Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming: Press Releases

Hearing 7/23: Deploying Oil From Strategic Petroleum Reserve

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

MEDIA ADVISORY FOR WEDNESDAY, JULY 23, 2008

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Select Committee to Hold Hearing on Deploying Oil From Strategic Petroleum Reserve

On Wednesday, July 23, 2008, Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming will hold a hearing on how releasing oil from America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve can bring immediate relief to high oil and gas prices. The past three presidents, including President George W. Bush, have successfully used the SPR to reduce oil prices during times of crisis.

WHAT: Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming hearing, “Immediate Relief from High Oil Prices: Deploying the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.”

WHEN: 9:15 AM, Wednesday, July 23, 2008

WHERE: 210 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC and on the web at globalwarming.house.gov

WHO:
Mr. C. Kyle Simpson, Policy Director, Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber, Schreck
Dr. Joe Romm, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress
James May, President and CEO, Air Transport Association of America (invited)

# # #

Select Committee Investigation: Oil Industry Behind White House Switch on Global Warming

Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Eben Burnham-Snyder, Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Select Committee Investigation: Oil Industry Behind White House Switch on Global Warming

President’s Chief of Staff Office, Cabinet Officials, Electric Utility Industry Originally Agreed to Regulation Of Emissions from Vehicles, Power Plants

WASHINGTON (July 18, 2008) – An investigation by the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming has found that members of government at the highest levels, including the office of President George W. Bush’s Chief of Staff and numerous heads of Cabinet departments, had decided to use the Clean Air Act to regulate global warming emissions not only from vehicles, but also from power plants, refineries, and other so-called stationary sources – but reversed their decision in the face of strong opposition from ExxonMobil and others within the oil industry, as well as from at least one senior adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney.

"This is the dysfunctions and motivations of the Bush administration laid bare," said Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the Select Committee. "The fact that they can, with near unanimity, completely switch positions on global warming to please the oil industry is shocking, and yet disappointingly predictable."

The investigation by the Select Committee is based on an on-the-record interview with a former high-ranking EPA official, Jason Burnett, confidential discussions with other EPA staff, and review of EPA documents obtained in response to a Select Committee subpoena.

The full investigative report and transcript of the interview with Mr. Burnett is available on the Select Committee website here:

http://globalwarming.house.gov/tools/2q08materials/files/0110.pdf (report)

http://globalwarming.house.gov/tools/2q08materials/files/0109.pdf (transcript)

The report reveals the following major findings, among others:

--President Bush’s Deputy Chief of Staff Joel Kaplan and numerous heads of cabinet agencies --including Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, Office of Management and Budget’s Susan E. Dudley, and White House Council on Environmental Quality Chairman James L. Connaughton, among others -- and White House offices endorsed EPA’s finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public welfare, and EPA’s proposals that greenhouse gas emissions from both vehicles and stationary sources including power plants and refineries should be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

-- White House Deputy Chief of Staff Kaplan personally approved EPA’s plan to go forward with a positive endangerment finding, which would necessitate the regulation of greenhouse gas regulations for motor vehicles and fuels, as well as trigger regulation of stationary source emissions under the Clean Air Act.

--While electric utility representatives, including the Edison Electric Institute (which represents the nation’s major investor-owned utilities), agreed that it would be best for EPA to proceed with regulation of both vehicles and stationary sources using Clean Air Act authority, oil industry representatives from ExxonMobil, the American Petroleum Institute, and the National Petrochemicals and Refiners Association, adopted a "not on my watch" approach – arguing that such regulations would tarnish President Bush’s conservative anti-regulatory legacy, and should be delayed until the next President took office.

--Doing the oil industry’s bidding, the Bush administration reversed course on regulating heat-trapping emissions – opting to do nothing and leave it to the next president to respond to the serious environmental threat of global warming. This decision was made at the very highest level within the White House. The winning argument against regulatory action had the support of the Office of Vice President Cheney, including Vice President Cheney’s energy adviser, F. Chase Hutto III.

--Most of the cabinet secretaries and heads of White House offices who recently wrote letters opposing use of the Clean Air Act to regulate global warming emissions – which were appended to the release of EPA’s July 11, 2008 "Advance Notice of Proposed Regulation" – had previously supported regulation of both vehicles and stationary sources under the act.

The report follows months of action by Chairman Markey and the Select Committee to unearth decisions and findings on global warming within the Bush administration. Starting in January of 2008, Chairman Markey requested documents from Administrator Johnson, leading to a lengthy subpoena process which resulted in the Select Committee achieving exclusive access to December 2007 EPA global warming findings on regulating emissions that were eventually scuttled by the White House.

# # #

Markey: GoreaEUR(TM)s Climate Challenge Deserves Strong Answer from Congress

Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Chairman Ed Markey, 202-225-4081

Markey: Gore’s Climate Challenge Deserves Strong Answer from Congress

Renewable Revolution Waiting in Wings, Says Chairman

WASHINGTON (July 17, 2008) – Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, today applauded Vice President Al Gore for his call to reform America’s electricity sector and bring fairness and sanity back to America’s energy system.

Chairman Markey is the author of the Investing in Climate Action and Protection Act, or iCAP, which has the highest targets—85 percent reductions in global warming emissions by 2050—of any Congressional proposal, including reductions from 100 percent of America’s electricity sector. The bill also reflects Vice President Gore’s call for fairness through a cap-and-invest system that helps low- and middle-income Americans and fossil fuel workers and industries equitably transition to a clean energy future.

Below is the statement of Chairman Markey:

“Vice President Gore’s call today reflects not just the urgency of global warming, but the pent up renewable energy revolution that is waiting in the wings, ready to be unleashed. At a time when fossil fuels are dragging down our economy, we should be looking to free fuels like the wind and the sun to power our economy, and we should be moving swiftly to bring these promising energy sources to the entire world.

“Congress must take this clarion call from our nation’s climate sage and act, swiftly and fairly. Climate legislation can grow our economy, assist low and middle income families and workers, and transition us to a stable, clean energy future, but we are running out of time.

“It has been more than two years since the release of ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, and we have still not answered the call to save our planet and save our economy. We cannot go another two years, or even one year, without passing legislation to significantly cut global warming emissions and unleash a renewable energy future.”

# # #

Markey: President DoesnaEUR(TM)t Think WeaEUR(TM)re In an Oil Emergency??

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Markey: President Doesn’t Think We’re In an Oil Emergency??

Record Inflation, $4 Gasoline, and Still the President Opposes Using Strategic Petroleum Reserve

WASHINGTON (July 15, 2008) – During President Bush’s news conference today, he was asked about the use of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to release oil into the marketplace and bring down the price at the pump. He responded by saying “ [The reserve] is for emergencies . . .” indicating that he has no intention of using any of the 700 million barrels of oil currently residing in the SPR.

“The president is once again demonstrating that he is a leader with blinders on,” said Rep. Edward J. Markey, Chairman of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. “Four dollar gasoline, bogged down in a war in Iraq, the economy entering a recession, the stock market down more than 15 percent since January, the housing market in crisis, banks failing, the highest inflation in almost 30 years, and he still doesn’t think we’re in an emergency?”

Chairman Markey yesterday announced he is finalizing a bill that will force the president to deploy oil from the reserve at an average rate of 500,000 barrels a day of light sweet crude oil for approximately six months. The bill would then swap in cheaper heavy crude oil to the reserves, replenishing the SPR, using the additional money raised from the swap to fund low-income energy assistance and renewable energy development.

Today at a press conference with Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Chairman Markey, three leading economists -- former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers and former Council of Economic Adviser Alan Binder and renowned economist Allen Sinai -- endorsed the use of the SPR and a ‘swap’ of oil as proposed by Chairman Markey as a way to address oil prices.

Since the SPR was established, multiple presidents, including the current President Bush after hurricanes Katrina and Rita, have released oil from the SPR to bring down the price of oil. Earlier this year, Chairman Markey and other Democratic leaders pushed a successful bi-partisan effort to stop the president from continuing to fill the SPR at a rate of 70,000 barrels a day, a move the president opposed before a veto-proof majority was won on the measure.

Democratic leaders are pushing for immediate relief by releasing oil from the SPR, and long-term solutions through increased fuel economy standards and renewable fuels like cellulosic ethanol, which the Democrats passed in December. Democrats are also pushing for more plug-in hybrid vehicles and renewable energy to break our dependence on oil and fossil fuels.

# # #

MARKEY: BushaEUR"In Big Oil We Trust

Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Select Committee, 202-225-4081

MARKEY: Bush—In Big Oil We Trust

WASHINGTON (July 11, 2008) -- In response to comments made by President George Bush this morning on the energy and environmental crisis facing the nation, Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, released the following statement:

“With millions of families hurting at the pump, President Bush continues to tell the American people to put their trust in Big Oil and hope things get better decades from now. He refuses to use the 700 million barrel Strategic Petroleum Reserve that could immediately help consumers, yet continues to sell the oil companies’ drilling proposal as if he worked in their PR department.

“The Bush administration’s own energy experts say that if Congress allowed drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coastlines today, we could not produce a single drop of oil or gas there for at least 10 years, and we would not reach peak production until 2030. And even then, the additional production would have no significant impact on prices. Despite these facts, the President continues to try to fool the American public into believing that drilling in these areas will magically drive down prices at the pump this summer. This is a complete and total fraud.

“While continuing his crusade to help Big Oil exploit America’s beaches and pristine coastlines for offshore drilling, the president still has yet to answer why oil companies are not drilling now on the 68 million acres of land on which they currently have access. Bush continues to threaten a veto of any renewable energy legislation that will provide domestic energy for every American faster and cheaper than his beach-side drilling schemes.

“This summer, Democrats in Congress have pushed an immediate energy relief package that includes releasing millions of barrels of oil from the strategic petroleum reserve and cracking down on rampant oil market speculators. We will continue to push for long-term renewable solutions and immediate gas price relief .”

# # #

Markey: On Global Warming Decision, White House Hacks Slash While Planet Burns

Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Markey: On Global Warming Decision, White House Hacks Slash While Planet Burns

Today’s Climate Document A Shadow of Previous Drafts Reviewed by Select Committee

Timeline and Comparison Chart Provided by Select Committee Below

WASHINGTON (July 11, 2008) – In a shameful display of political interference with potential regulation of global warming pollution, the Bush administration has watered down findings on global warming in a rulemaking notice released today by the Environmental Protection Agency. The so-called Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking released today, a response to last year’s Supreme Court’s decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, pales in comparison to earlier drafts, including a draft of findings from December of 2007 that was reviewed by staff of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. A draft of the ANPR from May 2008 was leaked and widely examined.

“Today’s sanitized and censored global warming proposal is a shadow of what the scientific experts say is needed to save the planet,” said Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the Select Committee, which was the only committee to access all drafts of the documents. “The White House has taken an earnest attempt by their own climate experts to respond to the Supreme Court’s mandate to address global warming pollution, and turned it into a Frankenstein’s monster.”

“On global warming, the White House uses the slash-and-burn technique. They slash any meaningful statements or action on global warming, and allow the planet to burn,” continued Rep. Markey.

A full timeline of the ANPR process, including the Select Committee’s process to gain access to the December drafts, and a chart comparing key portions of the various drafts of the document, is available below this release.

Today’s proposal also includes an unprecedented airing of grievances by the head of the Office of Management and Budget, Susan Dudley, and other cabinet officials, sharply criticizing the very exploration of regulatory options EPA is issuing.

“This is Bush administration dysfunction on full display,” said Rep. Markey.

The proposal released today scrubs much of the significant language and decisions on global warming from the December draft findings. The December draft showed that, among other findings: EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson determined that man-made global warming is unequivocal, the evidence is both compelling and robust, and the administration must act to prevent harm rather than wait for harm to occur before acting; that global warming could harm human welfare (the so-called “endangerment finding”); and that fuel economy standards could be much higher.

“This ANPR is really the Administration’s Notice of Prior Result – the failure of President Bush to regulate global warming pollution. Even when the supreme court of climate science, the IPCC, and the actual Supreme Court agree that carbon dioxide has serious consequences for America, the president is unwilling to do his duty to protect the nation,” continued Rep. Markey.

The regulations today were created in response to the Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, which directed the administration to make a determination on the danger posed by global warming and to propose regulations under the Clean Air Act for reducing global warming emissions from motor vehicles and fuels.

# # #

The Bush Administration’s Evolution on Massachusetts v EPA: From Progress to Politization

Overview

On April 2, 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles fall under the authority of EPA and the Clean Air Act, and directed EPA to determine whether they endanger public health or welfare (the so-called endangerment finding), and, if so, to regulate them . While EPA initially began to respond to the Supreme Court’s charge and formulated a positive endangerment finding and drafted proposed regulations in December 2007, the White House ultimately scuttled the effort in favor of an “Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” (ANPR), released on July 11, 2008 (after a May 30, 2008 version was leaked). The July 11 ANPR does not contain EPA’s finding of endangerment and regulatory recommendations, and guarantees that President Bush will leave office without acting on the Supreme Court’s charge. An analysis and timeline detailing the evolution of the EPA’s response to the Supreme Court decision is included in this document.

In addition, the July 11 ANPR demonstrates what can only be described as a bizarre and dysfunctional policy-making process — highlighting the deep conflicts within the Bush Administration on how best to respond to climate change. While all three drafts of the EPA’s response to the Massachusetts v. EPA decision (December 2007, May 30, 2008 and July 11, 2008) clearly signal that EPA legal and scientific personnel have concluded that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public welfare and therefore can and must be regulated under the Clean Air Act, the final ANPR also contains political statements to the contrary made by high-level White House officials and Bush Administration cabinet members, as exemplified below:

Susan E. Dudley, Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, White House Office of Management and Budget: “The issues raised during interagency review are so significant that we have been unable to reach interagency consensus in a timely way, and as a result, this staff draft cannot be considered Administration policy or representative of the views of the Administration…. [T]he Clean Air Act is a deeply flawed and unsuitable vehicle for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Interagency reviewers concluded upon reading the draft that trying to address greenhouse gas emissions through the existing provisions of the Clean Air Act will not only harm the U.S. economy, but will fail to provide an effective response to the global challenge of climate change.”
EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson: “One point is clear: the potential regulation of greenhouse gases under any portion of the Clean Air Act could result in an unprecedented expansion of EPA authority that would have a profound effect on virtually every sector of the economy and touch every household in the land…. I believe the ANPR demonstrates the Clean Air Act, an outdated law originally enacted to control regional pollutants that cause direct health effects, is ill-suited for the task of regulating global greenhouse gases. Based on the analysis to date, pursuing this course of action would inevitably result in a very complicated, time-consuming and, likely, convoluted set of regulations. These rules would largely pre-empt or overlay existing programs that help control greenhouse gas emissions and would be relatively ineffective at reducing greenhouse gas concentrations given the potentially damaging effect on jobs and the U.S. economy.”
Edward T. Schafer, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary, Department of Commerce, Mary E. Peters, Secretary, Department of Transportation, Samuel W. Bodman, Secretary, Department of Energy: “[T]he Clean Air Act is fundamentally ill-suited to the effective regulation of GHG emissions.”
Edward P. Lazear, Chairman, White House Council of Economic Advisors, John H. Marburger III, Director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy: “First, the Clean Air Act would result in excessive regulation… Second, the Clean Air Act may be inadequate…. Third, regulation of GHG through the Clean Air Act will prove inordinately burdensome….Fourth, the Clean Air Act entails redundancy… Finally, any GHG regulation imposed under the Clean Air Act is almost certain to fail…. We believe that the Clean Air Act is not the appropriate statutory framework for dealing with climate change. The Clean Air Act was never intended to address issues with the global complexity of GHG emissions.”

Both the May 30, 2008 leaked draft ANPR and the draft ANPR released by EPA on July 11, 2008 contain a remarkably broad and open discussion of potential options for regulating greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources, such as power plants, refineries, and cement plants. This discussion provides an evenhanded treatment of the pros and cons of regulation under various sections of the Clean Air Act. While acknowledging potential legal hurdles, the drafts include extensive discussion of options for overcoming such hurdles. They also include extensive discussion of technologies and policy options for increasing flexibility and reducing costs, including the use of market-based cap-and-trade mechanisms. Finally, both drafts make reference to a “technical support document” appendix that analyzes the options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from specific source categories (such as power plants) – a precursor to moving forward with regulations targeting such categories.

However, in keeping with the White House’s view that addressing global warming pollution under the Clean Air Act is unworkable and too costly, Administrator Johnson’s introduction to the July 11, 2008 ANPR, together with the appended letters from OMB OIRA Administrator Susan Dudley and other agency heads, sharply disavow the Agency’s analysis in the December 2007, May 30 and July 11 documents, and instead amplify remarks made by President Bush on April 16, 2008 that the Clean Air Act was “never meant to regulate global climate change” and that using it to do so could “have crippling effects on our entire economy”.

The Endangerment Finding and Proposed Vehicle Regulations

After the Massachusetts v. EPA decision, EPA engaged in a lengthy and laborious inter-agency process resulting in its conclusion that greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles do endanger public welfare as well as an aggressive regulatory framework to reduce those emissions.

What follows is a comparison of three versions of EPA’s analysis related to its specific response to Massachusetts v. EPA: The proposed endangerment finding and greenhouse gas motor vehicle regulations approved by Stephen Johnson in December 2007, the May 30 2008 leaked draft ANPR that was submitted by EPA to OMB, and the final version of the July 11 2008 ANPR released by EPA. In addition, a timeline of events that led to today’s ANPR release is also included.

Other than the Bush Administration, only the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming has had access to all of these documents.

This comparison demonstrates that EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson determined – consistent with the views of his scientific and technical advisors – that greenhouse gas emissions are dangerous and that motor vehicle emissions should be regulated by EPA, but that the Bush Administration ultimately refused to allow these steps to be taken. Moreover, each draft of the documents that ultimately were folded into the July 11, 2008 ANPR contained fewer recommendations, weaker conclusions and less extensive analysis such that the final, publicly released version says almost nothing whatsoever.

Topic	December 2007 documents submitted to OMB	May 30 2008 draft ANPR submitted to OMB	July 11 ANPR released by EPA
Draft regulatory proposal?	YES, for cars and light trucks	NO	NO
Endangerment finding made?	YES – greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles endanger public welfare.	NO, EPA asks for comment on whether science supports endangerment, and what the scope of the finding should be if it is made	NO – Invites comment on question of whether greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles of fuels endanger public health or welfare.
Scientific basis for endangerment included?	YES – Some benefits of climate change may exist, but these are said not to undermine the positive endangerment finding, which was based on all evidence for risks and adverse impacts.	Some, and reference to technical appendix. “Some elements of human health, society and the environment may benefit from climate change (eg. Short-term increases in agricultural yields, less cold-related mortality). We seek comment on how the potential for some benefits should be viewed against the full weight of evidence showing numerous risks and the potential for adverse impacts.”	Similar to May 2008 draft
Are regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles proposed?	YES	NO, but gives detailed consideration of how Clean Air Act could be used to develop such regulations, using analysis developed for the December 2007 documents.	NO, states that EPA has not made a determination on what sort of regulations would be appropriate, but includes some options based on May 2008 draft
Stringency of Proposed regulations	35 mpg by 2018 car and light truck average, and using a higher gas price led to 43.3 mpg for cars by 2018 of 30.6 mpg for light trucks by 2017.	N/A 35 mpg by 2018 car and light truck average cited as feasible but not proposed. Possible standards for higher gas price scenario were removed.	Similar to May 30 draft
Discussion of impact higher oil prices might have on stringency?	YES. All gasoline price estimates used were from EIA’s 2007 projections, and the 2007 high price projections ($3.20/gallon in 2030) were used to calculate 43.3 mpg for cars in 2018 and 30.6 mpg in 2017 for light trucks. Expectation that final regulation would be based on EIA’s 2008 numbers.	YES, discussion updates gasoline price to reflect current prices of $3.50/gallon Using higher gas price said to increase standards and dramatically increase consumer benefits to up to $2 trillion in 2040, but results of stringency calculation on actual standards have been removed.	All analysis has been removed.
Discussion of options for regulation of stationary source greenhouse gas emissions	N/A – Supreme Court decision did not relate to stationary sources.	YES – broad and open discussion of potential options for regulating emissions from stationary sources like power plants, e.g. through performance standards for individual sources or market-based cap-and-trade systems	Similar to May 2008, but conclusions disavowed by introductory statements by EPA Administrator Johnson and other Bush Administration officials

A LANDMARK GLOBAL WARMING DECISION AT THE SUPREME COURT, AND THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION’S BEGINS TO RESPOND

April 2, 2007: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the State of Massachusetts in Massachusetts v EPA, finding that:

Greenhouse gases are air pollutants that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act.
EPA's excuses for refusing to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles were all inadequate.
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA must determine whether these emissions cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, a determination often referred to as an 'endangerment finding,' and
If the EPA does make a positive endangerment finding, it must regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.

May 14, 2007: President Bush directed EPA, along with other agencies, to prepare a regulatory response to the Supreme Court decision, to publish the proposal by the end of 2007 and to complete it by the end of 2008.

May – December 2007: EPA staff worked to develop both a positive endangerment finding and aggressive regulations to ensure that the fleet of cars and light trucks achieve the equivalent of 35 miles per gallon (mpg) by 2018.

July 22, 2007: EPA Administrator Johnson:“[I]n May, the President directed us to move ahead and take the first regulatory step to address greenhouse gas emissions from cars. We’re working across agencies to develop a proposed regulation under the Clean Air Act by the end of this year, with final rules due out by the end of next year.”

November 8, 2007: EPA Administrator Johnson: “In addition, since the Supreme Court decision, we have announced that we are developing a proposed regulation to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from mobile sources. That is the first time in our Nation's history, and I have committed to members of Congress and to the President that we will have that proposed regulation out for public notice and comment beginning by the end of this year and to work toward a final rule by the end of next year.”

THE WHITE HOUSE BEGINS TO TRY TO STOP EPA’S EFFORTS

December 3, 2007: Director of the National Economic Council Al Hubbard sends a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Congress’ pending completion of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA), stating that “Unfortunately, while assigning new requirements to the Department of Transportation, the proposed legislation leaves ambiguous EPA’s role in CAFE regulations, and likely creates substantial amounts of regulatory uncertainty and confusion. The failure to clearly identify the relative roles of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation in national fuel economy regulations could greatly undermine our shared objective of reducing gasoline consumption in the United States. Legislation should clarify that there should be consultation between the agencies, while clearly establishing a single national fuel economy standard.

Early December, 2007: The positive endangerment finding and vehicle regulations were approved by EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson. The endangerment finding was submitted by EPA to the White House Office of Management and Budget, and the draft vehicle regulations were submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for review.

December 6, 2007: The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) submitted a Statement of Administration Policy on EISA, stating as part of the veto threat that “Unfortunately, H.R. 6 leaves ambiguous the role of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in regulating vehicle fuel economy, and as a result would likely create substantial regulatory uncertainty, confusion, and duplication of efforts. The bill could also delay effective implementation of new fuel economy requirements due to inevitable litigation. The double regulation that would result from this failure to clearly identify the relative roles of EPA and DOT in national fuel economy regulations could greatly undermine our shared objective of rapidly reducing gasoline consumption. The bill needs to clarify one agency as the sole entity, after consultation with other affected agencies, to be responsible for a single national regulatory standard for both fuel economy and tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles.”

December 13, 2007: The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) submitted a Statement of Administration Policy on EISA, stating as part of the veto threat that “the Administration compliments the Senate for giving the Department of Transportation (DOT) the authority to establish a new CAFE standard, which would both improve fuel economy and reduce tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions. The bill should clarify, however, that DOT should establish this single national regulatory standard, in consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency, and that neither agency should add additional layers of regulation.”

December 19, 2007: The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) was signed into law, requiring NHTSA to promulgate regulations to ensure that the car and light truck fleet achieve a fuel economy average of at least 35 mpg by 2020. Congress included a provision in EISA expressly rejecting the White House requests to remove EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases from motor vehicles.

AND THEN, ALL WORK ON THE EPA REGULATORY EFFORTS STOPPED

January, 2008: White House Council on Environmental Quality Chairman James Connaughton said that the Administration was studying “the need for further regulations and additional policies on heat-trapping greenhouse gases from automobiles and industrial emitters following passage last month of a new fuel economy standard.”

February 27, 2008: A press report indicated that “EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson says he is ‘taking a step back’ to analyze a slew of greenhouse gas (GHG) litigation, permits and petitions facing the agency in order to decide the best way to proceed given that taking one action under the Clean Air Act can impact a host of other provisions in the statute. Johnson also hedged on whether the agency will issue a long-awaited endangerment finding on the risks posed by GHG emissions, a possible retreat from his statement to the Senate environment committee last month that the agency was planning to issue the finding.”

March 13, 2008: At a hearing of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson said “that it is very evident that as one looks at the Clean Air Act, there are many interconnections, and a decision on one part of the Clean Air Act could have significant consequences both in how greenhouse gas is regulated as well as other unintended consequences, perhaps such as significant harm.”

March 27, 2008: EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson sent a letter to Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming Chairman Edward J. Markey and Ranking member James Sensenbrenner informing them that EPA had decided to issue an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) later in the spring which would “present and request comment on the best available science including specific and quantifiable effects of greenhouse gases relevant to making an endangerment finding and the implications of this finding with regard to the regulation of both mobile and stationary sources”, including the Agency’s response to Massachusetts v U.S. EPA. After reviewing the comments submitted in response to the ANPR, EPA “will then consider how to best respond to the Supreme Court decision and its implications under the Clean Air Act.”

April 2, 2008: The Select Committee On Energy Independence and Global Warming voted unanimously to authorize the Chairman to issue a subpoena to Administrator Johnson for the endangerment finding and greenhouse gas motor vehicle regulations prepared by EPA in its response to Massachusetts v EPA. On the same day, at a Select Committee hearing, Robert Meyers, Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator of the EPA Office of Air and Radiation, indicated in response to a question that a formal endangerment finding or regulatory proposal would normally not be included in an ANPR, but would rather be included in a subsequent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would be issued after the ANPR responses were received and analyzed. This demonstrated the high probability that the Bush Administration would leave all regulatory decisions related to the response to Massachusetts v EPA to the next President. The subpoena for the December 2007 documents was issued the following day.

April 16, 2008: President Bush said in a speech that “the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act were never meant to regulate global climate change. For example, under a Supreme Court decision last year, the Clean Air Act could be applied to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. If these laws are stretched beyond their original intent, they could override the programs Congress just adopted, and force the government to regulate more than just power plant emissions. They could also force the government to regulate smaller users and producers of energy from schools and stores to hospitals and apartment buildings. This would make the federal government act like a local planning and zoning board, and it would have crippling effects on our entire economy. Decisions with such far-reaching impact should not be left to unelected regulators and judges. Such decisions should be debated openly and made by the elected representatives of the people they affect. The American people deserve an honest assessment of the costs, benefits and feasibility of any proposed solution.”

March –July 2008: EPA staff worked to prepare the ANPR.

May 30, 2008: A draft of the ANPR was submitted by EPA to OMB, and a copy thereof was obtained by the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. It did not propose either an endangerment finding or vehicle greenhouse gas regulations for motor vehicles, but did contain some of the analysis used to formulate EPA’s December 2007 endangerment finding and regulatory response to Massachusetts v EPA.

June 20, 2008: The Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming obtained access to the EPA’s December 2007 endangerment finding and regulatory response to Massachusetts v EPA via an agreement reached with the White House and EPA.

June 24, 2008: Chairman Markey sent a letter to President Bush detailing the Select Committee staff’s review of the December 2007 documents and indicated that any “legal and scientific-based” ANPR released by EPA must include the key recommendations of those documents. “To do less would be a blatant denial of the overwhelming scientific evidence indicating that greenhouse gas emissions are dangerous, would overrule the scientific and legal recommendations of the EPA, and would further undercut your Administration’s credibility on matters related to climate change both here and in the rest of the world.”

July 11, 2008: The ANPR is released by EPA.

Markey: Aggressively Using Strategic Petroleum Reserve Will Bring Immediate Consumer Relief

Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Chairman Ed Markey, 202-225-4081

Markey: Aggressively Using Strategic Petroleum Reserve Will Bring Immediate Consumer Relief

Chairman Joins Speaker Pelosi, Others Calling on President Bush to Deploy “Consumer Price Weapon”

WASHINGTON (July 10, 2008) – Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) today joined House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other House leaders in calling on the president to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR).

“We have millions of barrels of oil we could release into the market today, without drilling one single well and giving away our coastline to Big Oil,” said Rep. Markey, Chairman of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. “Congress has already instructed the president to stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Now he must use this weapon against high gas prices.”

Rep. Markey was a principal co-sponsor of the House legislation that in May forced the president to stop filling the SPR at a rate of 70,000 barrels a day. He has previously called on the president to release oil from the SPR.

He has also called for the exchange in the SPR of light sweet crude, which is the most desirable source material to refine into gasoline and diesel fuels, for heavy crude oil, which will be needed for home heating oil later in the year. Because heavy crude is cheaper than light sweet crude, the bill would also raise revenues that can be re-directed to renewable energy and low-income fuel assistance funds.

The SPR currently holds well over 700 million barrels of oil, and is at more than 97 percent capacity. The president has broad authority to deploy oil from the reserves during times of national emergencies, and previous actions to use the SPR by the current president and past presidents have reduced the price of oil.

The high price of gasoline has consistently polled as the number one concern of Americans today and has become a serious economic hindrance on overall economic growth and on American families’ budgets.

# # #

Select Cmte. to Hold Hearing on Extreme Weather and Global Warming

Tue, 08 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

MEDIA ADVISORY FOR THURSDAY, JULY 10th, 1:30 PM

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Select Cmte. to Hold Hearing on Extreme Weather and Global Warming

California Wildfires, Midwest Floods, Other Events Prompt Question: What is Warming’s Link to Wild Weather?

In the aftermath of severe storms across America and throughout the world, and with Bertha strengthening to the first hurricane of the season, extreme weather is on the minds of people around the globe. And while storms, floods and droughts have always occurred, science points to our changing climate as having a real effect on the severity and frequency of extreme weather events. Extreme precipitation events have increased over North America over the past 50 years. For the past decade, the West and Southwest regions have experienced drought conditions which are impacting agriculture, and contributing to the wildfire epidemic in the Western United States.

On Thursday, Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming will hold a hearing examining the links between global warming, extreme weather events, and how these events affect the world now and will in the future.

WHAT: Select Committee Hearing, “Global Warming Effects on Extreme Weather”

WHEN: Thursday, July 10, 2008 at 1:30 PM

WHERE: 210 Cannon House Office Building and on the web at globalwarming.house.gov

WHO:
Jimmy O. Adegoke, Ph.D, Associate Professor, University of Missouri – Kansas City

Heather Cooley, Senior Research Associate, Pacific Institute

Dr. Jay S. Golden, Director, National Center of Excellence, SMART Innovations for Urban Climate & Energy, Global Institute of Sustainability, Arizona State University

Angela Licata, Deputy Commissioner, New York City Bureau of Environmental Planning and Analysis

Dan Keppen, Executive Director, Family Farm Alliance

# # #

Markey: G8 Global Warming aEURoeGoalaEUR? DoesnaEUR(TM)t Reach the Goal Line

Tue, 08 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Markey: G8 Global Warming “Goal” Doesn’t Reach the Goal Line

With Other G8 Countries Already on Emission-cutting Path, U.S. Again Holding World Back, Says Chairman

WASHINGTON (July 8, 2008) -- Today the G8 leaders announced their vision of a goal to cut global warming emissions by 50 percent by 2050 to be adopted as part of the ongoing international climate negotiations. Scientists have said that global emissions must be cut by 50 percent by the middle of the century, and industrialized countries must make even steeper cuts to avoid the worst effects of global warming.

Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, today called the agreement another attempt by the Bush administration to avoid taking any real action until the end of the president’s term.

Rep. Markey has introduced the Investing in Climate Action and Protection Act, or iCAP, which would cut emissions by 85 percent of current levels by 2050, representing the effective contribution scientists say the United States must make as the world's largest per capita and historical emitter of heat-trapping pollution.

Below is the statement of Chairman Markey:

“With most of the other G8 countries already committed to significant cuts, the United States is once again proving to be the lowest common denominator in global agreements to cut heat-trapping emissions. The ‘goal’ announced today doesn’t reach the global warming goal line.

“And while greater cuts are needed here at home to avert a climate catastrophe, even this new goal means that as soon as Air Force One touches down in America, President Bush should get working on an aggressive plan to cut United States emissions. Unfortunately, I have little confidence that he will do so. This administration appears more interested in passing the buck than in passing climate change legislation that would make the necessary cuts in global warming emissions.

“The bottom line is that 50 percent cuts by 2050 is the minimum effort to avert a climate catastrophe, and America must make the maximum effort possible as the number one per capita and historical emitter of heat-trapping pollution.”

# # #

Katrina Students Bring Climate Vulnerability Story to Congress

Tue, 08 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

MEDIA ADVISORY FOR THURSDAY, JULY 10, 10:00 AM

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Katrina Students Bring Climate Vulnerability Story to Congress

As Hurricane Season Begins, Gulf Coast Youth Release Study on Risks from Global Warming

As the first hurricane of the season thunders through the Atlantic Ocean this week, Gulf Coast students, along with a U.S. Forest Service expert, will brief Congress on the vulnerability of the Cumberland, Mobile, and Tennessee River Basins and tell their story on how global warming can affect our water, our land, and our lives.

Due to their experience with Hurricane Katrina, these two dozen students from Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama are taking action to prevent further deterioration of the climate for the sake of their coastal home and their generation which will live through the impacts to come. They will present their own research and perspectives on how their findings will affect the future, and on the needs for strong policy in the government, and a scientifically informed public dialogue on issues related to climate change.

Chairman Edward J. Markey and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming are hosting the students, who were selected for the World Wildlife Fund Allianz Southeast Climate Witness Program based on their academic achievements, their interest in the environment and climate change, and their leadership experience.

WHAT: Select Committee briefing on climate vulnerability

WHO:
25 Gulf Coast high school students from WWF Allianz Southeast Climate Witness Program
Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.)
Dr. Steve McNulty, US Forest Service
Ginette Hemley, Senior Vice President of Conservation Strategy and Science, World Wildlife Fund
Rev. Christopher Worthley, Executive Director, Allianz Foundation for North America

WHEN: Thursday, July 10, 10 AM

WHERE: 210 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC

# # #

EPA Documents - Global Warming a Danger, Vehicle Emissions Should be Regulated

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4012

EPA Documents—Global Warming a Danger, Vehicle Emissions Should be Regulated

Select Committee Review of Subpoenaed December Draft Regulations Shows EPA Moving Towards Climate Regulations, Higher Fuel Economy, Before Administration Pullback

WASHINGTON (June 24, 2008) – The Environmental Protection Agency was on its way towards finding global warming emissions to be a danger to public welfare, and that these emissions should be regulated in vehicles and fuels, according to a review of subpoenaed global warming documents by the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. The review of the documents follows a lengthy process of negotiation with the EPA and the White House, which started in January of 2008, and brings into serious question the administration’s u-turn on regulating global warming emissions.

The documents are the draft regulatory recommendations from December 5 and December 14 of 2007, and were sent to the White House and to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for approval before reports indicate all work was stopped on the recommendations. The White House is now in the process of completing an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), which would be a step backwards in what the Select Committee has found to be an already advanced process towards regulating global warming emissions.

Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the Select Committee, today sent a letter to the President on the documents, saying that any proposed rules disseminated from his administration should live up to the quality of recommendations put forward by his own EPA experts in climate and transportation.

“This administration has shown its contempt for Congress, its contempt for the rule of law, and this administration’s handling of the Massachusetts v. EPA decision has shown its contempt for science,” said Chairman Markey. “The president has a short amount of time to alter his legacy as running the most environmentally-unfriendly administration in history, and he can start by listening to his own climate scientists and take action on global warming.”

The letter, which is available on the Select Committee’s website at http://globalwarming.house.gov/tools/2q08materials/files/0064.pdf, outlines how the documents reviewed by the committee indicate that, along with global warming being a danger to public welfare and in need of regulation:

--EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson determined that man-made global warming is unequivocal, the evidence is both compelling and robust, and the administration must act to prevent harm rather than wait for harm to occur before acting.

--EPA found that global warming risks include severe heat waves, sea level rise, reduced availability of water, increased wildfire and insect outbreaks, an increase in heavy precipitation events, an increase in regional ground-level ozone pollution, and changes in the range of vector-borne diseases.

--EPA proposed that regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles be implemented in order to achieve the equivalent of a 35 mpg car and light truck fleet average by 2018 (with the car fleet averaging 38.4 mpg by 2018 and the truck fleet averaging 29.5 mpg by 2017).

--When EPA used the EIA 2007 high gasoline price projections of $2.75 in 2017 to $3.20 in 2030 to calculate standards, it found that the car fleet could achieve a standard of 43.3 mpg by 2018 and light trucks could achieve a standard of 30.6 mpg by 2017.

EPA is set to release its draft ANPR soon, and the letter makes clear that any future regulations from the administration on global warming will be measured against the standards put forward by its own environmental and energy experts.

The regulations reviewed were created in response to the Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, which directed the administration to make a determination on the danger posed by global warming and to propose regulations for reducing global warming emissions from motor vehicles and fuels. On May 14, 2007 the President directed EPA, along with other agencies, to prepare a regulatory response to by the end of 2007 and to complete it by the end of 2008. According to reports, EPA staff spent about 6 months developing this proposal, and transmitted both a positive finding of endangerment to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and a draft regulatory proposal to require the equivalent of a 35 miles per gallon (mpg) fuel economy standard from the fleet of cars and light trucks by 2018 to NHTSA in early December, 2007.

A timeline of the negotiations between Chairman Markey and the administration on these documents is available on the Select Committee’s website here: http://globalwarming.house.gov/tools/2q08materials/files/0047.pdf

HEARING 6/26: Select Committee to Discuss Fuel Economy As Solution to High Prices

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

MEDIA ADVISORY FOR THURSDAY, JUNE 26th, 1:30 PM

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4012

More Miles Per Gallon: Consumer Solutions to $4 Gas

Select Committee Hearing to Discuss Fuel Economy As Solution to High Prices

WASHINGTON (June 24, 2008) – At a time when gasoline costs $4 or more no matter where you go, high mileage cars, trucks and SUVs play a key role in helping consumers fight against record high gas prices. Money-saving hybrid and electric technology solutions exist today that can increase the gas mileage of cars to over 100 miles per gallon, but have not yet permeated the market to give consumers more choice on car lots across the country. Along with aggressive moves by the auto industry, the federal government could speed up the process, reaching higher mileage standards faster by using more realistic gas price assumptions when deciding what fuel economy standards to set.

On Thursday, the Select Committee on Energy Independence & Global Warming will discuss the future role of the auto industry and our federal government in fighting gas prices and examine the fuel economy standards proposed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in response to the enactment of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007. NHTSA’s proposal calls for the fleet of cars and light trucks to average 31.6 miles per gallon by model year 2015 – but when calculating these standards, NHTSA used Energy Information Administration (EIA) assumptions about gas prices that defy reality, ranging from $2.42/gallon in 2016 to $2.51/gallon in 2030.

The administration concedes that gas prices are the most critical element in determining mile per gallon increases in America’s vehicle fleet. At a hearing before the Select Committee earlier this month, the EIA said NHTSA should use the high end analysis for gas prices, which would have the effect of significantly raising the achievable miles per gallon in future vehicles.

WHAT: Select Committee Hearing, “$4 Gasoline and Fuel Economy: Auto Industry at a Crossroads”

WHEN: Thursday, June 26, 2008 at 1:30 PM

WHERE: 210 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC
and on the web at globalwarming.house.gov

WHO:
The Honorable Tyler Duvall, Assistant Secretary for Policy, Department of Transportation
Mr. Dominique Thormann, Senior Vice President, Nissan North America, Inc.
Mr. Shai Agassi, Founder and CEO, Project Better Place
Mr. Torben Holm, Consultant, DONG Energy A/S
Mr. Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell & Giuliani LLP

Briefing 6/23: Dr. James Hansen: The Climate Threat to the Planet

Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

MEDIA ADVISORY FOR MONDAY, JUNE 23, 3:00 PM

Contact: Eben Burnham Snyder, Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Dr. James Hansen: The Climate Threat to the Planet

Select Committee welcomes Dr. Hansen on the 20th anniversary of his landmark Congressional testimony

WASHINGTON (June 20, 2008) – On the 20th anniversary of testimony that sounded the alarm bell on our climate crisis, the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming will host pre-eminent climate scientist Dr. James Hansen as he gives a briefing Monday on his vision of the climate challenge as it stands now.

In 1988, discussion of climate change was confined mainly to scientific journals. But on June 23, Dr. Hansen was the lead witness at a hearing of the Senate Energy Committee to explore the issue. His testimony marked the first time a top climate scientist declared that global temperatures had risen beyond the range of natural variability. Since then, scientists from around the world have built an unassailable body of evidence that supports his 1988 testimony. Climate change now looms as a more immediate and serious threat than ever before and in need of swift, effective Congressional action.

WHAT: Select Committee Briefing featuring Dr. James Hansen, “The Climate Threat to the Planet”

WHEN: Monday, June 23rd, 2008 at 3:00 PM

WHERE: 2318 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC

# # #

JOINT HEARING 6/25: Intelligence Subcommittee and Select Committee to Examine National Security Implications of Global Warming

Mon, 23 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

MEDIA ADVISORY FOR WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 2008, 9:30 AM

CONTACT:
Select Committee, (202) 225-4081
HPSCI, (202) 225-7690

JOINT HEARING 6/25: Intelligence Subcommittee and Select Committee to Examine National Security Implications of Global Warming

First-ever Government Analysis of Security Risks From Warming World to be Discussed

On Wednesday, June 25, the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming and the Intelligence Community Management (ICM) Subcommittee, will hold a joint hearing on “National Security Implications of Global Climate Change.”

Members will hear and discuss the results of the first-ever U.S. Government analysis of the security threats posed by global warming.

WHAT: Joint Hearing on the National Security Implications of Global Warming

WHO:
PANEL ONE

Dr. Thomas Fingar, Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Analysis and Chairman of the National Intelligence Council

Mr. Rolf Mowatt-Larsen, Director, Intelligence and Counterintelligence, U.S. Department of Energy

PANEL TWO

Rt. Hon. Margaret Beckett, MP, Former Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom

VADM Paul Gaffney, President, Monmouth University and Former President, National Defense University

Dr. Kent Hughes Butts, Professor of Political-Military Strategy, Center for Strategic Leadership, U.S. Army War College

Marlo Lewis, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Lee Lane, Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute

WHERE: 210 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC

WHEN: Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 9:30 AM

Markey: Bush, Cheney, McCain Turning GOP into aEUR~Gas and Oil PartyaEUR(TM)

Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4081
Cong. Ed Markey, 202-225-2836

Markey: Bush, Cheney, McCain Turning GOP into ‘Gas and Oil Party’

WASHINGTON (June 18, 2008) – Rep. Ed Markey decried the drill-drill-drill policies of President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Senator McCain today, and called on the president to support legislation that would call Big Oil’s bluff by requiring the oil companies to use the 68 million acres they already own and are not using, rather than asking for more public land.

Below is the statement of Rep. Markey, Chairman of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming:

“The shortsighted, drill-first policies pushed by President Bush and Senator McCain is turning the GOP into the Gas and Oil Party.

“The oil companies already own 68 million acres of drillable land and sea, which is the size of Georgia and Illinois combined, but they’re not producing oil there. Today’s call for more land and sea is nothing more than a drilling decoy, and Democrats in Congress are calling their bluff.

“President Bush and Senator McCain have become the ventriloquist’s doll for Big Oil, simply repeating a fossil fuel wish list that was so preposterous, even the Republicans controlled Congress refused to adopt it. President Bush and Senator McCain should stand up to Big Oil and tell them to use the land they already own before asking for more public land.

“Democrats in Congress are calling their bluff by proposing legislation that will force Big Oil to use it or lose it, imposing a fee on unused oil leases, and using that revenue to fund energy efficiency and assistance programs that will help American families.

“Democrats in Congress have already started putting America on a long-term path towards energy independence by increasing fuel economy standards and the production of advanced biofuels. Democrats have made multiple attempts to push for renewable energy alternatives but have been blocked by the president. We are looking to the future. President Bush and Senator McCain are stuck in the past, singing the same song they have for years, with lyrics written by Big Oil.”

# # #

HEARING 6/18: Select Committee Looks to Smart Planning as Response to Fuel Costs, Global Warming

Fri, 13 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

MEDIA ADVISORY FOR WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 9:30 AM

Select Committee Looks to Smart Planning as Response to Energy Costs, Global Warming

New Cities Being Developed in Tornado-ravaged Kansas Town, Abu Dhabi Are Shining Examples of Better Development Practices

Watch it live! This hearing will be WEBCAST live HERE.

With fuel prices at an all-time high, a housing market gone sour, and heightened concerns about global warming, smart urban and rural community planning can help all three by reducing the miles traveled in vehicles, improving infrastructure and establishing economically strong communities.

On Wednesday, the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming will hold a hearing titled, “Planning Communities for a Changing Climate—Smart Growth, Public Demand and Private Opportunity.” The committee will explore examples of better development practices happening here in a tornado-ravaged Kansas town and on the sands of Abu Dhabi in the Middle East.

WHAT: Select Committee hearing: "Planning Communities for a Changing Climate—Smart Growth, Public Demand and Private Opportunity."

WHO:
Dr. Sultan Al Jaber, CEO, Masdar Initiative, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Steve Hewitt, City Administrator, Greensburg, Kansas
Gregory Cohen, President and CEO, American Highway Users Alliance
David Goldberg, Director of Communications, Smart Growth America
Steve Winkleman, Transportation Director, Center for Clean Air Policy

WHERE: 311 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC

WHEN: 9:30 AM, Wednesday, June 18

Report: No Chinese Drilling Off FloridaaEUR(TM)s Coast: Republicans Promoting Unfounded Myth to Push Drill-Drill-Drill Philosophy

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Report: No Chinese Drilling Off Florida’s Coast

Republicans Promoting Unfounded Myth to Push Drill-Drill-Drill Philosophy

WASHINGTON (June 12, 2008) – How are Republicans pushing their drill-drill-drill policy this week? By scaring up the ghosts of communism and xenophobia, perpetuating a myth that China is drilling off the coast of Florida.

A Congressional Research Service report from February of this year, however, disproves that myth, saying there is no offshore drilling partnership between Cuba and China, and any drilling has been focused on land in Cuba, not off Florida’s beaches.

“By perpetuating this myth, the Republicans and their friends in Big Oil are acting as the modern day masters of deception,” said Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Chairman of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. “It’s not the Chinese who are looking to drill off Florida’s beaches, it’s the Republicans and Big Oil.”

The CRS report notes that “while there has been some concern about China’s potential involvement in offshore deepwater oil projects, to date its involvement in Cuba’s oil sector has been focused on onshore oil extraction in Pinar del Rio province [in Cuba] through its state-run China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation.”

Rep. Markey, along with Reps. Nick Rahall (D-W.V.), Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.), Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) and others announced pieces of legislation today that would force the oil companies to drill on the 68 million acres of land and sea they already own, an area equivalent to Georgia and Illinois combined. The acreage could produce 4.8 million barrels of oil a day, nearly twice America’s current domestic production.

“Big Oil could drill in millions of acres today, without Congress even lifting a finger,” said Markey. “This is yet another drilling decoy proffered by the Republicans and their friends in the oil and gas industry.”

The CRS report is available on the web at http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33819.pdf and the specific passage cited above is on page 30.

# # #

Emanuel, Hinchey, Markey, Rahall to Introduce Legislation to Force Big Oil to Use Owned Leases

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

For Immediate Release

Contact:

Rep. Markey, 202-225-4081
Rep. Emanuel, 202-225-1400
Rep. Rahall, 202-226-9019
Rep. Hinchey, 202-225-6335

Emanuel, Hinchey, Markey, Rahall to Introduce Legislation to Force Big Oil to Use Owned Leases

WASHINGTON – House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel, Rep. Maurice Hinchey, Chairman Edward J. Markey and Chairman Nick Rahall today announced plans to introduce legislation that will help lower gas prices by compelling oil companies to utilize the 68 million acres onshore and offshore that are being leased by big oil companies, but not used to produce energy. The members were also joined by Reps. John Yarmuth and Peter Welch.

Currently, oil companies are not producing oil or gas on the nearly 68 million acres of federal land already under their control. Offshore, big oil is producing on only about 20 percent of the acres they hold, while onshore, companies are producing on less than 30 percent of the acres they hold. These unused areas could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly double current domestic oil production.

“With nearly 68 million acres of on-shore and off-shore public land already leased for oil and gas drilling untouched by the energy companies who hold those leases, it's time for Republicans and oil company executives to stop making the false claim that the U.S. is not making enough land available for energy production,” Hinchey said. “Oil corporations are trying to take control of as much land now during the oil-friendly Bush administration years, but are holding off on drilling until the price of oil soars to $200 or $300 a barrel so that they can make even greater profits. By stalling energy production, these major energy corporations are cheating the American people out of a domestic oil and natural gas supply, causing prices to unfairly and unnecessarily soar at the pump. The federal government has made tens of millions of acres available for oil and gas development. It's the energy companies that are refusing to produce and now we will make them pay if they continue to refuse to increase our domestic supply.”

Markey, Hinchey and Emanuel will introduce legislation that would assess a fee on land energy companies have leased but are not using for production. This fee will escalate if leases go unused over the course of several years. Revenue raised from these fees will go towards renewable energy and energy efficiency investments, as well as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). Chairman Rahall will also introduce legislation that employs a “use it or lose it” tactic that will compel oil and gas companies to either produce or give up the federal onshore and offshore leases they are stockpiling by barring the companies from obtaining any more leases unless they can demonstrate that they are producing oil and gas, or are diligently developing the leases they already hold.

“Big Oil, as many Americans already suspect, are perfectly fine with high gasoline prices at the pump, while they hold back domestic production on federal leases and enjoy world record profits. I am calling them on the carpet. I am calling their bluff. We are not going to continue to allow them to speculate and profiteer with public resources to the detriment of the American people,” said Rahall, Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee.

“Big Oil seems more concerned with pumping up prices than pumping more oil,” said Markey. “When Big Oil already has tens of millions of acres available to them right now, it’s cynical of them to come to Congress and ask for more drilling territory. This is a drilling decoy. With gas prices increasing by the day, it’s time for Big Oil to produce or pay.”

“It's time for oil companies to use it or lose it,” added Emanuel. “These companies have access to millions of acres and there is nothing stopping Big Oil from using this land to produce energy.”

# # #

EVENT PHOTOS

Select Committee Reaches Agreement with White House on EPA Documents

Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Select Committee Reaches Agreement with White House on EPA Documents

WASHINGTON (June 9, 2008) – The Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming has reached an agreement with the White House on access to documents pertaining to the Environmental Protection Agency’s decisions on two global warming regulatory issues.

Under the agreement, the EPA will allow the Select Committee access to the documents in a timely fashion, but to not interfere with the current regulatory deliberations currently underway within the administration. The Select Committee will not withdraw the subpoena still outstanding against EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson.

“The agreement will allow Congress the right to conduct oversight on important executive decisions,” said Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.). “Our goal all along was to acquire access to these global warming documents, and the committee has succeeded in that effort in a bi-partisan way.”

The committee has been pursuing two sets of documents, both easily accessed by the agency. The documents relate to EPA’s decisions on global warming emissions regulations for vehicles, and on the agency’s ruling on the risks of heat-trapping pollution to public health or welfare.

Starting in January, Chairman Markey requested the documents from Administrator Johnson, and has offered several proposals since then to accommodate the agency’s wishes to keep the documents private, while still recognizing Congress’ right to the documents.

A timeline of the exchanges between Chairman Markey and the administration is available on the Select Committee website HERE.

# # #

HEARING 5/11: The Future of Oil - Peak Prices, Peak Production, Piqued Consumers

Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

MEDIA ADVISORY FOR WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11th, 9:30 AM

Contact:Select Committee, 202-225-4081

Oil Hearing: Peak Prices, Peak Production, Piqued Consumers

Select Committee to Discuss “The Future of Oil”

WASHINGTON (June 9, 2008) – As prices at the pump reach record levels on a daily basis, many consumers and analysts are asking the same questions: How bad could prices get? And what policies are needed to address America’s oil crisis?

On Wednesday, June 11, Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming will examine the long term prognosis for oil’s global supply and demand, and what solutions could be implemented to reduce demand and decrease prices.

A barrel of oil reached a new record price on Friday, and many analysts are saying $200 oil is a potentially imminent threat. Yet our own government energy analysts are saying oil could slide back to $50 a barrel, and supplies could increase, even as the private sector disagrees. The Select Committee will discuss this disconnect, as well as the global warming concerns of non-traditional oil retrieval methods like oil shale and oil sands.

WHAT: Select Committee Hearing, “The Future of Oil.”

WHEN: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 at 10:00 AM

WHERE: 1300 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC
and on the web at globalwarming.house.gov

WHO:
Guy Caruso, Administrator, Energy Information Administration
Adam Sieminski, Chief Energy Economist, Deutsche Bank
Amy Myers Jaffe, Energy Studies Fellow at the James Baker Institute for Public Policy
Athan Manuel, Director of Land Protection Programs, Sierra Club

# # #

Markey: House Will Keep Global Warming Discussion Alive

Fri, 06 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: 202-225-4081

Markey: House Will Keep Global Warming Discussion Alive

WASHINGTON (June 6, 2008) – Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming and the author of the Investing in Climate Action and Protection Act (HR 6186) today gave the following statement following the United States Senate’s cloture vote on the Climate Security Act.

“Today a majority of Senators went on record saying they would support mandatory limits on global warming pollution, and it is now time for the House to continue this urgent discussion and move closer towards a national pollution solution.

“I look forward to a robust and effective discussion on climate legislation in the Energy and Commerce Committee with Chairman Dingell, Chairman Boucher, and all of my colleagues.

“Senators Boxer, Lieberman and Warner and many others have taken us farther down the road towards planetary salvation than Congress has ever gone before. With scientists saying time is running out to cut heat-trapping emissions and avoid the worst effects of global warming, it is time for all of us to band together and take the final strides necessary to complete this race against planetary destruction.”

# # #

House Passes 21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0500

From Speaker Pelosi's website:
On June 4, the House passed the 21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act, H.R. 3021.
This critical bill provides a five-year authorization for a green school construction program, authorizing $6.4 billion for school construction projects in fiscal year 2009, and ensuring that school districts will quickly receive funds for school modernization, renovation and repairs that improve the teaching and learning climate, health and safety, and energy efficiency. The bill requires that the majority of funds (90 percent by fiscal year 2013) be used for projects that meet green building standards.
School buildings should be safe and healthy learning environments for children. But according to recent estimates, America’s schools are hundreds of billions of dollars short of the funding needed to bring them up to good condition. Meanwhile, research shows a correlation between school facility quality and student achievement. Despite the need to modernize school buildings, since 2001 the federal government has provided almost no direct aid to help states and schools pay for school construction and repair. Modernizing school buildings would also create jobs in the construction industry, one of the industries hit hardest by the recent economic downturn. And by modernizing school buildings to make them more energy efficient and more reliant on renewable sources of energy, modernized school buildings can also help reduce the emissions that contribute to global warming.
The 21st Century High-Performing Public Schools Facilities Act (H.R. 3021) would:
Provide schools with access to funding for modernization, renovation and repair projects
Authorizes $6.4 billion for school construction projects for fiscal year 2009, and ensures that school districts will quickly receive funds for school modernization, renovation, and repairs that improve the teaching and learning climate, health and safety, and energy efficiency.
Allocates the same percentage of funds to states and school districts that they receive under Part A of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, except that it guarantees each such district a minimum of $5,000.
Encourage energy efficiency and the use of renewable resources in schools
Requires the majority of funds (90 percent by 2013) be used for projects that meet green building standards.
Allows states to reserve one percent of funds to administer the program and to develop a plan to create a statewide database of schools’ facilities, modernization and repair needs, energy uses, carbon footprints, and schools’ energy efficiency quality plans.
Requires school districts to publicly report the educational, energy and environmental benefits of projects, how they comply with the green building requirements, and the percentage of funds used for projects at low-income and rural schools.
Requires the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, to create a database of the best practices in school construction and to provide technical assistance to states and school districts regarding best practices.
Provide additional aid to Gulf Coast schools still recovering from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
Authorizes separate funds – half a billion dollars over five years – for public schools that were damaged by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
Ensure fair wages and benefits for workers by applying Davis-Bacon protections to all grants for school modernization, renovation, and repair projects

Renewable Direction Plan for Energy Independence

Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0500

For a PDF version of this document, please CLICK HERE.

With consumers paying $4 for a gallon of gas and our dependence on foreign oil rising from 46% to 61% between 1994 and 2006, there has never been a more urgent time to move America down the road towards Energy Independence.

Breaking our addiction to oil calls for immediate action, conservation and a smart long-term renewable energy policy that will protect consumers from skyrocketing energy costs, grow our economy and result in a cleaner, safer planet.

The New Direction Energy Plan

The New Direction Congress has already begun the transition to Energy Independence by increasing fuel economy for automobiles by 40% -- the first increase in over 30 years. The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act , adopted by the Democratic Congress, will, by 2030, save more than 4 million barrels per day -- the equivalent of stopping all the oil currently being imported from Middle East.

Better fuel economy is just the first step in the New Direction agenda that includes:

Unleashing the Renewable Revolution: Clean power sources like wind, solar and geothermal.
Efficient Vehicles: Bringing to market plug-in hybrid and electric cars that get more than 100 miles per gallon..
American Alternative Fuels: Aiding farmers in Middle America and not oil barons in the Middle East in our quest for fuel solutions that don’t depend on food crops but cellulosic ethanol made from biomass and algae.
Investing in Clean Technology: Ensuring that America is first in the race for green technology solutions of the future.

Fighting for Immediate Consumer Relief

While moving America out from under the thumb of Big Oil calls for long-term renewable investments, $4 gasoline is here now. Immediate action must be taken to help consumers at the pump. The New Direction Congress is fighting to protect consumers from Big Oil policy and provide immediate relief by:

Releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Drilling: Use It or Lose it: Making the oil companies drill now on the 68 million acres of land they already own
Fighting Price Gouging at the pump
Fighting Excessive Oil Speculation and closing the Enron Loophole
Increasing Mass Transit options

Transforming the future of global energy resources requires America to invest in our energy Strengths…not our Weakness. Weakness:

Weakness:	The United States only has 2% of the world’s oil supply. Yet America currently consumes 25% of the world’s oil resources. As developing nations like India and China increase the amount of oil they consume, it is clear that America must look to alternative sources as soon as possible.
Strength:	Wind: The United States has more wind energy potential than any other country on the planet; we can no longer afford to let millions of megawatts of renewable wind energy sit untapped. Just one windmill can power over 3000 plug-in cars or nearly 1500 homes.
	Solar: The solar capacity of the United States is equally impressive and untapped.
	Technology: America has led every technological revolution for the last century. If we focused on developing the clean energy technology solutions of the future, instead of sticking with the dirty technologies of the past, we will create an American economic driver for the next century. Make no mistake, America is in a global race for next generation renewable technologies. Even oil-rich Middle East nations, such as United Arab Emirates, are investing billions into wind and solar. These are the technologies that will drive the 21st century econonomy. America can not afford to fall behind.

The Road to $4 Gas and Fighting the Big Oil Agenda

Bad policy choices and lack of leadership have pushed America down the road to dependence on foreign oil.

Big Oil currently receives billions in tax payer dollars per year. Exxon Mobil made more than $40 billion in profits last year alone –more than any other company in history. How do they spend our money

The Big Oil companies are making record profits on the backs of consumers paying $4 gas at the pump, while also pocketing billions in taxpayer dollars per year. Now, Big Oil lobbyists are pressuring Congress to end a 27 year bi-partisan ban on offshore drilling. They want to turn America’s beaches and coastlines – the very places where our children swim and the primary engine for many states’ tourism industry– into oil drilling, distribution and refinery zones.

That is why it is critical to understanding the Truth about Drilling: It comes down to Delay, Distraction, Delusion, Dependence and Danger:

Delay:Big Oil is not drilling on 68 million acres they currently lease from the American people. Even with $40 billion in record profits, Exxon Mobil still spent more money on stock buy backs last year than they did on exploration.

Distraction:Contrary to their multi-million dollar advertising campaigns, Big Oil is an impediment to a renewable energy future. They are actively lobbying to defeat renewable energy legislation on Capitol Hill. Their beach drilling campaign is a distraction peddled by their Congressional allies who are opposing clean wind, solar and geothermal tax incentives. These incentives continue to be blocked in the Senate by JUST ONE VOTE.

Delusion:New drilling won’t save consumers a penny at the pump for the next 10 years. Economists report that additional barrels of oil from wildlife areas would only yield savings of 1.8 cents a gallon nearly 20 years from now. Conversely, if we invest in cars that can get more miles per gallon, and in clean wind, solar and geothermal energy over the next ten years, we will save U.S. consumers money.

Danger:The Department of Interior reports that more than 17 thousand barrels of oil were spilled from offshore rigs as a result of Hurricane’s Katrina and Rita, and independent analyses have shown even greater totals rivaling some of the largest spills in history. Last Fall, almost 12 thousand barrels were dumped into the Gulf of Mexico due to a rig accident. The 257 thousand barrels spilled from the Exxon Valdez was one of the worst ecological disasters in history. The 1969 oil spill that covered California beaches was the catalyst for Earth Day, and should not be forgotten.

Dependence:The signs of a green, renewable revolution are evident across America. But Big Oil is still trying to ensure that American energy policy remains shackled to the dirty, carbon-heavy fossil fuels of the past. That includes fighting to keep home grown biofuels out of your local gas station, giving no alternative to $4 gasoline. Meanwhile, other countries with less natural wind and solar capacity are breaking free from oil and moving aggressively toward renewable resources.

Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming: Press Releases

Hearing 7/23: Deploying Oil From Strategic Petroleum Reserve

Select Committee to Hold Hearing on Deploying Oil From Strategic Petroleum Reserve

Select Committee Investigation: Oil Industry Behind White House Switch on Global Warming

Select Committee Investigation: Oil Industry Behind White House Switch on Global Warming

President’s Chief of Staff Office, Cabinet Officials, Electric Utility Industry Originally Agreed to Regulation Of Emissions from Vehicles, Power Plants

Markey: GoreaEUR(TM)s Climate Challenge Deserves Strong Answer from Congress

Markey: Gore’s Climate Challenge Deserves Strong Answer from Congress

Renewable Revolution Waiting in Wings, Says Chairman

Markey: President DoesnaEUR(TM)t Think WeaEUR(TM)re In an Oil Emergency??

Markey: President Doesn’t Think We’re In an Oil Emergency??

Record Inflation, $4 Gasoline, and Still the President Opposes Using Strategic Petroleum Reserve

MARKEY: BushaEUR"In Big Oil We Trust

MARKEY: Bush—In Big Oil We Trust

Markey: On Global Warming Decision, White House Hacks Slash While Planet Burns

Markey: On Global Warming Decision, White House Hacks Slash While Planet Burns

Today’s Climate Document A Shadow of Previous Drafts Reviewed by Select Committee

***Timeline and Comparison Chart Provided by Select Committee Below***

The Bush Administration’s Evolution on Massachusetts v EPA: From Progress to Politization

Overview

The Endangerment Finding and Proposed Vehicle Regulations

A LANDMARK GLOBAL WARMING DECISION AT THE SUPREME COURT, AND THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION’S BEGINS TO RESPOND

THE WHITE HOUSE BEGINS TO TRY TO STOP EPA’S EFFORTS

AND THEN, ALL WORK ON THE EPA REGULATORY EFFORTS STOPPED

Markey: Aggressively Using Strategic Petroleum Reserve Will Bring Immediate Consumer Relief

Markey: Aggressively Using Strategic Petroleum Reserve Will Bring Immediate Consumer Relief

Chairman Joins Speaker Pelosi, Others Calling on President Bush to Deploy “Consumer Price Weapon”

Select Cmte. to Hold Hearing on Extreme Weather and Global Warming

Select Cmte. to Hold Hearing on Extreme Weather and Global Warming

California Wildfires, Midwest Floods, Other Events Prompt Question: What is Warming’s Link to Wild Weather?

Markey: G8 Global Warming aEURoeGoalaEUR? DoesnaEUR(TM)t Reach the Goal Line

Markey: G8 Global Warming “Goal” Doesn’t Reach the Goal Line

With Other G8 Countries Already on Emission-cutting Path, U.S. Again Holding World Back, Says Chairman

Katrina Students Bring Climate Vulnerability Story to Congress

Katrina Students Bring Climate Vulnerability Story to Congress

As Hurricane Season Begins, Gulf Coast Youth Release Study on Risks from Global Warming

EPA Documents - Global Warming a Danger, Vehicle Emissions Should be Regulated

EPA Documents—Global Warming a Danger, Vehicle Emissions Should be Regulated

Select Committee Review of Subpoenaed December Draft Regulations Shows EPA Moving Towards Climate Regulations, Higher Fuel Economy, Before Administration Pullback

HEARING 6/26: Select Committee to Discuss Fuel Economy As Solution to High Prices

More Miles Per Gallon: Consumer Solutions to $4 Gas

Select Committee Hearing to Discuss Fuel Economy As Solution to High Prices

Briefing 6/23: Dr. James Hansen: The Climate Threat to the Planet

Dr. James Hansen: The Climate Threat to the Planet

Select Committee welcomes Dr. Hansen on the 20th anniversary of his landmark Congressional testimony

JOINT HEARING 6/25: Intelligence Subcommittee and Select Committee to Examine National Security Implications of Global Warming

JOINT HEARING 6/25: Intelligence Subcommittee and Select Committee to Examine National Security Implications of Global Warming

First-ever Government Analysis of Security Risks From Warming World to be Discussed

Markey: Bush, Cheney, McCain Turning GOP into aEUR~Gas and Oil PartyaEUR(TM)

Markey: Bush, Cheney, McCain Turning GOP into ‘Gas and Oil Party’

HEARING 6/18: Select Committee Looks to Smart Planning as Response to Fuel Costs, Global Warming

Select Committee Looks to Smart Planning as Response to Energy Costs, Global Warming

New Cities Being Developed in Tornado-ravaged Kansas Town, Abu Dhabi Are Shining Examples of Better Development Practices

Report: No Chinese Drilling Off FloridaaEUR(TM)s Coast: Republicans Promoting Unfounded Myth to Push Drill-Drill-Drill Philosophy

Report: No Chinese Drilling Off Florida’s Coast

Republicans Promoting Unfounded Myth to Push Drill-Drill-Drill Philosophy

Emanuel, Hinchey, Markey, Rahall to Introduce Legislation to Force Big Oil to Use Owned Leases

Emanuel, Hinchey, Markey, Rahall to Introduce Legislation to Force Big Oil to Use Owned Leases

EVENT PHOTOS

Select Committee Reaches Agreement with White House on EPA Documents

Select Committee Reaches Agreement with White House on EPA Documents

HEARING 5/11: The Future of Oil - Peak Prices, Peak Production, Piqued Consumers

Oil Hearing: Peak Prices, Peak Production, Piqued Consumers

Select Committee to Discuss “The Future of Oil”

Markey: House Will Keep Global Warming Discussion Alive

House Passes 21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act

Renewable Direction Plan for Energy Independence

The New Direction Energy Plan

Fighting for Immediate Consumer Relief

Transforming the future of global energy resources requires America to invest in our energy Strengths…not our Weakness. Weakness:

The Road to $4 Gas and Fighting the Big Oil Agenda

Charts and Resources

Understanding the Difference Between Energy Plans

Action the New Direction Congress Has Already Taken:

The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act

Timeline and Comparison Chart Provided by Select Committee Below