    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1997, Book II)]
    [October 1, 1997]
    [Pages 1279-1283]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks to Television Weather Forecasters
    October 1, 1997

        Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President. Welcome to the White House
    on a cool, overcast day, about 60 degrees. [Laughter] How am I doing?
    I'm auditioning. [Laughter] You know, I have to leave this job after 3
    years, and I don't know what I am going to do. I am too young to retire,
    and I'm used to delivering bad news. [Laughter]
        Let me say, we are delighted to have you here in the White House. I
    thank you for coming and for devoting this much of your time to the
    briefings and to giving us a chance to meet with you on what is a
    profoundly important issue and one, frankly, that you, just in the way
    you comment on the events that you cover, may have a real effect on the
    American people.
        People look to you to figure out what they're going to wear in the
    morning and whether something really bad is going to happen. If so, they
    expect a timely warning and advice. So you not only get watched more
    than anyone else on the television news programs to find out about the
    weather, sometimes you are actually saving lives and always performing a
    public service. And we thank you for that.
        I'd also like to thank your outstanding partners at NOAA and the
    National Weather Service. I'm very proud of them and what they have
    done. In the past decade alone, they have doubled the amount of warning
    time we have to prepare for tornadoes, quadrupled the time for flash
    floods. And those are just two of the ways that our people here, with
    NOAA and the National Weather Service and their research and technology,
    have improved our Nation's safety and planning.
        You know, I spent most of my time over the last 4\1/2\ years telling
    the American people that we had to prepare for the 21st century, with
    all of its new opportunities and all of its new challenges, if we want
    to keep the American dream alive for everyone who will work for it and
    maintain our leadership for peace and freedom and keep our country
    coming together with all of its diversity and clash of interests,
    whether it's racial and ethnic or religious or whatever. And we have
    really focused on trying to just get the country to think about how we
    have to build these bridges to the future, how the future will be as we
    want it to be.
        Clearly, to me, this climate change issue is one of the principal
    challenges that we face, a challenge that, if we meet it, will ensure
    the continued vitality of our small planet and the continued success of
    the United States throughout another 100 years; a challenge that should
    we fail to meet it could imperil the lives of

    [[Page 1280]]

    our children and, if not our children, our grandchildren on this planet,
    how they live, how they relate to others, and whether they are able to
    continue to pursue their dreams in the way that our generation has.
        In trying to come to grips with this climate change issue and then
    talk to the American people about it, there are four principles that
    have guided me, and I'd like to go over them very briefly.
        First, I am convinced that the science is solid, saying that the
    climate is warming at a more rapid rate, that this is due in large
    measure to a dramatic increase in the volume of greenhouse gases going
    into the atmosphere, and that nobody knows exactly what the consequences
    are going to be or when they're going to be manifest, but on balance, it
    won't be all that long, and they won't be good. That is sort of a
    summary of what the prevailing scientific opinion is. I know there are
    those in a distinct minority who have a different view, but I am
    persuaded, having carefully looked at all this, that the vast majority
    opinion is, in fact, in all probability accurate. And that, therefore,
    we would be irresponsible not to try to come to grips with the results
    of these findings.
        Now, unlike a lot of weather forecasts, there is something we can do
    about this weather forecast because we've got enough lead time; at least
    we believe we do. So I think that's very important.
        Now, the second thing I want to say is that if we know that the
    majority of our scientists have this view and they say we don't know
    precisely what the bad effects of global climate change are or exactly
    how fast the climate will change, that means we don't know how severe
    the droughts and the floods of the future will be in a particular
    region, but we know that it won't be long and the consequences won't be
    good. If we know that, then it seems to me it is incumbent on the United
    States, when the nations of the world meet in December in Kyoto, Japan,
    to discuss climate change, that we be prepared to commit ourselves to
    realistic and binding limits on our own emissions of greenhouse gases.
        With 4 percent of the world's population, we enjoy over 20 percent
    of the world's wealth. That also explains why we produce over 20 percent
    of the world's greenhouse gases. Those two things are related. Now, I
    believe that we have a responsibility to cut back. First, because the
    world is looking to us for leadership, and secondly, because we won't
    have any influence in getting anybody else to cut back if we don't.
        To give you an example of how significant that is, we've got all
    these other countries that are growing that have far larger populations
    than we do. We estimate that the developing countries of Asia and Latin
    America will grow at roughly 3 times the rate of the United States,
    Japan, Europe, and Canada in the next 20 years. If that is true, we'll
    have to work very hard to maintain our 20 percent share of wealth. But
    even if we do maintain our standard of living and grow our economy, we
    won't be for long the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases. So
    if we expect others to show restraint, we must do the same, and we must
    lead the way.
        The third principle is that we must embrace solutions that allow us
    to continue to grow the economy while we honor our global
    responsibilities and our responsibilities to our own children. We have
    worked too hard here from the first day to revitalize the American
    economy to jeopardize our progress now. And furthermore, we cannot make
    changes that will leave whole chunks of that economy out in the cold
    without having a response to them.
        So the question is, can we emphasize flexible, market-based
    approaches? Can we embrace technology to make energy production more
    efficient and put fewer greenhouse gases into the atmosphere? Is there,
    in short, a way out of astronomical taxes or heavy-handed governmental
    regulation that will permit us to gradually bring down our greenhouse
    gas production and still grow the economy and enjoy what we've been
    enjoying here for the last 4\1/2\ years? I believe the answer is yes.
        Now, let me just give you one example. Typically, about two-thirds
    of the energy produced by powerplants is absolutely lost in the form of
    wasted heat, billowing out in clouds of steam, or pumped out into
    rivers. A company called Trigen has doubled the efficiency of
    powerplants in Philadelphia, Chicago, and Tulsa simply by capturing the
    waste heat and turning it into steam to warm office buildings and fuel
    factories, and in the process, by definition, dramatically cutting the
    volume of greenhouse gases going into the atmosphere to do the same
    amount of work in all those places. That is just one small example.

    [[Page 1281]]

        The Vice President and I have been working with the Big Three
    automakers, our energy labs, and the UAW for years now on a new
    generation of vehicles that we hope will get triple the gas mileage of a
    typical car. Perhaps the design will even include a blend of gasoline
    and electricity in a way that avoids the worst problems of electric
    cars--that is, they don't go very fast, and you have to charge them up
    too often--but gets the benefit of the energy conservation elements of
    the cars.
        All these things are out there, and we found over time--how many
    times have you seen America rise to a challenge? We didn't know how we
    were going to get to the Moon when President Kennedy said we were going
    there, but we got there because we put our resources behind it and we
    started with what we knew and then, in the process of exploring the
    outer limits of what we knew, we found a lot of things we didn't know,
    and we were able to put them to work toward a common mission. This is a
    scientific mission even more important in its implications than our race
    to the Moon in the 1960's. And yet we know a very great deal about how
    to do it without crippling the American economy.
        Finally, because of what I said earlier, because we represent only 4
    percent of the world's population, and because the developing countries
    of Asia, Latin America, and Africa increasingly are going to grow at 3
    times the rate of the developed countries, I believe we have to ask all
    nations, both industrialized and developing, to be a part of this
    process.
        I'm happy that other countries are developing. It's actually good
    for our economy when countries move from the ranks of the very poor
    countries into middle income countries, because then they can do more
    business with us. So it helps us when other people lift their children
    out of poverty and have a brighter future. It also means that they, too,
    however, become bigger energy users, and it imposes on us even heavier
    responsibilities, all of us, to change our patterns of energy use so
    that all of us can grow our economies without contributing to this
    greenhouse gas problem.
        But because of the growth rates in the future, both the population
    and economic growth and the associated energy use, we could have a great
    deal of effort by Europe, by the United States, by Canada, by Japan and
    still be in very difficult straits on this climate issue within 40
    years, unless we get real solid support from the developing countries.
    Should we make allowances for their growth? Of course we should. But in
    some way, in a fair and appropriate way, they should also participate in
    this agreement. Now, if that doesn't happen, then their emissions, the
    emissions of the developing world, will exceed the emissions of the
    developed world by about 2035.
        Now, those are the things I want to do. I want to try to get America
    to accept the fact that the majority scientific opinion, the
    overwhelming majority scientific opinion is accurate. I want us to make
    a commitment, therefore, to go to Kyoto with binding targets. I want us
    to implement our commitment in a way that continues to grow the economy
    in a different way but still maintains our robust entrepreneurial
    economy. And I want to find a fair way for the developing countries to
    participate. Those are my four objectives.
        On Monday we're going to try to take another step toward putting
    these principles into effect. We've invited noted economists and
    industrial leaders, State and local governmental leaders, and leaders
    from the environmental and scientific communities here to the White
    House conference--for a White House Conference on Climate Change. Our
    goals are simple. We want the American people to understand the
    importance of the challenge and to allow outside experts to help inform
    the policy process so we'll make the best decisions.
        Now, I'd like to ask you to think about this in terms of the work
    you do. When we had the terrible floods in the Dakotas and Minnesota not
    very long ago, a young Congressman from South Dakota was in my office--
    happened to be a member of the other party. I don't believe there's a
    partisan aspect to the weather--[laughter]--although some days it seems
    stormier than others around here. [Laughter] And this young man said--I
    was talking about climate change, and he said, ``Mr. President, we've
    had three 100-year floods in the last 9 years.'' He said, ``Does that
    mean I get to go 500 years without one?'' [Laughter] And you'd be amazed
    how many people just sort of, from their anecdotal, personal
    experiences, have this sense that there is more instability in the
    climate than there used to be and understand that it has something to do
    with the changes in the relationship of where we live and whatever
    little patch of land we occupy and this larger globe and the atmosphere
    which envelops it.

    [[Page 1282]]

        So what I hope will happen at the climate change conference I also
    hope has happened a little here today. What I want to do is to deal with
    the central political problem here. And I don't mean political in terms
    of party politics; I mean political in terms of how the body politic,
    how our society responds to this. If we have a problem that is a clear
    and present danger that we can see and feel, we get right on it. How did
    we get to the Moon? Because the Russians beat us into space, so we knew
    how to keep score, we would beat them to the Moon. And if we didn't,
    since there was a cold war and nuclear weapons, goodness knows what the
    consequences would be.
        Now, it is much harder when you have no manifestation of this
    problem unless you happen to live in a place which has experienced an
    unusual number of or intensity of weather aberrations. And, even so,
    they go away, and then you can start thinking about something else. It
    is difficult when you are not quite sure how to keep score and you don't
    know who the enemy is.
        All of you live with the weather as a fact of life and a
    precondition for life on our planet in a way that nearly no one else in
    the world does. The men and women of America who tune in and listen to
    you talk about the weather and rely upon you are either enlightened or
    entertained or disappointed by whatever it is you say and however you
    say it. Most of them are sort of like Sergeant Joe Friday; they just
    want the facts.
        This is a case where people need the facts and the context. Where if
    all you do is just try to get people to start thinking about this--you
    may not even know how you feel about it, or exactly what you think
    should be done--that's okay, but I would ask you to think about whether
    you should ask people to think about this, because our country always
    gets it right.
        We always get it right once we focus on it. But right now, while the
    scientists see the train coming through the tunnel, most Americans
    haven't heard the whistle blowing. They don't sense that it's out there
    as a big issue. And I really believe, as President, one of my most
    important jobs is to tell the American people what the big issues are
    that we have to deal with. If we understand what the issues are, if we
    start with a certain set of principles, we nearly always come to the
    right place.
        That's what we did--we passed the first balanced budget in a
    generation earlier this year, partly because we had already gotten the
    deficit down by over 85 percent, but partly because we got people in
    both parties to agree that there's a goal: We're going to balance the
    budget. And then the Republicans said, ``Here are the things we want in
    the balanced budget plan,'' and the Democrats said, ``Here are the
    things we want,'' and we found out a way to reconcile them and still do
    the most important thing, which was to balance the budget, and we did
    it.
        That's how we have to deal with this climate change issue. We have
    to say, ``There's a challenge out there. We have to respond to it.
    Here's the principles we want in our response.'' And then we have to get
    after it. But we can't do it until we build the awareness of the
    American people.
        So I hope you will think about how your work has been affected by
    what we believe is going on in the climate. And again, I don't ask for
    you to advocate or do anything outside whatever your own convictions or
    parameters of permissible speech are, but I do think it's very
    important, since you have more influence than anybody does on how the
    American people think about this, that at least you know what you
    believe and how you think we should proceed.
        Thank you for being here, and thank you for your leadership.
        The first time I ever really thought about this issue in this way
    was when I was reading Al Gore's book--[laughter]--which preceded our
    partnership. Sometimes he thinks all the great things he did preceded
    our partnership. [Laughter] I think most of the greatest things he's
    done occurred after our partnership started. [Laughter] I remember so
    well--one of the first times--we have lunch once a week, and I remember
    one week we were having lunch very early in this term--this is over 4
    years ago--and he said, ``Just in case you missed it in my book, here's
    the chart''--[laughter]--``of how much we are increasing the emission of
    greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and here's 10,000 years, and
    here's the last 50,'' like that.
        So I can now pass Al Gore's climate test--[laughter]--and I'm very
    proud of that. I think we should be proud that we have a Vice President
    who not only cares about this issue but knows enough about it to have an
    opinion worthy of the respect of any scientist in the world.

    [[Page 1283]]

        Ladies and gentlemen, the Vice President.

    Note: The President spoke at 2:10 p.m. in the East Room at the White
    House.