[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 31, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6102-S6103]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CLIMATE CHANGE
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I rise again for the 41st time to ask
my colleagues to wake up to the threat of climate change. Today I come
to discuss the serious risks that climate change poses to our energy
sector.
It is no controversial idea that our climate affects our energy
infrastructure. In the Northeast, when we think about what causes power
outages, we naturally think of bad weather. In fact, the American
Society of Civil Engineers reports that between 2007 and 2012, weather-
related events were the main cause of electrical outages in the United
States.
That same report said: ``The average cost of a one-hour power outage
is just over $1000 for a commercial business,'' just for 1 hour. This
takes a serious toll on our economy.
A recent Department of Energy report has highlighted how sensitive
our energy sector is to climate change and to extreme weather.
In September 2011, the Department of Energy reports:
High temperatures and high electricity demand-related
loading tripped a transformer and transmission line near
Yuma, Arizona, starting a chain of events that led to
shutting down the San Onofre nuclear power plant with power
lost to the entire San Diego County distribution system,
totaling approximately 2.7 million power customers, with
outages as long as 12 hours.
Earlier that summer:
Consecutive days of triple-digit heat and record drought in
Texas resulted in the Electric Reliability Council of Texas
declaring power emergencies due to a large number of
unplanned power plant outages and at least one power plant
reducing its output.
The report says the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Athens, AL, ``had
to reduce power output because the temperature of the Tennessee River,
the body of water into which the plant discharges, was too high to
discharge heated cooling water from the reactor without risking
ecological harm to the river.''
This happened in 2007, 2010, in 2011, and, in some cases, the power
production was reduced for nearly 2 months. The Department of Energy
reports that ``the cost of replacement power was estimated at $50
million.''
It is not just power generation, energy exploration has been affected
too. The DOE report explains that last July: ``In the midst of one of
the worst droughts in American history, certain companies that extract
natural gas and oil via hydraulic fracturing faced higher water costs
or were denied access to water for six weeks or more in several States,
including Kansas, Texas, Pennsylvania, and North Dakota.''
It was a similar story in the fall of 2011:
Due to extreme drought conditions, the city of Grand
Prairie, Texas, became the first municipality to ban the use
of city water for hydraulic fracturing. Other local water
districts in Texas followed suit by implementing similar
restrictions limiting city water use during drought
conditions.
In July of 2011, the report recounts that:
ExxonMobil's Silvertip pipeline, buried beneath the
Yellowstone River in Montana, was torn apart by flood-caused
debris, spilling oil into the river and disrupting crude oil
transport in the region. The property damage cost was $135
million.
Senator Vitter, our ranking member on the Environment and Public
Works Committee, has told us that 18 percent of the Nation's oil supply
passes through his home State of Louisiana at Port Fourchon. A recent
Government Accountability Office report found that the only access road
to that port is closed 3\1/2\ days a year on average because of
flooding, effectively shutting down that port. With sea level rise
climbing due to climate change, NOAA is now projecting that within 15
years portions of that highway will flood an average of 30 times each
year--again shutting down access to that port 30 times a year.
Vital infrastructure such as powerplants, power lines, roads, and
pipelines are all designed to stand up to historical weather patterns.
What happens when the weather stops following historical patterns?
According to the draft National Climate Assessment:
U.S. average temperature has increased by about 1.5 degrees
Fahrenheit since 1895; more than 80% of this increase has
occurred since 1980. The most recent decade was the nation's
hottest on record.
Oceans and other bodies of water are warming right along with the
atmosphere.
The seasons are shifting. Research shows that in the last two decades
the frost-free season has increased in every region of the contiguous
United States compared to the average between 1901 and 1960.
In the Southwest, the record shows the frost-free season has
increased 3 weeks and the western wildfire season has expanded by more
than 2 months since the 1970s. Precipitation patterns and the
availability of water are changing throughout the Nation. One study
concluded that snow in the western mountains is melting, on average, 1
to 4 weeks earlier now compared to the 1950s.
The draft National Climate Assessment shows that the amount of rain
falling in what we call heavy precipitation events or, more
colloquially, downpours is up in every region of the Nation. It is up
45 percent in the Midwest and 74 percent in the Northeast.
Sea level is rising about 8 inches, on average, globally, but in some
parts of the country it is much higher. NOAA reports that mean waters
off the Galveston, TX, coast are rising more than 2 feet per century.
At Grand Isle, LA, the rate is nearly 3 feet per century.
These aren't just projections of what is to come, these are actual
measurements of changes that have already happened or are happening
around us. The result is that we have an energy infrastructure built
for a different climate than the one which now exists and the one which
is to come. Conditions are only predicted to get worse.
The threat to our energy sector from changes in the climate should be
neither controversial nor partisan. There are a lot of commonsense
solutions here. Adapting our infrastructure for climate change is
smart, and it will save us from costly repairs.
Investing in energy efficiency by reducing the demand for power will
relieve pressure on the burdened systems. Investing in a diverse energy
sector will protect against the unique vulnerabilities of specific
types of power sources.
Rhode Island is part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative,
nicknamed Reggie, along with eight other Northern States. Our region
caps carbon emissions and sells permits to powerplants to emit
greenhouse gases, which creates economic incentives for both States and
utilities to invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy
development. These efforts also reduce load demand on the region's
electrical grid.
We are proud of the effort we are making in New England. I know a lot
of States are working just as hard. I say to my colleagues, our home
States are hampered by the inaction in Congress.
We have received credible and convincing warnings. We have received
compelling calls to act. The overwhelming majority of the scientific
community recognizes climate change is real and we are causing it.
Our national security and intelligence community, our faith leaders,
major American corporations, including the insurance and reinsurance
industry and most Americans all agree we need to act. It is time for
Congress to wake up, do its work to slow the onslaught of climate
change, and to prepare for what are now unavoidable, inevitable
effects. Yet here in Congress we sleepwalk on.
This is an issue I know hits home in your home State in very
different ways than it hits home in my State. But In each of our own
ways, our States are already experiencing the hit from climate change.
It is caused by carbon pollution that we are putting into the air, that
our companies, our smokestacks are launching into the atmosphere. It
changes our weather, changes our temperature, changes our seasons,
changes our oceans, changes our waterways, changes our weather, and
changes our lives.
The tragedy is that we sleepwalk on because we are unwilling to
address the special interests that are preventing us from taking the
action that all Americans need. This is the archetypical
[[Page S6103]]
fight between the public good, between an important public security
issue and a private special interest that is defending itself, that is
defending its right to pollute, that is defending its ability to
compromise our atmosphere, compromise our health, and compromise our
great oceans and waters. This should be an easy struggle. This should
be an easy struggle, but it is not. And it will be a mark of shame on
this generation, and it will be a mark of shame on this building that
given the choice between the clear information from the scientists, the
clear experience of what is happening in all of our States and the
power of the special interests, we ignored the first and yielded to the
power of those special interests.
I yield the floor.
____________________