Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Holds Hearing on Global Warming

SUNUNU:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Of course, as a new member of the Senate, it is a great pleasure to be here. And as the newest member of the committee, I am excited to be here as well.

My hunch is that you're not the only person in this room that harbors a special love for the state of New Hampshire.

(LAUGHTER)
But my guess is we won't hear too much more of that, at least not today. The proposals that we will talk about here today, as you have all made clear, have enormous environmental and economic implications. And that's why I think it's important that we have a thorough discussion and debate of new ideas, new proposals, new technologies that might deal with some of the concerns that we all share.

There are also important international implications to this discussion. I think, as many of those that have looked long and hard at these issues recognize, that in 10 or 15 years, developing nations, which are not party to any of the discussion or regulations in the Kyoto Protocol, will be responsible for the majority of CO2 emissions in the world.

And I think as we look at the future, as we try to predict the implications, the technical and climate implications of CO2 emissions, and try to formulate ideas for addressing the concerns raised here, we need to also find ways—and perhaps new technologies—that might bring some of these countries into the fold, so to speak. Because if, indeed, we're going to take action, you can't simply take action with regard to one or two or 10 or even 15 percent of pollutants or other emissions like CO2 and expect to really have a global impact and a long-term impact.

So I'm pleased to be here. I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses and know enough about the Senate that it would be a mistake for a junior member to delay the testimony of Senator Lieberman any further.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

SUNUNU:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
One point of clarification there. You mentioned countries, developing countries that were not included in Kyoto: China, Brazil, India, Indonesia. But I think it is the case, while they are not bound by any reductions, they do get to vote to ratchet up the reductions on all of the signing countries. I think they get a vote.

And when a certain level of countries—I think 75 percent of the countries, including developing countries—vote to make a change in the treaty, then that change would go into effect. So while they are not bound by any reductions, as I have come to understand the treaty, they actually do get a vote to change the terms of the agreement.

You mentioned the voluntary program in the United States that you have been working on. How do you measure the success of that program?

MAHONEY:
We measure the success of it by inventorying reductions in emissions. And we are in the process of running the development of those activities right now, engaging dozens and dozens of industries across the country.

And I know the comment, I would also measure this by a sense of: can we get something in operation and get it moving very quickly? And quickly, when we think of making major corporations move and we think in the Washington sense, is probably a year or two. It's not this week or this month.

I note, by comparison, after Superfund passed, it was almost a decade before there was nearly any cleanup because there was so much litigation about the end point standards and all the rest of it. So my measure of success in the voluntary program is that if, in a reasonable time—and I would take reasonable to be in the range of about two years, hopefully quicker—but if, within a couple of years, we can show real progress, I think that is much faster than the time scale we might see with a prescribed mandatory program.

That is why I feel that working out the kinks...

SUNUNU:
Sure. Okay. Your timetable is two years to achieve real progress, I guess. And my question was how do you measure progress?

MAHONEY:
Progress is measured specifically by reductions in the total emissions or the net emissions.

SUNUNU:
So sort of aggregate reductions in emissions?

MAHONEY:
That's right. CO2, typically, or all greenhouse gases.

SUNUNU:
And what would be your goal for aggregate reductions in that two-year period?

MAHONEY:
Well, the goal, I think, is better stated. And the president's goal is the 18 percent reduction in intensity or, in other words, an 18 percent improvement in emission efficiency by the year 2012. And it is our intent to meet that goal, which is a very onerous one for the U.S., all in.

SUNUNU:
So are you going to measure progress by aggregate emissions or by a reduction in intensity? Those are really two different measurements, aren't they?

MAHONEY:
Both measurements will be fully available. They convert one to the other, although the conversion is not all that easy.

SUNUNU:
I'm trying to make it easy for you, though. If you sort of pick one and focus on one and then you don't achieve the other, you are much less likely to come back here, whether I'm still a senator or not, and have someone say, "Ah-ha, but you didn't achieve the other. Even though you reduced in intensity, aggregate output increased."

MAHONEY:
The primary measure, because it's consistent with the administration's program, is intensity. And we also will be reporting aggregate reductions overall. But the primary measurement is intensity.

SUNUNU:
Where does the United States rate today, compared to all other countries, on intensity? We know we are responsible for 25 percent. I assume that means aggregate. We emit more CO2 than any other country.
But where do we rate, in terms of intensity?

MAHONEY:
To give the honest answer, I can't. I don't know, so I don't want to guess, senator.

SUNUNU:
And I assume intensity is, what? Output of CO2 per dollar of economic output or per BTU?

MAHONEY:
For dollar of economic output. But I would note, one thing that I do know, that the intensity in the U.S. improved 12 percent through the 1990's. And we are projecting, under the president's plan, another 18 percent improvement in the period out to 2012.

SUNUNU:
Could I ask you to put together a summary of intensity, at least, for a select number of countries, including the United States, so we can see? Given that you have said this is the measure by which you will determine whether you are successful or not, I would think we would want to at least how we're doing compared to some other countries.

MAHONEY:
I would be delighted to.

SUNUNU:
Thank you very much.