Ratepayer Protection Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the good gentleman from Kentucky for his work on this bill.

I rise today in support of my amendment to H.R. 2042, the Ratepayer Protection Act of 2015, and urge my colleagues to support its adoption.

This amendment, which I am proud to introduce with my friend and colleague from the State of Washington, Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler, would very simply direct the Environmental Protection Agency to consider hydropower as a renewable energy source when issuing, implementing, and enforcing any final rule regarding carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants under the Clean Air Act.

EPA's misguided proposed clean power plan, which the Agency announced in June of 2014, attempts to regulate and reduce the amount of carbon emitted from the power sector by setting emission guidelines for each individual State. Under the proposed rule, my home State of Washington would be responsible for an unattainable 72 percent reduction in its carbon emissions by the year 2030.

To put this into context, the State of Iowa would be required to reduce carbon emissions by 16 percent, the State of Kentucky by 18 percent, and the State of North Dakota by 11 percent. I believe the proposed clean power plan would have devastating consequences for each and every State, as well as for the country at large, which is why I am proud to cosponsor and support H.R. 2042.

Mr. Chairman, the requirements placed on Washington by this misguided rule are simply unachievable. It will hurt our families and our small businesses by raising the cost of electricity, and it will cost our economy billions of dollars just to comply.

My amendment would seek to provide a reality check to EPA and highlight the effect this regulation would have on such States as Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and South Dakota, which are blessed with abundant sources of hydropower, a nonemitting energy source. However, under the EPA's plan, hydropower is not treated as a renewable energy source, despite the fact that the Obama administration has recently been touting the potential of hydropower as part of its all-the-above energy strategy.

In fact, Mr. Chair, last April, Secretary Moniz discussed the importance of hydropower and described it as a renewable in an address to the National Hydropower Association. In his remarks, the Secretary stated: ``We have to pick up the covers off of this hidden renewable that is right in front of our eyes and continues to have significant potential.''

Yet, despite this public praise for hydropower and recognition of it as a renewable, the EPA decided to push a plan that explicitly neglects hydropower as a renewable in favor of other sources, such as wind and solar.

Additionally, the EPA's plan uses the year 2012 as its baseline for each State's carbon reduction goals, and this will also negatively impact my home State and others in the Northwest.

In 2012, Oregon and Washington experienced unusually high levels of rainfall, unfortunately, unlike this year, which led to a sharp increase in hydropower production; and, therefore, we used less energy from fossil fuel sources.

As a result, the proposed rule seriously underestimates the average amount of carbon used by my State in its power production which, in reality, is much higher than the EPA 2012 baseline. Because hydropower is not viewed as a renewable, we will have to utilize impractical amounts of other renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, to meet the EPA's goals.

Mr. Chair, the effects of this decision in States with large amounts of existing hydroelectric power, such as mine, Oregon, South Dakota, and Idaho, are significantly disadvantaged under the rule and will not get credit for their existing hydroelectric generation and infrastructure.

However, my amendment would address this issue by directing EPA to simply recognize hydropower as a renewable energy source. This would in no way restrict the goals of H.R. 2042, which I fully support, nor would it negatively affect other nonhydropower States. It just highlights the misguided rule put forth by the Agency.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the Newhouse-Herrera Beutler amendment and the underlying bill, and I urge the amendment's adoption.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source