Energy Policy Modernization Bill

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, for the past week the Senate has been debating the way that America produces and uses our energy. We have talked about how these issues affect our economy, how they affect our communities, and how they affect the world--the world that we hope to leave to our children.

As Senators have come to the floor and offered their ideas, I have tried to keep one basic idea in mind, and that idea is that we want to make energy as clean as we can, as fast as we can, as long as it doesn't raise costs on American families. I think that is the goal of many Members of the Senate with regard to this bipartisan legislation.

I want to talk today about two bipartisan ideas--ideas that some of us have offered to make this legislation even better. One of the first amendments the Senate took up on this bill was an amendment I offered, along with Senator Schatz, that passed by voice vote. He is a Democrat, I am a Republican, and it is something that both of us think is a very good idea.

This amendment creates a prize system to encourage new technologies that could remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and permanently sequester it. A lot of the Members of this body talk about reducing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Some of them want to reduce this by cutting the amount of emissions of carbon dioxide; some want to do it with a carbon tax; and some others want to do it by banning some of the energy sources that we need today to power our economy. The problem with that approach is that it severally reduces how much energy we as Americans can use, and it raises the cost of energies on hardworking families.

We just got the new economic numbers that are out in terms of economic growth in America for the last quarter of last year--0.7 percent. That is the last quarter of 2015. That is nowhere near the growth that we need in this country for a healthy economy. It is nothing.

Cutting back on the types of energy resources Americans can use by some of these proposals or by making energy much more expensive is not going to help our economy grow as we need it to in terms of having a healthy, strong economy.

The amendment that Senator Schatz and I have introduced looks at this issue from a very different direction. It looks at the carbon that is already in the atmosphere. The amendment says we should be looking much more at finding a way to remove some of that carbon dioxide. To get that done, America needs to invest more in developing new technology that can accomplish it, not just through more spending or more government research but by setting up a series of prizes for different technical breakthroughs. By doing that, we can turn to ingenuity and to innovation to solve the problem. That includes the private sector, universities, and even just someone out tinkering in their garage and coming up with a great idea.

Prizes like this are not a new idea. Back in 1714 the British Government offered a big prize for the first person to invent a better way for measuring longitude. It was a clockmaker whose name was John Harrison. He won the prize, and his idea transformed the way that we sail the seas.

In 1927 Charles Lindbergh flew nonstop from New York to Paris. This helped create the new modern aviation industry. He took the flight to win a $25,000 prize-sponsored by a New York hotel owner.

The prize created by this amendment--and there is more than one. There are several prizes. The prizes created by this amendment are meant to encourage that kind of new thinking, that kind of bold action. So that is one of the amendments, one of the bipartisan ideas.

Another amendment and idea that we have talked about, which is again bipartisan, is an amendment we voted on yesterday, amendment No. 3030. This was an idea that had bipartisan support. My lead cosponsor was my friend from North Dakota, Senator Heitkamp. This amendment would have expedited the permit process for natural gas gathering lines on Federal lands, on Indian lands. Gathering lines are pipelines that collect unprocessed gas from oil and gas wells and then ship it to a processing plant. At the plant, the different kind of gases--methane, propane--are separated from one another. Then they are shipped out again by other pipelines to locations where they can be sold and used by people to power our country, to power our economy. That is what the producers want to do. The problem is, we don't have enough of these gathering lines to gather up this gas and send it to the processing plants. So a lot of times there is only one option, and that is to flare or vent the excess natural gas at the well. If there were more gathering lines, then we would have a lot less waste.

You don't have to take my word for it. Last month, the Obama administration proposed a new rule that restricts this kind of flaring of oil and gas operations on Federal land and on Indian land. In that rule, the administration admitted that the main way to avoid flaring ``is to capture, transport, and process'' that gas for sale, using the same technologies that are used for natural gas wells. It makes sense. The administration said that the rate of energy production in some of the areas outpaces the rate of development of this infrastructure to capture the gas. The administration said the production had overwhelmed the capacity of the gathering lines, and Senator Heitkamp and I were talking about ways to deal with the problem. Even though the administration seems to recognize and give voice to the problem, its proposed rule doesn't actually address the problem or provide a solution, and Senator Heitkamp and I have a solution.

The rule doesn't do anything to speed up the permit process for natural gas gathering pipelines. The President ignores that component. Whether you agree with this new rule or you disagree with it, the only practical way to reduce the venting or the flaring of natural gas is to build more of these gathering lines. The rule will not work without them.

If we don't build the infrastructure to solve the problem, the administration's rule will end up pushing oil and gas production off of Federal lands, off of Indian land, and this is completely unacceptable. It is unworkable.

The Obama administration says this type of gas venting and flaring is bad for the environment. They say the government is losing royalty money because the gas isn't being sold. I agree. That is why the bipartisan amendment Senator Heitkamp and I sponsored would solve both of these problems at once. Even though we weren't able to get that amendment adopted yesterday, this is an idea that all Republicans and Democrats should be able to support. It would help Americans get the energy we need and do it in a cleaner way and at a lower cost. That is the goal.

I know Senators on both sides of the aisle are going to keep talking about this idea, and we are going to keep trying to get it enacted into law. These are just two commonsense, bipartisan ideas Republicans and Democrats have offered to solve the energy challenges America is facing.

In my home State of Wyoming, people know we need to balance a strong economy and a healthy environment. They are in favor of using our natural resources responsibly. Part of that is remembering that these are resources and resources should be and can be used.

We should also recognize that the important resource we have in this country is American ingenuity. We should be investing in it. We should be cutting through the redtape that holds back innovation. Abraham Lincoln once said that when we face new and difficult challenges, we must think anew, and we must act anew. Lincoln knew the importance of setting a big goal, of unleashing the ingenuity of the American people to get it done. He had the vision for the transcontinental railroad. He also signed the original charter for the National Academy of Sciences. We must think anew; we must act anew.

It is not enough for environmental extremists to say that the resources have to stay in the ground. That is not realistic. That is not responsible. America can do better, and the American people are ready to be part of this solution. They are ready to make energy as clean as we can, as fast as we can, without raising costs on American families. They need us to help show the way. With this kind of bipartisan solution I have been talking about today, I think we can take a step toward reaching that goal.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source