Consumer-First Energy Act of 2008 - Motion to Proceed - Continued

Floor Speech

CONSUMER-FIRST ENERGY ACT OF 2008--MOTION TO PROCEED--Continued -- (Senate - June 10, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about American energy independence, energy self-sufficiency, and specifically to talk about clean coal and clean coal technology.

I have introduced a number of constructive amendments to the Lieberman-Warner climate change legislation. But one of the most important of those was the need to address the future of clean coal technology.

If this body chooses to pursue cap-and-trade legislation, we need to ensure that the Senate includes provisions to bring about the energy security our Nation needs. The so-called cap-and-trade legislation would impose greenhouse gas emissions and mandates that are unrealistic in scope and in timing.

In a time of high energy prices, in a time of housing deflation, in a time of food inflation, taxpayers cannot afford misguided policies that hamstring our economy. Our competitors--India and China--are not constraining their economies with carbon limits. Global issues deserve global responses. Blindly imposing Government regulations will force heavy burdens on utility consumers, on labor, and on American families.

Last week, the record was clearly laid out that this proposal raises consumer prices through Government mandates. I believe most Americans favor policy approaches that balance America's need for energy with environmental protection.

In order to avoid substantial economic fallout, Federal funding is not only warranted to help American commerce meet this challenge, it is essential.

Despite the recent pace in developing clean coal technologies, America cannot afford to simply give up on this challenge. Coal is abundant. Coal is affordable. Coal is reliable. Coal is secure as an energy source. Coal can also become a very clean fuel.

As noted in the May 30 front-page article in the New York Times, America will continue to rely heavily on coal-fired electric generation for decades to come. The New York Times reporters are merely recognizing what is abundantly evident from official Government predictions.

The article also aptly notes that coal-fired generation holds great promise for reduced carbon dioxide emissions. America's energy policy must not simply deliver sustainable energy; America's energy future must incorporate a vision for a safer, cleaner, and healthier environment. Clean, coal-fired electric generation must be an integral part.

The challenge before us is significant. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired powerplants will be possible through first capturing carbon dioxide emissions and then sequestering them underground. Both will take time and both will take money.

In order to achieve this challenge, the Federal Government and private industry must partner in funding research and technological innovation. Timing is critical. America needs to make a serious and substantial investment in research and developing commercial technology.

In order to achieve energy security and a clean environment, the Federal Government must demonstrate its commitment with targeted, upfront financial support. We must show leadership, not merely dictate flawed policies and hope for the best.

What does this mean? If Congress mandates reduced emissions, it is incumbent upon us to also provide the policies to allow our own economy to succeed.

Proven, commercially available, cost-effective technologies must be developed with respect to carbon capture and sequestration. These technologies must be efficient, effective, and allow America to continue to compete globally.

The amendment I have filed would direct $50 billion in revenue from emission allowances--$40 billion for the demonstration and deployment for carbon capture technologies, and $10 billion for large-scale geologic carbon storage demonstration projects.

This is an enormous investment, but it is also necessary. This amendment is technology neutral. It would not rely on Government to dictate the favored type of carbon capture mechanism. Incentives would be provided by the choice of the recipient as a loan guarantee, through incremental cost sharing, or in the form of electricity production payments for each kilowatt hour produced.

This amendment includes aggressive but achievable technological milestones. It also establishes a timeline for new projects over the next 7, 8, or 10 years. This amendment is reasonable, rational, aggressive, and achievable.

Making this investment comes down to a choice between two things: one, Congress taking responsibility for the mandates proposed; two, regulating the economy and turning its back on ratepayers, on manufacturers, and on American families.

Without investment in coal, it will mean higher heating and higher cooling bills that will continue to ripple through the economy, picking winners and losers.

Last week, some Members of this Chamber insisted upon policies that would raise prices at the pump through regulation. Today, they tried to address the runup in gasoline prices by raising taxes.

I will tell you that the rising prices of gasoline are hurting the people of Wyoming and the people across this country--truckers, ranchers, commuters, and all American families.

I adamantly disagree with the so-called ``solutions'' proposed by the majority, which were higher taxes and more regulation. I urge my colleagues to allow real solutions to today's energy prices, including American exploration and investment in American technology. It is time to enact a prosperous path for the future of America's energy and America's economy.

With that, I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source