And I especially want to thank each and every member of the panel today, and thank you for your time and your patience. And I think everyone enjoyed your testimony. What we're going to do now is I think what we're going to do is have a break for lunch, rather than basically, or maybe I should wait, we'll wait until the first vote, and then at the first vote, we'll break for a lunch period at that time. So thank you very much. We'll have the next panel on immediately. Mr. ROHRABACHER. I've been informed that we are on the edge of a recorded vote, and rather than start-there we go. Why don't we go ahead and do the necessary votes, and come back in half an hour, which is at 15 minutes to 1:00, and that gives everybody time to grab a sandwich. Thank you very much. [Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the Subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene the same day, Thursday, November 16, 1995, at 12:45 p.m., in the same place.] [1:00 p.m.] AFTERNOON SESSION Mr. ROHRABACHER. This subcommittee is called to order. Our second panel will address the potential impact of global climate change. We have with us Dr. Robert Watson, Associate Director of Environment for the White House Office of Science and Technology. Dr. Watson. And Dr. William Nierenberg, Director Emeritus of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography in San Diego. David Gardiner who serves in the policy office of the Environmental Protection Agency, and coordinated the recent EPA study of sea level rise, as well as Dr. Thomas Gale Moore, Senior Fellow at Hoover Institution, Stanford University. Also with us is Dr. Robert Corell, Assistant Director of Geosciences for the National Science Foundation, and chairman of the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. I would like to thank you all for being with us today. I would like, if possible, if you could summarize your remarks in terms of five minutes. That would be very helpful, because we then-we believe in a dialogue. We will have a dialogue between you, as well as a dialogue with the Members of Congress and the Members of this subcommittee. Dr. Watson, welcome back. Good to see you again, and would you like to proceed first. STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT T. WATSON, CO-CHAIR WORKING GROUP NUMBER II, INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT, OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT Dr. WATSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I greatly appreciate being given the opportunity to testify before you and your subcommittee today. Today I am testifying in my capacity as the Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group II. Hundreds of scientists from academia, government laboratories, environmental organizations, industry, and business representing more than 50 developed and developing countries were involved in preparation of this report. Let me first, however, summarize the background of the science that you heard this morning, which was the underpinning of this report. The earth's climate is changing. The earth's surface temperature has increased by half a degree centigrade over the last century and the last couple of decades are the hottest this century. There is absolutely no doubt that, since the pre-industrial era, human activities have significantly increased the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, which tend to warm the atmosphere, and in some regions sulfate aerosols which tend to cool the atmosphere. Climate models that take into account these increases in both greenhouse gases and sulfate aerosols simulate the observed temperature quite well, suggesting that human activities are implicated in the observed changes in the Earth's climate. There is no doubt that climate will change. It is a question of where, when, and by how much. IPCC Working Group II-1 models project that global mean surface temperature could increase between 1 and 3.5 degrees Centigrade by 2100, and it will be accompanied by a sea level rise of 15 to 95 centimeters, with even larger changes thereafter. Hence, we expect the incidence of extreme high temperature events, floods, and droughts to increase in some regions. While we recognize that the reliability of regional scale predictions is still low, this does not preclude an assessment of the sensitivity of human health, ecological and social economic systems to changes in climate. Working Group II primarily focused on assessing the sensitivity of these systems to changes in temperature and rainfall. This isolates the uncertainty in the impacts' analysis from uncertainties in regional projections of climate change. Let me quickly discuss the implications of climate change. We believe there is a new and additional stress on many ecological and socioeconomic systems; that most systems are sensitive to both the magnitude and the timing and rate of climate change; that developing countries are more vulnerable to climate change than developed countries, and unexpected changes cannot be ruled out. With respect to human health, we believe most of the effects will be adverse with significant loss of life. Direct health effects include increases in mortality and illnesses due to the anticipated increase in the intensity and duration of heat waves. We believe the indirect effects are such there will be increases in the potential transmission of vector-borne diseases such as malaria, dengue, and yellow fever, and there could be some increases in nonvector-borne infectious diseases such as cholera. With respect to food, we believe that global agricultural production could well be maintained in a double CO2 world. However, crop yields and productivity due to climate change will vary considerably across regions and localities. While the productivity is projected to increase in some areas, such as Canada and parts of North America and Russia, it is projected to decrease in others, especially the topics and subtropics. Therefore, there may be an increased risk of hunger and famine, especial in the tropics and subtropics where many of the world's poorest people live. The composition and geographic distribution of many ecosystems will shift, and therefore there will be reductions in biological diversity and in the goods and services ecosystems provide society. Models "project," not "predict" [Laughter.] Dr. WATSON. [continuing] that as a consequence of projected changes in climate under a double CO2 world, one-third of the existing forest area of the world will undergo major changes in vegetation type. We believe that the expected or projected climate change will occur at a rate rapid to which the speed at which forest species grow, reproduce, and re-establish themselves. Therefore, species composition of impacted forests are likely to change. Entire forest systems may disappear, while new assemblages of species and hence new forest ecosystems may be established. Today, 46 million people per year are at risk of flooding due to storm surges. A one-meter sea level rise would increase this number to 118 million people. In addition, a 1 meter sea level rise is projected to result in land losses that range from 1 percent for Egypt, 6 percent for the Netherlands, 17.5 percent for Bangladesh, to as much as 80 percent of the Marshall Islands, thus displacing millions of people. That is the side of the impact. Can we do anything about it? The answer is, yes, we can do things about it and in a cost-effective way. It does not have to be expensive, as suggested by Jerry Marman of the first panel. IPCC Working Group II concluded that significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are technically possible and can be economically feasible. By utilizing an extensive array of technologies and policy measures together, they accelerate technology development, diffusion, and transfer in all sectors. For example, numerous studies have indicated a 10 to 30 percent energy efficiency gain above present levels are feasible at little or no cost in many parts of the world over the next two to three decades in industry, buildings and transportation sectors. It is also technically possible to realize deep emissions reductions in the energy supply sector in step with the normal timing of investments to replace infrastructure and equipment as it wears out or becomes obsolete. That is to say, no premature retirement of capital stock. Promising approaches obviously include more efficient conversion of fossil fuels from 30 to 60 percent in the world's power plants; switching to low-carbon fossil fuels; decarbonization of fuels followed by carbon dioxide storage; nuclear energy; and, most important, a switch to renewable fuels. Policies are available to governments that can facilitate that penetration of these less-greenhouse-intensive technologies and can help modify consumption patterns. We believe that these policies will be more easily implemented and accepted when they are also designed to simultaneously address other environmental issues such as air pollution and soil erosion. They go all the way from voluntary programs and negotiated agreements with industry; utility demand-side programs; tradeable emissions permits to make it most cost- effective; and many others. One crucial issue, though, is also stimulating research, development and demonstration of new technologies. In conclusion, policymakers are faced with responding to the risks posed by the anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases in the face of significant scientific uncertainties. However, these uncertainties must be considered in the context that climate-induced environmental changes cannot be reversed quickly, if at all, due to the long time scales, decades to millennia associated with the climate system. We also noted that decisions taken during the next few years. may limit the range of possible policy options in the future because high near-term emissions-that is to say, today and the next few decades-would require deep reductions in the future to meet any given target concentration. Therefore, we deduce that delay in action might reduce the overall cost of mitigation because of potential technological advances, but it could also increase both the rate and eventual magnitude of climate change, and hence the adaptation and damage costs. Therefore, uncertainty does not mean a nation or the world community cannot position itself better to cope with the broad range of possible climate changes, or to protect itself against potentially costly future outcomes. Delay in such measures may actually leave the Nation or the world poorly prepared to deal with the adverse changes and may increase the possibility of irreversible or very costly damages. While human-induced climate changes Mr. ROHRABACHER. Dr. Watson Dr. WATSON. issue [continuing] -are a serious environmental Mr. ROHRABACHER. Dr. Watson Dr. WATSON. One more sentence? Mr. ROHRABACHER. All right. Dr. WATSON. Fine. I'll give you two sentences. -a coordinated attack on the climate change issue by the science. community, industry, business, environmental organizations, and governments all working towards a common goal of the cost-effective protection of human health and vital ecological systems is within our grasp. Thank you. Statement of Dr. Robert T. Watson Associate Director of Environment Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment United States House of Representatives Mr. Chairman and Members of the Sub-committee: I greatly appreciate being given the opportunity to present the latest scientific findings of the This assessment is one of a series of international scientific assessments conducted by the My testimony represents the views of the large majority of the international scientific community from academia, government laboratories, environmental organizations and industry. Hundreds of scientists, from more than 50 developed and developing countries, have been involved in the preparation of this assessment. This assessment, which was formally accepted by governments at a meeting in Montreal, Canada in October, was extensively peer-reviewed by scientific experts and by governments. The Summary for Policymakers (SPM) was written by the chapter chairs, peerreviewed by scientific experts and governments, and then approved verbatim by government representatives. The process which was used to prepare and review the IPCC Working Group II assessment, and its SPM, is described in Annex II. The SPM is included verbatim in my testimony in Annex III. Part I: Human Activities are Implicated in Changes in the Earth's Climate Before summarizing the key findings from Working Group II let me first summarize the present state of understanding of the climate system. The Earth's climate has been relatively stable during the past 10,000 years, the time during which modern society has evolved, and largely adapted to the prevailing local climate and its natural variability. However, the Earth's climate is now changing. The Earth's surface temperature this century is warmer than any other century during the last thousand years; the Earth's surface ! |