[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 3]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 4239]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                       ENERGY AND GLOBAL WARMING

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. NANCY PELOSI

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, March 21, 2001

  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my deep concern about the 
direction President Bush is taking on energy and global warming.
  The overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree that the 
earth's atmosphere is warming, and human activities, especially 
combustion of fossil fuels, are contributing to the warming trend.
  Robert Watson, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 
Change, has said, ``We see changes in climate, we believe humans are 
involved, and we're projecting future climate changes much more 
significant over the next 100 years than over the last 100 years.''
  Coastal areas, such as my district of San Francisco, will face 
serious challenges from global warming. Sea levels are rising both 
because ice sheets are melting and because the ocean is expanding as it 
absorbs heat from the atmosphere. The projections for the rise in sea 
level between 1990 and 2100 range from a low of 3.54 inches to a high 
of 34.64 inches--close to three feet.
  President Bush says, ``My Administration takes the issue of global 
climate change very seriously.'' During his campaign, he pledged to 
reduce emissions from electric utilities, including carbon dioxide. 
Last week, responding to a concerted campaign from the electric utility 
and fossil fuel industries, he broke that promise. The environment, and 
the human communities around the world that will be harmed by climate 
change, will suffer the consequences.
  Instead of encouraging the U.S. to reduce our dependence on the 
fossil fuels that cause global warming, by using energy more 
efficiently
  The Administration has made drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife 
Refuge the centerpiece of their energy policy. They say we need oil 
from the Refuge to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. They even 
point to the electricity shortages in California as a reason to drill 
for oil in the Refuge. But oil is used to generate less than one 
percent of California's electricity, truly a negligible amount.
  Not only would oil from the Refuge do nothing to help California, but 
it would also do very little to increase America's energy supply. Over 
the next half century, the coastal plain of the Refuge would contribute 
less than 1 percent of the oil consumed in the U.S.
  The Administration is using the energy crisis to score victories 
against the environment, both on climate change and drilling in the 
Arctic Refuge. If they can roll over environmental protection in these 
areas, none of our environmental laws and regulations will be safe from 
attack.
  I call on President Bush to stand up for the American people and the 
environment. We must move quickly to counter global warming--our future 
depends upon it.

                          ____________________