerplants to cut mercury emissions 90 percent by 2015. The
Federal Government is finally catching up and will publish a
requirement in coming days to make similar reductions by 2016.
Yet despite everything we have done to combat mercury pollution, we
are still grappling with its consequences. A recent analysis of 25
years of data has found an unexpected rise in average mercury levels in
northern pike and walleye from Minnesota lakes. After declining by 37
percent from 1982 to 1992, average mercury concentrations in these fish
began to increase in the mid 1990s.
During the last decade of that period, 1996 to 2006, average mercury
concentrations increased 15 percent. These numbers make one of the
clearest possible arguments for supporting Federal protection, because
we all have a stake in protecting the health of our fish and wildlife,
and we cannot do that if we cannot keep dangerous toxins out of our air
and water supply.
This is important to our economy, but it is also important to
maintaining a certain way of American life, a way of life that many of
us grew up with that we ought to be able to pass on to future
generations. I grew up in a family that valued the outdoors. I was 18
years old before I took any vacation that did not involve a tent or a
camper in one way or another.
This did not just start with my parents. My grandpa was an avid
hunter and fisherman. He worked 1,500 feet underground in the mines in
Ely, MN. You can imagine why for him hunting was his way of life. This
was his way out. When he got above ground from those mines, it was
something he loved to do. I want future generations of Minnesotans to
be able to enjoy these same pastimes. I want them to be able to fish in
clean water, to hunt in abundant forests, and to camp out in our
beautiful wilderness. But I also want them to know the same America we
know, an America that is innovative, that is forward thinking, that is
willing to come together and hammer out hard-won solutions to tough
challenges.
Nowhere is this more important than our quest to move America forward
through smarter energy and environmental policies. I cannot help but
think, this is our generation's version of the space race and energy
race. But the finish line will not be Neil Armstrong placing a flag on
the Moon. It will be building the next generation of energy-efficient
windows, and doing it in northern Minnesota instead of in China, or an
electric car battery factory in Memphis, TN, instead of Mumbai, India,
or a wind turbine manufacturer in San Jose, CA, instead of Sao Paulo,
Brazil.
This is my vision for an energy America that is energy independent, a
stronger, more innovative America. I know you all want to same thing.
That is why I am here on the floor today, because I know we cannot
continue to get by with piecemeal energy policy. We cannot play red
light-green light with our tax incentives as we are doing this year,
and that is why we have to put them in place again.
What we need now is a comprehensive national blueprint for energy
policy, a solution that will serve the integrity of our air, of our
water and natural resources, that gives businesses the incentives to
research and develop new sources of energy that invest in the next
generation of American innovation.
That is our challenge. It is not going to happen overnight, but I
believe we will get it done. We have before; we will do it again. One
way to start is to make sure we extend these energy tax credits.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota.
____________________