[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 56 (Tuesday, March 28, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H1469-H1470]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           ENERGY AND CLIMATE RIPE FOR BIPARTISAN COOPERATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Peters) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Speaker, energy security and climate action are ripe 
for bipartisan cooperation in this Congress. Unfortunately, H.R. 1 is a 
partisan grab bag that fails to meet the challenge before us and 
reverses our climate progress in many cases.
  H.R. 1 would eliminate the methane emissions reduction program, the 
greenhouse gas reduction fund, and energy efficiency and 
electrification incentives that reduce energy demand and costs for 
Americans, all vital components of the Inflation Reduction Act.
  Last week, climate scientists issued their starkest warning yet that 
the world must cut emissions by 60 percent by 2035 to limit the 
planet's rise in temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius. We don't have time 
to waste refighting the battles of last year.
  Some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have said they 
don't want a bill that favors one type of energy over the other. The 
problem is that their bill, H.R. 1, explicitly favors fossil fuels. It 
ramps up oil and gas leasing and exploration over the clean, affordable 
fuels and technologies of the future.

  Right now, pipelines that carry fossil fuels are already expedited 
and given regulatory exemptions, while transmission lines, which 
transmit electricity long distances from all energy sources, don't get 
the same preferential treatment. The current system favors fossil 
fuels, risking our energy and climate security.
  Look, it is not all bad. There are pieces of H.R. 1 that I believe we 
can work together on--a better process for determining the level of 
review to apply to a project, reusing existing data instead of 
reinventing the wheel at each step, and creating presumptive timelines 
for reviews so that projects are not indefinitely stalled. I am more 
than willing to admit that NEPA, a law from 1970, can be updated to 
meet today's challenges. In fact, clean energy permit reform is 
required to meet our climate goals, but this proposal fails to match 
the scale of our climate challenge.
  The current power grid took 150 years to build. To get to net-zero 
emissions by 2050, we have to triple its size in the next 30 years.
  According to Americans for a Clean Energy Grid, North America has 
built just 7 gigawatts of interregional transmission since 2014, less 
than half of that in the United States, so let's say 4. South America 
has built 22, Europe 44, and China 260 gigawatts of interregional 
transmission.
  We currently have enough wind, solar, and storage projects in the 
pipeline to power nearly 85 percent of our economy, but 80 percent of 
those projects could be canceled due to insufficient transmission.
  This decade, we will need to deploy solar and wind at five to six 
times our historical record pace. We need to be laser-focused on making 
it easier, not harder, to build clean energy because all the money in 
the world can't solve the climate crisis if we leave it in the bank or 
don't move fast enough.
  Our country prides itself on accomplishing big things together, 
whether it is winning a world war, constructing an interstate highway, 
or discovering the next big medical breakthrough. During World War II, 
San Diego war factories built a bomber an hour to help combat fascism 
and support our Allies. During COVID-19, we developed a vaccine in less 
than 2 years when 10 to 15 years is the norm. Today, we are debating 
whether a decade is an appropriate amount of time to construct one 
single transmission line, an offshore wind facility, or a geothermal 
plant.
  With a climate crisis that requires us to move at scale and speed 
orders of magnitude greater than ever before, we can't be bogged down 
in reviews and litigation before we even begin to build a given 
project.
  We can fix our judicial review processes to protect vulnerable 
communities while preventing wealthy NIMBYs, corporations, and bad 
actors from blocking essential clean energy projects, which is what is 
happening right now.
  We can reduce the level of review for climate projects on non-
sensitive land

[[Page H1470]]

while ensuring that polluting projects remain heavily scrutinized.
  What we can't do is simply stand by and accept the status quo that is 
bogging down clean-energy projects that will combat extreme weather and 
climate catastrophes that threaten vulnerable communities, endangered 
species, and stable economies.
  Mr. Speaker, I am ready for us to get to this vote on a bill that has 
no chance of becoming law to get it out of the way so that both sides 
can come together to work on a bipartisan solution. I invite any of my 
colleagues to come to me and to talk to Chairman Westerman, who has 
been working with me on that kind of bipartisan solution. The future of 
our planet depends on it. We have no time to waste.


                Welcoming Joe Garcia and Michael Morasco

  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Speaker, I acknowledge and welcome Joe Garcia and 
Michael Morasco, members of the Escondido City Council, to Washington, 
D.C. It is my great honor to now represent that wonderful city in 
Congress. I look forward to working with them.

                          ____________________