[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16084-16086]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                 ENERGY

  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I am in the Chamber to speak to some 
amendments to the Energy bill which the Senate debated last week and is 
continuing to debate this week.
  The first is an amendment I offered last week, along with Senator 
Snowe, where we are joined by many Senators, including Senator 
Bingaman, who is managing the bill on the majority side, as well as 
Senator Collins and Senator Coleman, as well as Senators Kerry, Boxer, 
and Carper.
  There are a number of people supporting this amendment throughout the 
Senate because they understand if we are going to discuss any kind of 
climate change policy going forward, we at least need to have accurate 
information. Other countries are doing this quite successfully.
  The idea is to have one gathering place for information, and that 
would be our EPA. The amendment gives them latitude to set this up as 
they would like, but the idea is to have one place for a carbon 
registry or, to make it easier, a carbon counter. I figure if Weight 
Watchers can have a calorie counter, we can have a carbon counter.
  Now, what is interesting about this is the type of business support 
we have seen for action in this area. Obviously, we have seen action 
across our States--in places such as my State of Minnesota, in places 
such as California and Arizona and New Jersey--all over this country.
  I have often said the States have taken the lead, that they have been 
more than the laboratories of democracy, they have been the aggressors. 
One of our national magazines this week has a picture of Governor 
Schwarzenegger and Mayor Bloomberg on the front cover, and it says: 
``Who Needs Washington?'' Because they are moving so quickly? Well, 
that cover says it all.
  We need to be relevant. We need to lead the national energy policy. 
We need to at least gather the information we need to make good 
decisions about climate change policy going forward.
  Now, as for the businesses, in January, it made quite a big splash 
when some American businesses came together to form the U.S. Climate 
Action Partnership. They actually urged Congress to fast track a 
greenhouse gas inventory and registry. They asked it be done by the end 
of this year.
  With my short time in the Senate, I realize you cannot wait until 
September or December to get this idea passed. If you are actually 
going to get it done by the end of the year, you need to get it passed 
now.
  Now, let me go through some of the companies that are part of this 
U.S. CAP group that is advocating for change, that is acknowledging 
climate change is an issue, and is advocating for a national registry. 
They include

[[Page 16085]]

Alcoa; American Industry Group, or AIG; Boston Scientific Corporation; 
BP America; Caterpillar; ConocoPhillips; Deere & Company; the Dow 
Chemical Company; Duke Energy; DuPont; General Electric; General Motors 
Corporation; Johnson & Johnson; Marsh, Inc.; PepsiCo; PG&E Corporation; 
PNM Resources; Shell; and Siemens Corporation. These are the kinds of 
companies I am talking about.
  Now, there has been some concern expressed over this bill by the 
National Chamber of Commerce, and I have to tell my colleagues it kind 
of surprises me. First of all, we have a number of good business 
Democrats as well as good business Republicans on this bill who 
understand that you don't want 31 States doing their own national 
climate registry. I don't have a problem with it because there is no 
choice. It is the right thing to do. But, in fact, it is much better if 
we do this on a national basis involving the U.S. Government.
  Responding to the challenges these businesses laid out, the 
Klobuchar-Snowe-Bingaman amendment establishes a national greenhouse 
gas registry that will gather and consolidate consistent, transparent, 
and reliable data on greenhouse gas emissions at the facility level. 
The amendment, as I mentioned, requires the Environmental Protection 
Agency to consider cost and coordinate with existing Federal and State 
programs in implementing the registry.
  The new registry only covers major emitting facilities and major 
sources of fossil fuel. Utilities already reporting under the Clean Air 
Act would not have to report their data twice.
  How this is working now is a patchwork of reporting. Some industries 
are reporting to the Energy Department, some industries are reporting 
to the EPA, some are reporting every 3 years, some are reporting every 
year, and it makes it very difficult to get the kind of greenhouse gas 
emissions data we need to make adequate decisions about climate change 
legislation.
  Let me say this bill, with three Republicans and several Democrats on 
it, does not in any way dictate what our next step will be for climate 
change. It puts the data in place as these major companies asked for 
and fast-tracks it by the end of the year.
  I also note that for facilities facing burdensome costs in purchasing 
advanced monitoring equipment, the EPA would accept basic fossil fuel 
data, which is collected by businesses for general accounting purposes. 
The EPA would then calculate emissions based on that fuel data.
  The amendment also specifies that confidential business information 
would not be published; however, we will have a Web site which would at 
least give the greenhouse gas emissions data to the public.
  There was a recent report by National Public Radio which showed that 
a reporter tried to find out who are some of the larger emitters of 
greenhouse gases in this country. She was unable to figure it out. She 
could figure it out in Canada. Because greenhouse gases are invisible, 
it is very difficult to do by looking at businesses. The registry 
excludes small businesses as defined by the Small Business 
Administration, which is less than 500 employees that emit less than 
10,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas per year.
  This amendment makes a lot of sense. It is a commonsense amendment, 
and I am going to be urging my colleagues to support it in the next 2 
days. If we can't take this simple step when we are looking at an 
energy bill, as we are looking at a new direction for energy policy and 
as we are looking at great new ideas for buildings and appliances--as I 
like to say, I heard somewhere of building a fridge to the 21st 
century--as we look at the possibility of raising the gas mileage 
standards and setting standards in a way that will spur investment 
across this country, we have to put in place at least the building 
blocks, sensible building blocks toward a new climate change policy.
  The other thing I would like to address today on this vital topic of 
energy security is the role I believe renewable fuels ought to play in 
meeting our Nation's future energy needs.
  The United States today spends more than $200,000 per minute on 
foreign oil. That is $200,000 per minute. That is $13 million per hour. 
The money is shipped out of our economy, adding to our enormous trade 
deficit, and leaving us vulnerable to unstable parts of the world to 
meet our basic energy needs.
  Oil companies would have you believe that energy security is decades 
away; that we need some new technology, some vehicle of the future 
before we can break the stranglehold oil has on us. I believe we are 
going to see this new technology. I believe we are going to see these 
vehicles of the future. But meanwhile, we can't sit and wait and wait 
and wait. We have to start now.
  Any Minnesota farmer can tell you that one way to go about this is 
with homegrown renewable fuels. They are here today. Ask someone in 
Brazil, and they will tell you that with sugarcane, they become energy 
independent. They moved to homegrown energy. In our State, they are 
ready to use this homegrown energy, and they believe it will help us to 
break free from our addiction to oil.
  Consider this: In 2006, ethanol offset the need for 170 million 
barrels of imported oil and kept $11 billion in rural America. Consider 
this as well: A flexible fuel vehicle driven on about 85 percent 
ethanol fuel offsets 477 gallons of gas per year. A hybrid electric 
vehicle saves 94 gallons. That means that flex-fuel vehicles run on 
high blends of renewable fuels are by far our best near-term 
opportunity for energy independence. Obviously, the best is to combine 
these vehicles.
  Renewable fuels also have tremendous potential to revitalize our 
rural economy. Ethanol has been nothing short of a revolution in our 
State. We have 16 ethanol plants up and running and 5 more under 
construction. By 2008, Minnesota will be producing 1 billion gallons of 
ethanol each year, and that will generate $5 billion for the State's 
economy and support 18,000 jobs.
  Last year, my daughter did a report for her sixth grade class on 
ethanol, and she interviewed a number of farmers throughout Minnesota. 
She drew a big picture with the State of Minnesota on it. She had two 
little dots designating Minneapolis and St. Paul. Then she had this 
huge circle that said Pine City, home of farmer Tom Peterson.
  Well, that is the future for rural America. That is what is 
revitalizing so many of our towns. Of course, we started with corn-
based ethanol and soybean-based biodiesel. But now we are moving to a 
new level with cellulosic ethanol which can involve all kinds of 
things. We are focusing on switchgrass and prairie grass and doing this 
in a way that is good for our environment and carbon neutral and 
creates habitat for wildlife, something our hunters in Minnesota are 
very interested in. I know the Presiding Officer's brother who lives in 
Minnesota is especially interested as a hunter in having that habitat 
that we need.
  In spite of the clear advantages of renewable fuels to our economy 
and our energy security, we face a chicken-and-egg-type problem when it 
comes to the challenge of making them available to more drivers. The 
automakers haven't traditionally wanted to sell flex-fuel vehicles in 
areas where there are no E85 pumps, and the gas stations don't want to 
put in E85 pumps when there are no flex-fuel vehicles. That is why I am 
so pleased the amendments that came out of the Commerce Committee, on 
which I serve, included not only the increase in gas mileage standard 
but also a requirement that by 2015, 80 percent of the vehicles 
produced be flex fuel.
  In order to ensure that the drivers who purchase the flexible-fuel 
vehicles know they can use E85, our language requires automakers to put 
that information on the fuel tank cap and to put a flex-fuel emblem on 
the back of the vehicle that drivers will be able to recognize.
  On the other end of this problem--the ability for consumers to fill 
up their cars with ethanol and biodiesel--it is crucial that Congress 
act to provide more American drivers with access to renewable fuel 
pumps.
  Right now, Minnesota ranks first in the country for E85 pumps. We 
have more than 300--I think the last number

[[Page 16086]]

I heard was 314--of the 1,200 pumps nationally, far more than any other 
State. That is great for Minnesota, and it shows the vision of our 
State government in Minnesota, but it limits the positive impact that 
renewable fuels can and should have on the entire Nation's security. If 
we are serious about finding alternatives to foreign oil, we should 
ensure that drivers in every State have access to E85 and biodiesel.
  That is why I wish to speak to two amendments to the Energy bill 
aimed at making renewable fuels available across the country. Senator 
Bond and I have introduced an amendment that would provide grants to 
promote the installation of E85 biodiesel pumps at gas stations 
nationwide. I would also like to thank Senator Voinovich, Senator 
Hagel, and Senator Kerry for their support of this amendment.
  In past years, Congress has only provided a small amount of money 
each year for E85 infrastructure, and last year, even that small amount 
of funding was cut. As a Nation, we are stuck in a rut. Less than 1 
percent of the gas stations sell E85. It is time for the country to 
make a serious investment in renewable fuels. That is going to mean, as 
I said, more flex-fuel vehicles. It is also going to mean investment in 
cellulosic ethanol, acknowledging we are not going to have all this 
ethanol based on corn and we are not going to have just soybean-based 
biodiesel; that there are all kinds of possibilities, as we move 
forward, for how we are going to get our ethanol. We need to be 
creative about that and we need to put the investments in place and put 
the standards in place.
  But what we need, if we are going to do this, is the pumps on the 
ground. That is why Senator Bond and I have an amendment to give grants 
for ethanol and biodiesel pumps. It would be enough for 1,000 to 2,000 
new pumps, which would nearly double or triple what we have now.
  I am also introducing an amendment that would block oil company 
tactics to keep renewable fuels out of gas stations. I have heard from 
gas stations in Minnesota that their franchise contracts make it 
difficult to sell ethanol and biodiesel, so many of them can't even do 
it. Here are some examples. Remember, these are just dealing with gas 
stations in which they have franchise contracts involving the oil 
companies: They are not allowed to sell renewable fuels under the main 
canopy that bears the oil company name. They are not allowed to convert 
the pumps they already have to sell E85 or B20. They can't put up signs 
to let customers know they have renewable fuel or how much it costs.
  That is why I call it the ``Right to Retail Renewable Fuel.'' Look 
what we have on the other side. We have these oil companies. Last year, 
Exxon made $29 billion in profit--a record--and the big five oil 
companies made $120 billion. Now they are blaming ethanol, the small 
amount--these 1,200 pumps across the country at 170 gas stations--they 
are blaming that for the reason they can't do anything about their 
refineries. It is outrageous.
  We need to encourage competition. That is what I am trying to do with 
the right to retail renewable fuel amendment. This amendment would 
prohibit oil companies from placing restrictions on where and how 
renewable fuels can be sold to gas stations. This will ensure that 
franchise owners across the country have the ability to make ethanol 
and biodiesel available to their customers.
  In conclusion, I believe that ethanol and biodiesel have tremendous 
potential to meet the energy needs of our country. Again, I think of 
the ethanol industry akin to the beginning of the computer industry 
when we had the big computers in the room. That is where we are. It is 
going to become more efficient, it is going to become better for the 
environment, and it is going to become less costly as we move forward. 
That is why we are moving into things such as cellulosic ethanol that 
can be grown on marginal farmland that is carbon neutral and that takes 
less energy to produce.
  I believe these alternative fuels will move us toward energy 
independence in the immediate term--not decades from now. I believe we 
ought to use the Energy bill before us as an opportunity to invest in 
renewable fuels and to make them available to every American driver. I 
believe we should be investing in the farmers and the workers of middle 
America and not the Middle East.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that going 
forward, the time be equally divided between Republicans and Democrats.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority time has expired.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Klobuchar). The senior Senator from New 
Mexico is recognized.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________