Opioid Epidemic

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleague Senator Whitehouse as he takes to the Senate floor to speak on climate change for the 219th time.

Mr. Whitehouse is the Senate leader on climate change, and his foresight, actions, and determination on this issue are remarkable. I am very proud to join him today.

Climate change is a dire threat to our environment and to our children's future, and yet, if we rise to the challenge of responding to climate change, it will offer us major economic opportunity. The clean energy transition is already creating jobs, reducing the cost of generating electricity, clearing the air, and improving our health.

The old idea that responding to climate change comes at the expense of the American economy is outdated and inaccurate. The clean energy economy is the economy of the 21st century. We see this every day in Minnesota, which is a national leader in the clean energy transition.

The climate is rapidly changing, and these changes are caused by human activities that release greenhouse gases. I know this because it is what science shows us.

In Minnesota, we take special pride in the severity of our winters, but Minnesota winter temperatures have increased by 6 degrees since 1970. More than our pride is at stake. Agriculture and forest pests that were once held in check by severe winter cold are now thriving. Summer temperatures are on a pace to make Minnesota as warm as Kansas by the end of the century. Some models suggest that changing climate and spreading pests could eliminate Minnesota's iconic evergreen forests by 2100.

Urgent action is needed to limit further climate change. If we don't reduce greenhouse gas emissions to near zero by 2060, the world will cross a dangerous warming threshold--a threshold that the United States and other nations have pledged to avoid.

I am deeply worried about these threats, and so are our children, but I am also hopeful because I have seen how tapping into the abundant wind and sunshine is building a new energy economy that is clean, green, and full of opportunity.

Here is just one example. Shortly after becoming a Senator, I visited the Vetter family farm near Mankato, MN, and saw firsthand how renewable energy can provide new sources of income for farmers. The Vetters raise hogs, but they also farm the sun through a 14-acre community solar garden. The Vetters inspired me to become a champion for the energy title in the Senate farm bill, which provides Federal support for rural renewable energy projects.

Just 3 years ago, Minnesota wasn't much of a player in solar energy, despite the fact that we had nearly the same solar potential as Houston, TX. However, new State policy has led to strong growth and solar energy development. The State began a community solar garden program in 2013, and Minnesota now has enough solar energy to power nearly 120,000 homes. During the first quarter of 2018, Minnesota was fifth in the Nation for solar installations.

Now Minnesota is a model, but the Southeastern United States and almost all of the western half of the country has as much or more sunshine than Minnesota and lots of opportunity.

Minnesota is new to solar, but we have long been a national leader in wind energy. Today, nearly 20 percent of our electricity comes from wind turbines. Like solar, the fuel costs for an installed turbine are zero. So wind energy is sheltered from the ups and downs of fossil fuel prices. Wind energy is also a rural economic engine. A single industrial-sized turbine can bring a family farm $4,000 to $8,000 in lease revenue each year.

My State is home to the two largest wind and solar installation companies in the country--Mortenson Energy in the Twin Cities and Blattner Energy in rural Avon. Together, they have installed renewable energy capacity across the country equivalent to 100 coal plants.

Clean energy brings good jobs. For example, wind energy technician is one of the fastest growing jobs in the country, with an average salary of $54,000, and it doesn't require a 4-year college degree.

Jobs in Minnesota's clean energy sector are growing twice as fast as jobs in other parts of our State's economy. Employers report they are having trouble finding the skilled workers they need to fill these jobs. To address this problem, I have introduced legislation to help employers partner with high schools and community colleges so students can gain the skills they need to get these jobs.

Last year, renewable energy contributed 25 percent of the electricity generated in Minnesota. Nuclear power, which also does not release greenhouse gases, contributed an additional 23 percent. From a climate change perspective, Minnesota is already halfway to being a 100-percent clean energy State, and we are not slowing down. Xcel, our largest utility, is on track to deliver 60 percent renewable and 85 percent clean energy by 2030. Great River Energy, which serves many of our rural electric co-ops, is committed to 50 percent renewables by that same date. Why are they doing this? Well, it is not all about saving the planet. Wind energy has become the cheapest way to add new electricity to Minnesota's electric grid. Yes, Minnesota is windy, but so is every State in the middle of the country. And, as Senator Whitehouse described, most coastal States have tremendous wind power potential through offshore wind farms.

This summer, the McKnight Foundation released a groundbreaking analysis of what decarbonizing Minnesota's economy would mean. If Minnesota continues to move away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy, we can achieve a dramatic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. That would mean an electric mix that includes at least 91 percent clean energy. That would mean total energy bill savings of $600 to $1,200 per Minnesota household each year. It also would mean 20,000 more jobs in our State compared to a ``business as usual'' scenario, with continued reliance on fossil fuels.

Given all of the upsides, it is disheartening that the President continues to do everything in his power to slow down the clean energy transition. He would rather take us backward than have America remain a world leader pushing forward. He is pulling the United States out of the Paris climate agreement. He is taking steps to roll back auto fuel efficiency standards and trampling on the rights of States that want to maintain rigorous targets. He has tried repeatedly to keep uneconomic and polluting coal plants open--a move that, if successful, would cost American taxpayers and electric bill payers billions of dollars a year.

In a recent attack on clean energy, President Trump has proposed replacing the Clean Power Plan with an alternative that would actually increase greenhouse gas emissions and, by the administration's own calculation, cause up to 1,400 additional deaths per year due to air pollution. Just yesterday, the Trump administration proposed to weaken rules that limit the release of methane--a potent greenhouse gas.

Instead, the Federal Government can and should partner with States to encourage the spread of clean energy. The Federal Government should help States lead and not hold them back.

First, we should set national clean energy targets. These should be a floor, not a ceiling, setting States free to innovate and adopt the best way to meet energy emission reductions given their local resources, local economies, and local sensibilities.

Second, the Federal targets should be technology neutral. The goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In one place, this might mean wind power; in another, nuclear power. Some States have great hydropower resources, while others might choose to utilize carbon capture and storage upgrades to existing coal plants.

Third, we should work with States to enhance the interstate transmission system. I have talked a lot about what Minnesota is doing on clean energy. States like California and Hawaii and many others are certainly also leading the way. With transmission, the Texas grid expansion provides a potential national model. That expansion is helping bring clean electricity from the windy western part of Texas to the large cities in the east.

Fourth, the Federal Energy and Regulatory Commission must properly account for greenhouse gas emissions when it approves projects. It should allow States to value their nuclear plants as zero-emission sources. As the original fleet of nuclear plants retires, it is imperative that they be replaced with non-emitting power sources.

Last, the Federal government should expand support for cutting-edge energy research at our National Labs and at State universities. The Federal Government also needs to recognize that the discoveries in the lab only help if they are actually deployed. We must help States and utilities take risks on new, potentially game-changing technologies. To those ends, I recently introduced legislation to help fund both research and initial deployment of new energy storage technologies.

We have everything to lose if we fail to meet the challenge of climate change. We owe our children and the next generation a better alternative.

I again thank Senator Whitehouse for his leadership on this issue and for inviting me to join him today.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source