it is changing, the USGCRP will greatly advance our knowledge about the implications of such change for society. The research successes of the last decade have laid the foundation for a global environmental change information service that will allow global change research results to be applied more effectively to national needs, including the long-term challenge of confronting climate change.

Perhaps the most difficult aspect of the climate challenge is the fact that it has developed gradually and steadily over time, rather than as a dramatic, sudden overnight change that demands our attention. The solution will also have to be long-term. The Administration believes that a careful, prudent strategy to address climate change must include scientific research and development to reduce remaining uncertainties and improve our understanding of impacts and adaptation potential. It must also include a strong research and development effort focused on the advanced clean and efficient energy technologies that hold significant promise for mitigating future emissions growth, avoiding future climate change, and providing economic and environmental benefits to our nation and the world.

Conclusion

The Administration's climate change actions and proposals are based on a combination of sound science and common sense. I want to conclude my remarks by summarizing what we have learned from research on global change that I believe provide a sound scientific base for actions.

Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have increased about 30% since the onset of the Industrial Revolution. The level of CO2 in our atmosphere, which is about 365 parts per million by volume (ppmv) right now, is already significantly higher than it has been in 160,000 years -- and new analyses soon to be published will argue that it is higher than it has been in the last 400,000 years.

The IPCC Second Assessment Report, published in early 1996, reviewed all the scientific
evidence and has identified a series of climate changes that have been observed during this
period:

• Over the last century, the global mean (average) surface temperature increased by
about 0.5 - 1° F.

• Over the same period, global mean sea level has already risen 4 to 10 inches, and
further rise is inevitable.

• Mountain glaciers have retreated worldwide this century.

• The average surface temperature this century is as warm or warmer than any century since at least 1400 AD.

As I noted earlier, the IPCC also concluded that "The balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on global climate."

The IPCC cautions that, if we continue a "business as usual” emissions trajectory, atmospheric concentrations CO2 will exceed 700 ppm by the end of the next century. This would be a higher level than any experienced in over 50 million years. Based on computer models of climate

change, the IPCC projects that this emissions trajectory would produce a number of adverse consequences, including the following:

The Earth's average surface temperature is projected to increase by about 1 to 3.5° C (about 2 to 6.5° F) by 2100, a rate of warming that would probably be greater than during any comparable time interval during the last 10,000 years.

• Sea level is projected to rise by 15-95 cm (6-38 inches) by 2100. Even after a hypothetical stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations sea level would continue to rise for centuries.

An increase in the rate of evaporation as the climate warms, leading to 1) an increase in average global precipitation as well as frequency of intense rainfall and floods in some regions, and 2) to a decrease in soil moisture in some regions, leading to increased frequency and intensity of droughts.

When the IPCC Second Assessment Report was written, 1995 was the warmest year on record. In subsequent years, 1995 was surpassed by 1997, and 1997 was in turn surpassed by 1998. The long-term surface temperature data records of NOAA, the United Kingdom Meteorological Office, and the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies all show this to be the case. In fact, newly published findings on the long-term climate of North America, based on analysis of tree rings, ice cores, coral reefs, and sediments, indicate that 1998 was probably the warmest year in the last 1000 years. While this was in part due to a strong El Niño, its contribution was an addition to a clear warming trend.

Indeed, the strong El Niño event that disrupted our climate conditions and those in many other nations provided us with an unpleasant preview of the types of impacts we can expect in a warmer and wetter world that unmitigated climate change would produce, including more intense rainfalls and a simultaneous increase in both floods and droughts. Fortunately, improved predictive capability, developed through the USGCRP helped many nations minimize the economic disruption of one bad year. But imagine if these conditions were typical rather than unusual.

I believe, as do most scientists who have carefully studied this problem, that we need to confront this growing challenge now. The evidence is compelling that emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are amplifying the Earth's natural greenhouse effect and warming the planet's surface. Computer models suggest that such warming is likely to lead to further climate disruptions and ecological impacts as sea levels rise, patterns of precipitation change, atmospheric and ocean currents shift, and plants and animals migrate.

So, the question facing us is - what specific constructive steps do we take? First, it requires a sustained and enhanced commitment to energy research, development and deployment. It is critical that we begin our long-term efforts in this area sooner rather than later, because the consequences of our near-term technology choices are themselves significant and long-lasting. The longer we continue on a “business as usual” path, the greater the degree of warming, the faster the rate of climate change, and the more severe the negative effects for human and

ecological systems. Second, it requires continued research into the science of climate change to help guide our understanding of impacts and mitigation and adaptation options.

Mr. Chairman, doing nothing is the high risk option. What is at stake is the health and well-being of our children and future generations, as well as our environmental quality and global stability. The same scientific and technical capabilities that have helped identify this problem can help us overcome it. We have in hand the means to choose a new path of robust economic growth that also helps reduce the climate change threat. The Administration's climate change science and energy technology proposals are important initial steps in this regard.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, for your attention today. I would be happy now to answer your questions.

THE WHITE HOUSE

WASHINGTON

Neal F. Lane

Assistant to the President for Science and Technology
Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy

Dr. Neal F. Lane, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, was sworn in as Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy in August 1998.

Prior to moving to the Executive Office of the President, Dr. Lane was Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF) from October 1993 and served on the National Science Board.

Before becoming NSF Director, Dr. Lane was Provost and Professor of Physics at Rice University in Houston, Texas, a position he held since 1986. His tenure at Rice began in 1966, when he joined the Department of Physics as an assistant professor. In 1972, he became Professor of Physics and Space Physics and Astronomy. He left Rice from mid-1984 to 1986 to serve as Chancellor of the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs. In addition, while on leave from Rice from 1979 to 1980, he worked for the National Science Foundation as the Director of the Division of Physics.

Widely regarded as a distinguished scientist and educator, Dr. Lane has published numerous papers on atomic and molecular physics, and has delivered many lectures on science and public policy. Early in his career, he received an NSF Post-doctoral Fellowship and an Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Fellowship. He earned Phi Beta Kappa honors in 1960 and was inducted into Sigma Xi National Research Society in 1964, serving as its president in 1993. While a Professor at Rice, he was a two-time recipient of the University's George R. Brown Prize for Superior Teaching. Dr. Lane has also received honorary degrees from several institutions of higher education.

Through his work with scientific and professional organizations and his participation on review and advisory committees for various Federal and state agencies, Dr. Lane has contributed to public service throughout his career. He is a fellow of the American Physical Society, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Association for Advancement of Science, and a member of the American Association of Physics Teachers.

Born in Oklahoma City in 1938, Dr. Lane earned his B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in physics from the University of Oklahoma. He and his wife, Joni Sue, have two children and

Chairman CALVERT. Thank you, Doctor.

Mr. Reicher.

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE DAN W. REICHER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Mr. REICHER. Chairman Calvert-Chairman Calvert, Mr. Costello, members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to testify on the Department of Energy's Climate Change Technology Initiative activities.

The Climate Change Technology Initiative is the cornerstone of the Administration's efforts to stimulate the development and use of clean energy technologies and energy efficient technologies that will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The CCTI is designed to pursue cost-effective technologies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions while also meeting other energy, environmental, and economic challenges of the early 21st century.

Over the next few years, we will witness the complete restructuring of U.S. electricity markets; we will confront the challenge of global climate change; we will see sweeping new federal and state clean air requirements; and we will encounter an increasingly volatile global energy market. In the face of these challenges, our goal is to develop a diverse portfolio of affordable energy sources and use them efficiently and wisely.

The Energy Information Administration has prepared an analysis of the Climate Change Technology Initiative.

While the report may appear to be an in-depth treatment of this subject, in fact, it is quite limited in both scope and analysis. As a result, its estimates of the potential of the CCTI to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are inappropriately low, and it is of limited usefulness in any objective evaluation of the initiative or the budgets which support it.

I will briefly critique the analysis and describe the critical work supported by our CCTI budgets.

In fairness to EIA, numerous caveats in the report underscore the limited scope of its work, but the implications of these shortcomings must be highlighted in this hearing.

First, the analysis is quite incomplete. The study only attempts to quantify the potential benefits of the tax incentives component of the CCTI. The EIA does not quantify the benefits of the technology RD&D programs within the CCTI; however, these RD&D benefits have been estimated by the Department and independently peer-reviewed. The potential climate benefits of the DOE CCTI programs in 2010, alone, exceed 112 million metric tons of carbon per year. This conclusion is summarized in a report by Arthur D. Little that we are releasing today.

[The information is contained in Appendix 1.]

Mr. REICHER. This lack of ELA estimates is a severe shortcoming because the various components of the CCTI-tax incentives, technology, R&D, and deployment programs are designed to work together synergistically.

Second, the analysis only considers one of the nine components of the President's climate strategy. Other components of the strategy such as credit for early action, federal procurement, and elec