It's dragged its feet on addressing the nuclear waste program, stifled domestic oil and gas exploration on public lands, and discouraged the use of hydropower. Almost a year ago, on March 23rd, 1999, OPEC, along with four non-OPEC countries-Mexico, Norway, Russia, and Oman-agreed to cut production to about 2.1 million barrels a day, cuts that many experts predicted would increase world oil prices, which then averaged about $12.50 a barrel. The Administration did nothing and oil prices began to rise.

Six months ago, on September 22nd, 1999, OPEC and its collaborators decided to maintain these cuts until March 2000. By then, average world prices were nearly $23 a barrel and were sure to keep climbing. And still, the Administration did nothing. It was asleep at the fuel pump.

Finally, within the past month, after world prices climbed to nearly $30 a barrel, outcries from individual consumers finally spurred the Administration to send Bill Richardson on a world tour with a tin cup to beg princes, presidents, and potentates of OPEC and its allies to increase oil production, an action that they may consider at the end of March. And it may be too little too late, the consumers and economy will continue to suffer.

In the R&D arena, the Administration also needs to get to work. It continues to put all of its eggs into one basket, the renewable energy and efficiency basket, while ignoring fossil fuels and nuclear energy. Today, fossil fuels provide us with nearly 85 percent of our energy use. According to the Energy Information Administration, our dependence on fossil fuels will grow to nearly 87 percent in 2010, and to more than 89 percent by 2020.

However, in the fiscal year 2001 budget request, DOE proposes to spend more than 62 percent of its R&D funds on renewable energy and efficiency programs, and only 22 percent on fossil fuels. We should be doing all we can to encourage, not discourage, domestic energy production, and promoting a long-term, balanced energy R&D portfolio. The American people deserve better.

I look forward to hearing today's testimony and pursuing these subjects in greater detail. But, before we start, I'd like to remind the members of the Subcommittee and our witnesses that this hearing is being broadcast live on the internet. So, please keep that in mind during today's proceedings.

I would also ask for unanimous consent that all Members who wish have their opening statements entered into the record. And, without objection, so ordered.

I'd like to turn to my friend, distinguished Ranking Minority Member, Mr. Costello, for his opening remarks.

Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I'm a little confused about the topic of this hearing, after hearing your opening statement.

Chairman CALVERT. Well, I had to buy some gas yesterday in California. So I thought I'd throw that in.

Mr. COSTELLO. I thank Chairman Calvert for convening today's hearing to review the Energy and Technology programs included in the Administration's climate change budget. Energy plays a critical role in our economy and always will. As a result, I believe it is in the national interest to make improvements in energy efficiency to diversify our use of energy resources and to expand energy supplies.

I support research and development in the implementation of voluntary programs conducted in cooperation with industry and consumers that will help us to achieve these goals. I am particularly interested in hearing more about the following programs included in the Administration's request: the Bioenergy and Biobased Product Initiative; the Weatherization and State Energy Grants program, and the Cleaner Fossil Fuels Initiative, which includes a program to develop new technologies for cleaner, high efficiency coal combustion.

The coal industry is important to my district. This industry has shifted production to low sulphur coal reserves in the west, and that in fact has resulted in a number of my constituents losing high paying jobs in Southwestern and Southern Illinois. The development of cleaner, more efficient coal combustion systems will ensure that we make the best use of this valuable resource here at home, and that we can expand the market for clean coal burning technologies in other nations that rely on coal.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to hear about the programs in the Administration's budget designed to promote cleaner, more efficient energy use. I believe the Committee should evaluate these programs with respect to their potential to achieve the goals of energy security, a robust economy, and a healthy environment. Given the critical nature of energy resources, I believe we need to continue to pursue a wide range of options designed to address both short and long term issues related to energy supply and utilization. I welcome our witnesses here today and I look forward to hearing their testimony.

Chairman CALVERT. I thank the gentleman.

Gentlemen, it's our policy to swear in all the witnesses, so if you'll please stand and raise your right hand.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

[Witnesses respond in the affirmative.]

Chairman CALVERT. Thank you. You may be seated.

Without objection, the full written testimony of all the witnesses will be entered into the record. However, I would ask that you all please summarize your statements to five minutes or less, so we'll have time for questions. And, I know, Dr. Baker, you have another commitment later this morning. So with that, you may begin, Dr. Baker.

TESTIMONY OF HON. D. JAMES BAKER, CHAIR, NATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL, SUBCOMMITTEE ON GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH; AND ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION AND UNDER SECRETARY FOR OCEANS AND ATMOSPHERE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, ACCOMPANIED BY: MARGARET LEINEN, NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION; ARI PATRINOS, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY; AND JACK KAY, NASA Dr. BAKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's my privilege to be here not only in my NOAA position, but also as Chair of the National Science and Technology Council's Subcommittee on Global Change Research, to testify on the President's fiscal year 2001 budget request for the U.S. Global Change Research program. I've

just taken over as chair in that position after the very long and successful tenure of Bob Corell from NSF.

With me here today are three other agency representatives: Margaret Leinen from the National Science Foundation; Ari Patrinos from the Department of Energy; and Jack Kay from NASA. I'll just make a few brief remarks, and the rest of my testimony is in the record.

The United States Global Change Research Program was established in the Global Change Research Act of 1990, to bring together diverse Federal agencies to coordinate research on climate science. But Presidential interest in changing climate has deep historical roots, really beginning with Thomas Jefferson. The U.S. Global Change Research program has been supported by every Administration in Congress since its inception. The support has been bipartisan, reflecting that the state and future of global climate and climate change is a deep matter of concern.

The future prosperity of our country depends on Federal support for science and scientific inquiry. Understanding and dealing with global climate change is one area that affects everyone on the planet, and the Federal community looks forward to working with Congress this year on the President's budget request.

Over the next year, we will deliver to you as you requested the first national assessment of the impacts of climate change, and a 10 year strategic plan for the Global Climate Research Program. We're working with hundreds of stakeholders and scientists to ensure that the product that we deliver to you will be scientifically credible as well as useful.

The overall request for the Global Change Research Program is approximately $1,740,000,000. This budget continues the Nation's strong support for research on global climate change with an increase of about 2 percent over last year. In addition to this modest increase, we have redistributed funds within the total interagency budget in response to the recent National Academy of Sciences report, Global Environmental Change, Research Pathways for the Next Decade, which I would like to highlight just a couple of notes about.

The Pathways report recommended that the program shift its efforts in climate observation systems from the remote sensing side to surface based or in situ measurements, ground based or ocean based. In response to this, we have increased the request for scientific research about 7 percent, including a $31,000,000 increase for the Department of Agriculture's work on the carbon cycle, which we began last year.

NOAA is requesting an increase of $28,000,000, or about 40 percent, for the augmentation of its surface based observations network and data delivery capability. The total increase for surface based observations and science together is about 10 percent.

The space based observation of the budget has been reduced by about $40,000,000, as expected, as the first set of earth observation satellites have been completed and launched. And that's one of really the great successes of this program, the new TERRA satellite, which is up there, and plans for the next set of satellites, which are currently on track.

This adjustment is encouraging, because it demonstrates that the program can in fact move resources around to address new research and observation needs as we learn and understand more about the complexity of the climate system. The changes also indicate that the program is responsive to the views of the external scientific community.

We also are starting a program, proposing a program on the water cycle, looking at the cycle of water through land, ocean and atmosphere and all of its forms, vapor, liquid and solid. We will be looking at atmospheric transport, seasonal to inter-annual water and climate changes. We have some wonderful results from the new NASA TERRA satellite, the Tropical Rainfall Measurement Mission, which has reduced greatly the errors in measuring_tropical rainfall. And we're looking forward to the new NASA Terra satellite, which will help us look at issues of water availability, water quality, the pathway of water, nutrients and minerals through soils.

And, Mr. Chairman, I think this starts to address some of the scientific questions which were very nicely talked about in the book you recommended to me, Cadillac Desert. I appreciate that. It shows the importance of water to our country and the importance of understanding water issues.

We have a focus also on the carbon cycle. The last decade of climate research led by the program has enabled U.S. scientists to make some great strides in understanding the movement of carbon from the atmosphere to land and the ocean. This is critical to understanding the amount of greenhouse gas carbon that will end up in the atmosphere over time, and the rate at which surface temperatures may rise.

We have established that carbon is absorbed, stored and released by carbon sinks, like forests and soils, and that North American forests and soils have great capacity to absorb carbon. Because of this important finding and the Pathways report's strong recommendation that we focus on carbon cycle science, we've established a carbon cycle science initiative in the 2000 budget. We'll build on that foundation in the 2001 budget.

Initially, we'll target the North American carbon sink, with sampling and monitoring campaign. What we learn from that research has broader implications on a global scale when we place the North American carbon sink in the context of the global system.

We're also looking at our capability to monitor global climate change. We know that our capability is degrading as the National Academy of Sciences has reported to us in their report, Adequacy of Climate Observing Systems. Some of our systems have fallen into disrepair, are deteriorating and becoming insufficient to meet our needs. To respond to these concerns, NOAA is requesting $28,000,000 to improve our climate record, to upgrade and expand our baseline observatories that collect atmospheric data from Point Barrow, Alaska, to the South Pole, and are the world's longest atmospheric time series, to increase the scope of our ocean observations with new float programs, and to make sure that this data is available to everyone.

The final thing I would like to talk about is modeling. We have only one planet, and it's too big for us to do experiments on. And

so we need to have an important component of modeling. Modeling using powerful supercomputers is the only way we can test theories or experiment on the global climate system.

Climate modelers in the United States and around the world are intent on achieving the best possible simulation of how the Earth, the atmosphere and the oceans all work together to produce this complex climate system. They need to know the physical processes involved, they need to know the chemical processes, and they need to know how changes in one factor ripples through the whole system. And then we have to find ways to get computers to reproduce that accurately, so that the simulations are not flawed.

The models have improved over the past decade, and there is increasing confidence in those projections of climate change. Traditionally, these climate models have tested the limits of our computing power and have driven advances in high-end computing in this country. One of the obstacles we have is the computers themselves, which are limited in the amount of data that they can collect and process, and the level of detail that they can look at, both temporally in time and in space.

Our budget request for funding for U.S. climate modeling capabilities and management, through the Information Technology Initiative, which we started last year, we will focus on both short-term and long-term objectives to assist the climate research community with investments in new hardware, faster computers, and better software so that we can use those to help the modeling centers and academic research community.

We're also supporting a new level of integration and collaboration among the Federal agencies to improve those modeling efforts. This is the kind of information that policy makers need as they plan for and manage their communities in a world of global change.

Finally, let me say that key to the success of the global change research effort has been a commitment among the agencies, the Administration and the Congress, to continue to improve our understanding of the system. During the past years, we have made tremendous contributions to our knowledge base of the Earth's climate and the ozone hole. The El Nino forecasts are good examples. These are made possible because of the support for research begun a decade ago.

Our 2001 budget ensures we will continue to see steady progress at the frontiers of this exciting and beneficial research endeavor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.