UPDATE 3:32pm -- The committee is in recess, full notes from this morning and this afternoon after the jump.
We're back for Day 2 of hearings in the House Energy & Commerce Committee on the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, draft clean energy & climate legislation introduced by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA).
My notes are below. Please note that if it's not in quotation marks, it's my hasty summary of remarks, not a direct quote.
You can watch the hearing on the committee's website, please join the discussion in comments!
3:31pm - Rep. Markey thanks the U.S. CAP panel and calls a recess until the next panel.
3:26pm - Rep. Christopher Murphy says China and Japan are vying for top spot in developing new clean energy techonology ... 80% of South Korea's recent stimulus bill was invested in clean energy ... will the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 be enough of a jump-start to clean energy technology on its own?
3:18pm - Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) says "there's a gaping hole in this bill" over the allocations. Of course, if the allocations were detailed, Rep. Shimkus would be ripping any government spending as pork and consumer rebates as a waste of taxpayer money.
3:12pm - Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) is the latest of many committee members to mistakenly refer to NRDC's Frances Beinecke as "Bernanke."
2:59pm - OK, here's a new one -- Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) says forget about China and India -- Aruba has the world's largest refinery. We can't act before Aruba does.
2:56pm - Charles Holliday of DuPont says if we don’t act, we’ll lose the lead on clean energy technology to countries like China and India. Emphatically says the science is clear on global warming.
2:44pm - Can I just tell you how bizarre it is repeatedly hearing Big Coal (as represented by Jim Rogers) trying to explain to Republican members of Congress that electricity prices are going up no matter what so we might as well start transitioning to clean energy now?
2:22pm - Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) asks the panel if it would support the bill if there were no free allowances. Except NRDC, the panel says it would not.
2:05pm - Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) suggests to the panel that the economy's and countrys success depends on the passage of cap and trade. The panel agrees.
1:53pm - Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) says it’s all about jobs, and believes this bill will help.
1:47pm - Rep. John Sarbanes (D-CA) says clean energy & climate legislation must have incentives for ratepayers to become more efficient.
1:41pm - Jim Rogers, the CEO of Duke Energy, tells Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-CA) that electricity costs are going up no matter what -- with or without legislation limiting carbon pollution. That's why we need to give consumers control over their usage by adopting efficiency gains.
1:06pm - Rep. Edward Markey introduces USCAP panel. You can find their written testimonies here. The panelists are: Charles Holliday, Jr., Chairman, DuPont ... Red Cavaney, Senior Vice President, Government and Public Affairs, ConocoPhillips ... Jim Rogers, Chairman, President, and CEO, Duke Energy Corp ... Frances Beinecke, President, Natural Resources Defense Council ... Meg McDonald, Director, Global Issues, Alcoa Inc. ... David Crane, President and CEO, NRG Energy, Inc.
12:56pm - Rep. Charles Gonzalez (D-TX) grills Chu on whether we need more domestic production and refining capacity in the US.
12:50pm - Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX) claims the committee has not heard that global warming is not natural. How can these members come up with solutions to our energy crisis when they won't even acknowledge the science behind it?
12:44pm - Rep. Betty Sutton (D-OH) responded to Shimkus job statement: "We can collaborate, and it has to be done."
12:36pm - Rep. George Radanovich (R-CA) No water allocations for many of his constituents, a result of environmental alarmism. How can this be pulled off without breaking the backs of the public?
12:32pm - Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL), recently mocked by Rachel Maddow for his odd views on global warming, calls clean energy & climate legislation "The largest assault on democracy and freedom in this country I’ve ever lived through." Says he fears bills like Waxman-Markey more than wars and terrorism.
12:24pm - Rep. Donna M. Christensen (D-Virgin Islands) wants to make sure impacts on low-income communities are considered. She also points out that nuclear power will be considered a low-carbon fuel under the bill.
12:18pm – Lisa Jackson getting smacked around by Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) on the jobs impact of carbon regulation. She says "I’m not a jobs expert" and offers no solid answer on the net jobs impact. Rep. Scalise asks if Chu or LaHood have an answer – neither do. Jackson keeps fumbling around.
12:05pm - Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) accuses Lisa Jackson of moving to regulate carbon pollution "with or without Congressional consent." Jackson quickly corrects her to say that EPA was only acting after the Supreme Court ruled that it HAD TO act under the Clean Air Act.
12:00pm - Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) says the bad news is "Thomas Edison WOULD recognize our energy system."
11:48am – Rep. Jane Harman points out that thanks to California regulations, while refrigerator size is up, both energy use and prices are down. Energy Secretary Stephen Chu says refrigerators now use just one-fourth of the energy they used in 1975. Rep. Harman says experiences like this are
11:39am - Rep. Lee Terry says that without a breakthrough in carbon capture and storage technology, a carbon cap will drive up the cost of producing coal-fired electricity. My short answer to Rep. Terry: Yes. Does Rep. Terry get the point of a carbon cap? Reward low-carbon power, punish high-emitting polluters. As soon as Jackson starts answering, Rep. Terry says "I’m gonna cut you off because I only have a minute and 45 seconds" and launches into another reason why we can’t possibly succeed in controlling climate change. Why bother pretending asking questions at all?
10:30am-11:30am - Rep. Lois Capps(D-IL) says bill focuses on looking forward to new technology, and that's why it doesn't focus on the value of old hydro systems. Asked Jackson to talk how the bill can help the American public adapt to public health needs.
Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) is focused on definition of biomass in bill, excluding "woody biomass" and federal lands. Focused also on hydro power in bill.
Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) asked Chu about whether a specific title necessary on nuclear. Chu said it should be in bill but wouldn't commit to a separate title.
Rep. Gene Green (D-TX) asked Chu for gas-price impact analysis of bill before markup. Asked Chu about why a national standard was needed over state standards. Chu says a market for investment is needed and that comes from uniformity and allocation trading.
Rep. Mary Bono-Mack (R-CA) said there is a lot to like and support in this bill, but she needs much more clarity on the cost impact on her constituents.
Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) asked about EPA modeling and low-income housing, Jackson said it's a modest impact if 40 percent of proceeds go back to American households.
Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-KY) focused entirely on Spanish study on negative impact on non-green jobs of state investment in non-green jobs (this study has been repeatedly debunked).
10:19am -- Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood read his opening statement.
10:15am -- Energy Secretary Stephen Chu read his opening statement.
10:06am -- EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson read her opening statement.
9:59am -- America must take its cues from China and India. That’s the message from committee Republicans this week. The latest to parrot this point of view is Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), who just misleadingly introduced a series of op-eds and editorials as news articles. He also uses the "undecided" line – I can’t tell if it’s supposed to be a joke sarcasm, or some sort of strategic thing?
9:51am – The difference between the pessimism and can’t-do attitude of committee Republicans and the optimism and yes we can attitude of committee Democrats is remarkable. Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) calls on members of both sides of the aisle to come together to create a bill that creates millions of clean energy jobs, protects families and businesses and cuts our global warming pollution by the amount scientists say is necessary.
9:46am – Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) says cutting our carbon emissions will mean Americans will have to live like people in Nigeria or like people did in 1875. Says for some people "global warming is religion." Says cutting carbon emissions will amount to "the de-industrialization of the United States. I’m not going to be a part of that."
Now he’s repeating the usual talking points about how expensive it’s going to be ... we can’t do it ... yadda yadda ... day two of the hearings and all we’ve heard so far from the committee’s Republicans is no. Do they have ideas? Alternatives? So far we haven’t heard them.
Closes by saying, "Put me down as undecided on the bill" (audience laughs).
9:40am – Chairman Henry Waxman calls the hearing to order. Says the committee’s job is to meet president Obama’s goals as laid out in his February address to Congress: "To truly transform our economy, to protect our security, and save our planet from the ravages of climate change, we need to ultimately make clean, renewable energy the profitable kind of energy."