Hill Heat: An Update on the Science of Global Warming and its ImplicationsScience Policy Legislation Actiontag:www.hillheat.com,2005:TypoTypo2008-07-22T10:38:09-04:00Wonk Roomurn:uuid:b6b2eb77-0b76-401e-8e82-101c7fad79c62008-07-22T10:00:00-04:002008-07-22T10:38:09-04:00An Update on the Science of Global Warming and its Implications<em>Witnesses</em>
<ul>
<li>Jason Burnett, Former Associate Deputy Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency</li>
<li>Dr. Kevin E. Trenberth, Head of the Climate Analysis Section, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Climate and Global Dynamics Division</li>
<li>Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist, Earth System Science Center, University of Alabama in Huntsville</li>
</ul><em>Witnesses</em>
<ul>
<li>Jason Burnett, Former Associate Deputy Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency</li>
<li>Dr. Kevin E. Trenberth, Head of the Climate Analysis Section, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Climate and Global Dynamics Division</li>
<li>Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist, Earth System Science Center, University of Alabama in Huntsville</li>
</ul>
<p>10 <strong>Boxer</strong> The evidence has been overwhelming that global warming poses a serious threat to the American people.</p>
<p><strong>Bond</strong> Workers are suffering as jobs go to countries with cheaper energy and weaker environmental laws. I would share the goal that we are going to reduce carbon, we are going to promote energy efficiency. What is the real threat to the people of America? The real threat is higher energy prices and more lost jobs.</p>
<p>Under the W-L bill $6.7 billion would be taken away from workers. Calpers had invested in the high future cost of energy. As long as we keep all the land out of production the price will continue to go up.</p>
<p><strong>Boxer</strong> We’ll respond to his misstatement in the record.</p>
<p>10:15 <strong>Lautenberg</strong> My grandson has asthma.</p>
<p>10:22 <strong>Craig</strong> yields.</p>
<p>10:22 <strong>Cardin</strong> We haven’t had an energy policy and we’ve seen the consequences. The L-W bill will allow us to take the necessary steps to deal with global warming. I’ve urged we have a robust provision to have the best science available to achieve the objectives we set out to do. We all know about corn ethanol.</p>
<p>10:26 <strong>Klobuchar</strong> I met yesterday with a 14-year-old who biked 1500 miles with a petition signed by 1200 kids for greater fuel efficiency. It appears this administration has been living in an evidence-free zone. One of the redacted facts was that climate change would increase wildfires.</p>
<p>10:29 <strong>Whitehouse</strong> I yield.</p>
<p>10:30 <strong>Boxer</strong> swears in the witnesses.</p>
<p>10:31 <strong>Burnett</strong> I recently resigned my position as associate deputy administrator. The scientific information I present is not my opinion. The April 2 Supreme Court decision permanently changed the landscape. Severe heat waves are expected to increase. The science is clear. A Cabinet-level meeting in November reached the agreement greenhouse gases did endanger the public and needed to be regulated. The only way to avoid making a positive endangerment finding was to make any finding at all.</p>
<p>10:37 <strong>Trenberth</strong> The <span class="caps">IPCC</span> is inherently conservative. Climate change is a real problem today. The problem is accelerating. Changes could happen much larger and sooner than the <span class="caps">IPCC</span> suggests. The oceans and land ice have a lot of inertia. Long lead times are essential for action to address climate change. Globally the past 7 years are among the eight warmest on record. Sea level rise continues at a rate of a foot a century. In the first six months of 2008, record rains point to the increases of rain that have been observed in association with more water vapor in the atmosphere due to global warming. Longer dry spells are also associated with global warming. The risk of wildfire increases dramatically. In 2007 two Cat 5 hurricanes made landfall for the first time in Central America. Hurricane Bertha has broken records. We should not be misled by short-term climate changes such as La Nina. Our predictions at <span class="caps">NCAR</span> are for substantial changes. I believe there is a crisis of inaction in addressing climate change.</p>
<p>10:43 <strong>Spencer</strong> There’s two issues I’d like to talk about. As a <span class="caps">NASA</span> employee during the Clinton-Gore administration, I was told what I could or could not say. It seemed entirely appropriate to me to abide by the limits of my superiors. I’d like to present the latest research. There remains considerable uncertainty just how sensitive the climate is to human influence. We have attained the holy grail of climate research—a true measure of climate uncertainty. They have been contaminated by cloud variability. In my written testimony, I show how cloud variations and La Nina-El Nino might explain 70 percent of the warming we’ve measured. These results are not yet published, but I presented them at a seminar. The <span class="caps">IPCC</span> process has been guided by desired policy outcomes. I am predicting today that the theory mankind is mostly responsible for global warming will fade away.</p>
<p>10:51 <strong>Boxer</strong> Spencer has been named by Rush Limbaugh as his official climatologist. I’m going to ask Mr. Burnett a few questions about the waiver. Did Johnson discuss in December his plan to move forward with at least a partial waiver?</p>
<p>10:52 <strong>Burnett</strong> If the Clean Air Act was not amended by Congress, we would move forward with the waiver.</p>
<p><strong>Boxer</strong> Did Johnson indicate that the compelling and extraordinary conditions had been met?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> All three criteria were met.</p>
<p><strong>Boxer</strong> Did you prepare Johnson for a meeting with the White House on the waiver?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> Materials from our general counsel indicating the legal vulnerability of denying the waiver was communicated to the administrator in multiple fora.</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> Pres. Bush had made it clear of his policy preference for a single standard.</p>
<p>10:57 <strong>Craig</strong> Climate change conferences are a thriving cottage industry.</p>
<p><strong>Spencer</strong> There’s more like me out there.</p>
<p><strong>Craig</strong> You gave passing comment on climate change and wildfires. The skies of Idaho were filled with smoke from California. In 1991 forestry scientists met and determined that there were millions of acres of forest that were dead and dying. Because of the tremendous population and fuel buildup and a slight change of temperature we’re seeing those fires. Very little is said by scientists about natural emissions of carbon. I accept warming. Why aren’t scientists dealing more with the vegetative consequences and advocating reduced fuel loads?</p>
<p><strong>Trenberth</strong> The major factor recently is the major drought that allowed the lodgepole pines to be infected by the pinebark beetle. In recent times we haven’t had the cold spells that kill the beetles.</p>
<p><strong>Craig</strong> You’re right about the bug itself. If you take out those bug kill areas, we’re being denied that.</p>
<p>11:03 <strong>Lautenberg</strong> Mr. Spencer, since you ascribe the problems with changing climate to natural causes, that we then throw up our hands and wait?</p>
<p><strong>Spencer</strong> I’m of the professional opinion that people have some influence. We already spend billions of dollars on alternative energy research.</p>
<p><strong>Lautenberg</strong> You told the House Global Warming Committee that ExxonMobil thought regulations would taint the Bush legacy.</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> There were those in the administration who wanted to be the ones who took action and those who didn’t want to do anything.</p>
<p><strong>Lautenberg</strong> Are we approaching the point of no return?</p>
<p><strong>Trenberth</strong> What used to be a 500-year flood is now a 30-year flood.</p>
<p>11:10 <strong>Cardin</strong> Were you present at the Cabinet-level meeting?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> I worked with other officials to prepare for the meeting.</p>
<p><strong>Cardin</strong> How were you apprised of the findings of the meeting?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> I prepared briefing materials and Johnson and Peacock asked us when they returned for us to draft findings that reflected the decisions of the meeting.</p>
<p><strong>Cardin</strong> Do you know who was in the meeting?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> I’m familiar with the agencies involved. We had meetings three times a week at the <span class="caps">OMB</span>. Administrator Johnson said he took the extra step of checking with the President’s chief of staff office and Joel Kaplan whether that meeting was sufficient to tell the staff a decision had been made.</p>
<p><strong>Cardin</strong> What happened?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> The sequence of events was strange. I had checked with my colleagues at <span class="caps">EPA</span> that the document was ready to be sent to <span class="caps">OMB</span>. I sent it over, and then received a phone call from deputy chief of staff Joel Kaplan asking us not to send the document over.</p>
<p>11:19 <strong>Klobuchar</strong></p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> The regulation we were developing would have raised fuel economy standards.</p>
<p><strong>Klobuchar</strong> You went back and forth with <span class="caps">OMB</span> on the definition of carbon dioxide molecules.</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> I was at almost all of the meetings hosted by <span class="caps">OMB</span>. There was interest in defining <span class="caps">CO2</span> from automobiles as different from <span class="caps">CO2</span> from power plants. Jeff Rosen raised that question multiple times. It was sometimes embarassing for me to return to my colleagues to have them explain again that <span class="caps">CO2</span> is a molecule.</p>
<p><strong>Klobuchar</strong> What can we expect in the future?</p>
<p><strong>Trenberth</strong> Rainfall is up about 7 percent, mainly east of the Rockies. Heavy rains are up 14%, very heavy rains up 21%. The reason is well understood. The warmer air can hold more water vapor.</p>
<p>11:25 <strong>Boxer</strong> Washington is under a severe weather alert.</p>
<p><strong>Whitehouse</strong> Were you at the <span class="caps">EPA</span> long enough to get a sense what the routine meetings and conversations were between the administrator and the White House?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> My focus was on air quality policy.</p>
<p><strong>Whitehouse</strong> Would you characterize they were routine?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> This was my first vehicle waiver process.</p>
<p><strong>Whitehouse</strong> Were there specific meetings on the California waiver?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> Yes.</p>
<p><strong>Whitehouse</strong> Did the White House understand that the responsibility for making a decision on the waiver rest with the administrator?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> In the ozone decision the president’s policy was ultimately followed.</p>
<p><strong>Whitehouse</strong> Did the White House respond to the notice that you intended to partially grant the waiver?</p>
<p><strong>Burnett</strong> The response was clearly made that the White House wanted a single standard inconsistent with the California waiver.</p>
<p>11:32 <strong>Sanders</strong> Talk about human health and global warming.</p>
<p><strong>Trenberth</strong> We see events like Katrina, that our infrastructure isn’t adequate. These things happen from time to time but don’t all happen all at once. Natural variability plays a role. In Europe in 2003, the magnitude of the heatwaves, over 30,000 people died, you cannot account for it natural variability or global warming alone.</p>
<p><strong>Sanders</strong> If you see increased drought, people won’t be able to grow food.</p>
<p><strong>Trenberth</strong> There are various diseases that flourish in warmer climates. Everyone will be affected one way or another. In Europe and Asia it’s gotten much warmer. In the US, it’s gotten wetter. I personally think the biggest pressure point on society will be water and water resources.</p>