BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, thank you.

I am sorry I didn't hear all of the remarks from my friend from Illinois because at the end, he pointed out that there are some on my side of the aisle who acknowledge that we are dealing with a changing climate and that those impacts are real. Well, this Senator is one of them.

I come from a State where we see it. It is real. It is tangible. It impacts not only the land and the water but also the people. We see that in the Arctic. I am one who is approaching this from the perspective of pragmatism and practical solutions we can move forward with.

While I like aspirations, and we all have to have goals, I want us to make sure we are not setting ourselves up for a situation where the expectations are not realistic.

The Senator mentioned the vote we will have later this afternoon. I have suggested that it is important for us around here to make sure that we don't distract from those pragmatic and practical solutions and that we don't amp up the rhetoric so high that we can't get ourselves to a place where we can work cooperatively and collaboratively to get to these solutions. If we are going to address it in a meaningful way, it must be bipartisan, it must be enduring, it must move from one administration to another, and, again, it has to be something we can work toward with meaningful steps.

I would like to take just a couple of minutes today to speak to some of the things and some of the areas in which I think Congress can actually make some progress as we look to the issue of climate change.

I have refrained from speaking specifically to the Green New Deal as it has been laid down and introduced because I don't see it as a real and viable solution that has been fully considered as a proposal. There certainly is a lot of aspiration to it. There certainly is a lot of aspiration, but I have kind of refrained from piling on, if you will, despite my concerns about the costs of the deal. I think we can go back and forth in terms of how much it really costs individual Americans, what is the cost to society, and what is the cost of not doing something, but I think those are all kind of almost false in a sense because it is not that we are not doing anything. I think we need to establish that. If we were to enact and move forward with every aspect of the proposal as it has been laid out, is it possible? Is it possible?

It is certainly a worthy goal for us in this country to be transitioning to more renewable and cleaner sources of energy. We are doing that. We are certainly seeing that as the cost of solar is coming down and as we are seeing more wind being harnessed. I think we have great potential in more hydropower, more geothermal, and the technologies that could be coming our way when it comes to ocean energy.

Surely we need to be moving in that direction, but is it affordable? Is it possible to transition to 100 percent renewable energy and electric vehicles over the next 10 years? I don't believe it is physically possible for us to do it in 10 years. So are we setting something up so that young people, like the Senate pages who are listening to me, will say: Well, sure, you should be able to do that in 10 years. You say you can. So if you haven't done it, you have failed.

This is not a question of whether we succeeded or failed but whether every step we are taking is moving us in a more positive direction. Shouldn't it be a worthy goal to maximize our energy efficiencies within our buildings and how we access our power? Absolutely. But is it possible? Would we be able to physically retrofit every building in America to maximize energy and water efficiency over the next 10 years? I don't believe we can do that in 10 years.

Aspirations are good, and goals are good, but when you look at what has been specifically laid out in this Green New Deal, it is more than just transitioning to renewables or electric vehicles or greater energy efficiency. It calls for a Federal jobs guarantee. It focuses on healthcare, education, wages, trade, and a lot more. It suggests unprecedented levels of prosperity and economic security for all people of the United States. That is wonderful. I would love that. But how do we get there? What is the feasible mechanism for accomplishing this goal?

Let's be honest with where we are and recognize the potential cost of this Green New Deal. Whether you want to peg it in the price range of $50 trillion to $90 trillion over the next 10 years--I am not going to get caught up in those numbers because that is not going to happen. It is not going to happen.

What I really hope doesn't happen is that this discussion about the Green New Deal or whatever you want to tag it--that we are not distracted from the necessary and important conversation we must have about climate change and the practical steps we can take to address it. Let's talk about that.

I mentioned to my friend from Illinois that we see it in Alaska. We say that we are ground zero for climate change. The Arctic is warming two to three times the rate of the rest of the world. We are seeing glaciers retreat. Permafrost is thawing. We are seeing sea levels rise. Wildlife migration patterns are changing. We are seeing different invasive species. With the water temperature, we are seeing ocean acidification. Villages are being threatened by coastal erosion and in need of relocation. For us, this is real. Climate change is real.

If you don't want to use the words ``climate change,'' you don't have to use the words ``climate change,'' but just come up and take a look, because something is happening. We are seeing it.

Engaging in rhetoric that is either fantasy or denial really doesn't help those who are facing this. I think there are some policies that both parties can support that I think can make a real difference in real time.

I want to first start off by acknowledging that we are not in a situation and a place where we are doing nothing. That is not the case. We are. We are working on policies, and over the course of years, we have put policies in place that are making a difference and will make a difference moving forward. It is not as though we are starting from scratch. Just look at where we were last year. We expanded the tax credit for carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration, CCUS. We increased funding for the Department of Energy to research and develop cleaner technologies. We passed legislation to promote basic science, nuclear energy, hydropower, and more. Many of us support the production, use, and export of clean burning natural gas, which can substantially help reduce global emissions. That was just last year in terms of the policies we put in place that are moving us forward in the right direction.

You don't always hear about it, but we have a pretty decent story to tell here in this country. We are leading the world in greenhouse gas reductions. Despite an uptick we saw last year, in 2018, our emissions have fallen significantly over the past decade.

We have made progress, but we need to be making more progress and, in my view, more accelerated progress. What more can we do? That is a conversation we are having in the Energy Committee. I have been working with my ranking member, Senator Manchin from West Virginia. It is a conversation we have been having on both sides of the aisle. We had a hearing on the impact on the electric sector due to climate change. We had that hearing about 10 days or so ago. We are planning on having others. We are talking with other colleagues who are not part of our committee about what more can be done.

Two or three weeks ago, I was in Houston attending the big oil and gas conference, the big global conference. It is kind of like the Davos of oil and gas. It was notable that throughout that week's conference with oil and gas producers, predominantly, the focus and the attention was on climate change and what we are doing with those technologies that will help us to reduce methane leakage, what we are doing to help share some of these environmental technologies, and what more we are doing to help facilitate these clean, lower carbon technologies. This is coming from an industry that is recognizing that innovation must happen.

It was fascinating. I sat down with a group of about 20 folks who were pretty high up within their sectors. I was thinking we were going to be talking about some of the latest technologies in oil and gas development. But about two-thirds of the people around the table were not from oil and gas companies; they were from high-tech companies. They were there because they see that the real difference in making a difference is going to come from these technologies, and they want to be a part of that conversation. That is a good conversation to have.

Within the Energy Committee, what we are doing is we are going to revive and refresh the bipartisan Energy bill that we moved out of committee and off this floor a couple of years ago with the help of Senator Cantwell. We moved it out with the support of 85 Members. It may be that we have to move some smaller bills instead of everything all at once, but we have to update our policies.

We haven't updated an energy policy for 11 years now. Senator Cantwell knows, when you think about where the industry has gone, where the energy sector has gone, and the fact that our policies have lagged, that is a drag. We need to address that.

I think there are areas where we can reach a bipartisan agreement on policies that support the innovation, break down the barriers, promote efficiency, and keep the markets well-supplied. There is a lot more we can be doing on nuclear energy. I am going to be introducing a bipartisan bill this week to promote advanced reactors. There is more we can be doing on carbon capture utilization and sequestration. This is a big priority of Senator Manchin's. We know that unlocking the key is going to be with storage and energy storage. We have to be advancing that. There is so much more room within hydropower, microgrids, to lower costs for energy in rural areas, to lower the cost of all renewables and make them more competitive, to ensure we are producing the minerals and materials we need for the technologies. I mentioned sharing environmental technologies.

It is not just the Energy Committee that is going to be working on this. All committees will have their own contribution to make, and I welcome that, but we have to have rational discussions.

I have said: Come to the Energy Committee, where there is a safe space if you want to talk about climate. If you are a Republican on this side who says I don't know that I want to go there, a Democrat on that side, let's sit down and have a rational conversation about how we are going to be working together across the aisle to agree on policies that will deliver cleaner and lower carbon technologies. They have to be pragmatic, they have to be durable, and they have to be bipartisan.

Senator Manchin and I had an op-ed that ran in the Washington Post a few weeks ago. It wasn't great, earthshaking, brandnew, novel ideas on how to address climate change. What we said is, we have to join hands on this. We have to come together. We are both from producing States with very vulnerable populations. Take a look at the two of us and work with us to help advance some of these things.

We have gotten more shout-outs not for highlighting some new technology but the fact that we were talking together as Republicans and Democrats. That is going to be an important part of how we move forward.

I mentioned, I am from a producing State. You all know that. What many don't know is how Alaska is leading the way in what is possible for some of the innovation, the proving ground, for technologies. We have about every resource you can think of in great abundance, including sunshine. You don't think about solar for us, but we are putting it to good use. We have been pioneering when it comes to microgrids and these smaller scaled technologies. We have wind turbines out in St. Michael. We have energy-efficient refrigeration on Saint Paul Island. This is a little, tiny island out in the middle of the ocean. We have clean power generation in Kodiak. About 99 percent of that significant fishing community is renewable. We have an in-river system being installed in Igiugig. We have innovation happening all over the place, and it is happening because we are driven by necessity. It costs too much. It is not sustainable.

I don't want to be from a State where most of my off-road communities are powered by diesel. It is not good for them. It is not good for anybody. How do we get off that? Allow us to move forward and free up-- some are going to be critical of me. They are going to say: You know what, Lisa, you are talking about baby steps. You are talking wind turbines in St. Michael; you are talking about energy efficiency in St. Paul. Do you know what? When you are paying $7, $8, $9 a gallon to keep the lights on, to keep something refrigerated--close to 80 cents a kilowatt hour--that is not sustainable. So for these communities, it is making a difference. You say: Well, we have a big globe out there. We do have a big globe out there, and we all have a responsibility there, but we have to start.

I want to share a quote from my friend, the former Secretary of Energy, Ernie Moniz. He was talking about some of the practical, pragmatic solutions. He said some are going to argue it is not enough. Some would argue, well, that will not get us there as fast as we need to go. I would argue that would get us there as fast as we can go.

We must--we must--move. We recognize that, but we have to know the only way we are going to be moving is if we move together. That is what we have to do in Congress. We have to take these policies that can keep us moving to lower emissions, to address the reality of climate change, to do so all the while recognizing we have an economy we need to keep strong, we have vulnerable people whom we need to protect, and we have an environment we all care about--Republicans and Democrats--and it is not just the environment in our States or our country, but it is our global environment.

So, moving forward, how we are working together on that is a priority, or should be a priority, for us all. My hope is, we get beyond the rhetoric, the high-fired rhetoric, and we get to practical, pragmatic, bipartisan solutions.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I will yield.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I thank my colleague for that.

I want to acknowledge the support and partnership I have had with Senator Cantwell. She and I come from differing views on certain issues, but throughout our time as the chair and the ranking on the committee, we really did work to try to advance some of these solutions, where--I think we would both agree--there is common ground. Again, advancing that is important. It is important for the progress we are making. It is making a difference. It is helping to reduce the emissions. It is helping to move us toward greater efficiency.

So let's not pooh-pooh the small things. Let's acknowledge that building things together, you do elevate yourself--but we have to start. If we keep dividing ourselves, then we are not going to come together to build these bridges.

I thank my friend from Washington State who has worked hard on the committee to advance this and continues to do so.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source