November 4, 2009

Verbatim, as delivered

Chairman Berman’s opening remarks at hearing “Copenhagen and Beyond: Is there a Successor to the Kyoto Protocol?”

In a little over a month, world leaders will gather in Copenhagen, Denmark in an effort to tackle one of the most difficult challenges of our time – global climate change.

Numerous studies have warned that the failure to act quickly and decisively on global warming will have disastrous consequences.

Many developing countries will face the threat of severe flooding, the loss of arable lands, and the spread of cholera, malaria and other diseases.

A World Bank study released last May estimated that storm surges resulting from rising sea levels could threaten 52 million people and 29,000 square kilometers of agricultural land in developing coastal countries around the world.

This will likely lead to mass migration, political instability and even failed states.

While countries in the developing world will bear the brunt of climate change, the effects of global warming will also be felt here in the United States.

According to the U.S. Global Change Research Program, a consortium of 13 federal agencies, climate change will affect almost every aspect of American life, from access to food, to the state of our health, to the amount of energy we use.

In my home state of California, where water is already scarce, increasing temperatures could lead to a major water crisis – in fact, we’re having a major water crisis right now.

While there is growing certainty about the consequences of climate change, it is unfortunate that the same cannot be said about the prospects for charting a new course in Copenhagen.

Will the result be a comprehensive, binding agreement to reduce global emissions and provide aid to developing countries to deal with the impacts of climate change?

Or will we see, as is more widely expected, a more general framework agreement with a “roadmap” to a future deal?

At this late stage, no consensus has been reached on specific objectives for lowering global greenhouse gas emissions or on how best to help poor countries adapt to climate change.

Differences also remain on what funding levels are adequate to achieve these objectives and how to help developing countries access clean energy technologies while protecting intellectual property rights.

In part, this is a result of the fact that the United States has limited flexibility to negotiate at Copenhagen because Congress has yet to provide clear guidance on emissions levels and other key issues.

In June, the House passed legislation that would reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent below 2005 levels and provide assistance for poor countries to adapt to the impacts of climate change, develop clean energy technologies, and reduce emissions from deforestation.

The Senate has yet to act, but Majority Leader Reid has announced he wants Senate committees to complete their work before Thanksgiving. I strongly support Senators Kerry and Boxer’s efforts to move this legislation soon.

If we hope to achieve a meaningful international agreement on climate change, the United States will have to make serious commitments to reduce its emissions and to help developing countries.

Many nations, both developing and industrialized, have been very clear about the need for U.S. leadership in this arena. Regrettably, in recent years, such leadership has been lacking.

In his recent speech before the United Nations General Assembly, President Obama made it clear that the world can no longer postpone a serious response to climate change. He acknowledged that many nations will be devastated by drought and famine if we fail to alter our current course. Just yesterday Chancellor Merkel spoke passionately about this issue.

One thing this committee can do to help combat climate change is to begin the process of modernizing our foreign assistance institutions and programs.

This will allow us to more effectively help developing nations meet their energy needs in an environmentally sustainable manner and adapt to climate-related challenges. I am hopeful that we will begin considering foreign assistance reform legislation early next year.

Today’s hearing will help us gain a better understanding of the challenges and opportunities at Copenhagen, the positions of the various parties, and the possible outcomes of the climate change negotiations.