Hearing of the Environment Subcommittee and Oversight Subcommittee of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee - Opening Statement of Rep. Biggs, Hearing on at What Cost? Examining the Social Cost of Carbon

Hearing

Welcome to today's joint subcommittee hearing entitled "At What
Cost? Examining the Social Cost of Carbon." Today we will examine the previous
administration's determination of the Social Cost of Carbon, or SCC, and explore why
the calculated value is flawed.
Energy is the bedrock of our society. And yet, the SCC estimate of the previous
administration has killed jobs, limited innovation, and resulted in higher energy costs for
American families--all in exchange for benefits that are negligible at best, and
nonexistent at worst.
The Obama Administration's Interagency Working Group, which ultimately established
an enormously high SCC of $37 per ton of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere, relied on
outdated economic models and failed to take into account the White House's own
Office of Management and Budget, or OMB, guidelines for cost-benefit analysis.
Quite simply, the working group used numbers that got them the results they wanted in
order to advance some of the most expensive and expansive regulations ever written.
In pushing forward this political agenda, the working group acted irresponsibly. It also
allowed the previous administration to implement stringent and costly regulations
without a scientific basis
As we will learn today, the SCC working group ignored two major OMB
recommendations for federal agency rulemaking. First, it failed use a 7 percent
discount rate, and instead relied on rates of 2.5%, 3%, and 5%; and, second, it ignored
the guideline to report cost-benefit analysis from a domestic perspective. If nothing
else is taken away from what will be a very technical hearing, I hope it will be these
two very basic flaws.
The low long-term discount rate established by the previous administration
fundamentally disregards the notion that the American economy is resilient and can
respond to potential future threats with technological development and innovation.
As to the flaw of the previous administration's decision to focus on CO2 emissions from
a global perspective, this approach leaves the U.S. footing the bill for costly regulations
that are based on benefits conferred to other countries. It is simply not right forAmericans to be bearing the brunt of costs when the majority of benefits will be
conferred away from home.
By ignoring OMB guidelines, the current SCC models leave critical components out of
the discussion. If the OMB guidelines would have been followed, the social cost of
carbon would be significantly lower.
The previous administration disregarded scientific integrity by overestimating climate
change resulting from greenhouse gas emissions. In order to push an expensive
regulatory agenda, the administration inflated the SCC to justify costly regulations in
response to the allegedly terrible damage CO2 emissions will cause in the future.
The SCC is nothing but a one-sided manipulation of parameters to fit the policy-driven
agendas of the previous of the previous administration. These alarmist tactics need to
stop. Today's hearing is intended to uncover the real truth and deception behind the
SCC.
America's strength emanates from our resilience and flexibility. Attempts to justify
government regulations over industry innovations hinders growth and development. I
look forward to working with the Trump administration to renew faith in American
ingenuity and technological development.

Source