Congressional Hearings
GENERATION CLIMATE: YOUNG LEADERS URGE CLIMATE ACTION NOW
Congressional Hearings
SuDoc ClassNumber:
Congress: House of Representatives
CHRG-116hhrg36812
| AUTHORITYID | CHAMBER | TYPE | COMMITTEENAME |
|---|---|---|---|
| hlcn00 | H | L | Select Committee on the Climate Crisis |
[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
GENERATION CLIMATE: YOUNG LEADERS URGE CLIMATE ACTION NOW
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE
CLIMATE CRISIS
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 4, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-2
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
www.govinfo.gov
Printed for the use of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
36-812 WASHINGTON: 2019
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CLIMATE CRISIS
KATHY CASTOR, Florida, Chair
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana,
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon Ranking Member
JULIA BROWNLEY, Calfornia MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia
JARED HUFFMAN, California GARY PALMER, Alabama
A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia BUDDY CARTER, Georgia
MIKE LEVIN, California CAROL MILLER, West Virginia
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
Ana Unruh Cohen, Majority Staff Director
climatecrisis.house.gov
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Page
Hon. Kathy Castor, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Florida, and Chair, Select Committee on the Climate Crisis:
Opening Statement.............................................. 1
Prepared Statement............................................. 3
Hon. Garrett Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Select Committee on the
Climate Crisis:
Opening Statement.............................................. 4
Hon. Suzanne Bonamici, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon, and Member, Select Committee on the Climate
Crisis, prepared statement, submitted for the record by Ms.
Castor......................................................... 5
WITNESSES
Lindsay Cooper, Policy Analyst, Office of the Governor of
Louisiana, Office of Coastal Activities
Oral Statement................................................. 11
Prepared Statement............................................. 12
Aji Piper, Plaintiff, Juliana v. United States, Seattle, WA
Oral Statement................................................. 14
Prepared Statement............................................. 16
Chris J. Suggs, Student and Activist, Kinston, NC
Oral Statement................................................. 6
Prepared Statement............................................. 8
Melody Zhang, Climate Justice Campaign Coordinator, Sojourners,
Co-Chair, Young Evangelicals for Climate Action
Oral Statement................................................. 36
Prepared Statement............................................. 38
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Letter from ND Resident, Tanner Hopfauf, submitted for the record
by Mr. Armstrong............................................... 50
Excerpt from Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, submitted for
the record by Mr. Palmer....................................... 63
Excerpt from the: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National
Climate Assessment, Volume I, submitted for the record by Mr.
Palmer......................................................... 66
Statement of Mr. Benji Backer, President, American Conservation
Coalition (ACC), submitted for the record by Mr. Graves........ 71
Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, submitted for the
record by Mr. Huffman.......................................... 70
Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate
Assessment, Volume I, submitted for the record by Mr. Huffman.. 70
GENERATION CLIMATE: YOUNG LEADERS URGE CLIMATE ACTION NOW
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 4, 2019
U.S. House of Representatives,
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:02 a.m., in Room
2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Kathy Castor
[chairwoman of the committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Castor, Lujan, Bonamici, Brownley,
Huffman, Levin, Casten, Neguse, Graves, Palmer, Carter, Miller,
and Armstrong.
Ms. Castor. The committee will come to order. Good morning.
Welcome to the first committee hearing of the Select Committee
on the Climate Crisis.
Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the committee at any time.
Today, we are going to hear from young Americans who are
concerned about climate change and who are working to be part
of the solution.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes to give an opening
statement.
This committee is explicitly charged with finding solutions
to solve the climate crisis so that we can, quote, ``honor our
responsibility to be good stewards of the planet for future
generations.''
So, today, we are starting with the Americans who are the
most affected by the climate crisis: young people, who are
growing up in it, who are going to be bear the cost and the
burdens, and who will help us find opportunities and solutions.
The last time global monthly temperatures were below
average was in February of 1985. That means all of our
witnesses and everyone who is 34 years or younger have grown up
in a world that has been forever altered by climate change. In
fact, this is the first Congress with Members who have grown up
in the climate crisis. Six of our colleagues were born after
that last below-average month.
And the severity of the climate crisis this generation will
have to deal with in their lifetimes depends on the actions
that we take now. We have made some progress in recent years in
cutting carbon pollution, but it has not been enough to stop
the climate crisis. Communities across the country are feeling
the impacts and bearing enormous cost, here and now.
When I was in science class, back in the day, I didn't
learn about how burning fossil fuels could change the climate,
but students learn about that now. I am Gen X, but Millennials
and Generation Z have grown up knowing we are in a climate
crisis, and they are demanding that we address it.
And I want to be clear: We need this young, vibrant, smart
generation that is central to America's democracy. They work,
they pay taxes, they vote. And, increasingly, they are doing
everything they can to solve the climate crisis. In their
schools, in their houses of worship, in their communities, they
are taking action, and they are demanding that elected
officials do the same.
Solving the climate crisis offers opportunities for them.
Some of the fastest-growing jobs in American are solar
installers and wind turbine technicians, clean-energy
engineers. These are no longer the jobs of the future; they are
the jobs that this generation is doing to solve the climate
crisis right now.
This is a transformative generation. The March for Our
Lives, the Peoples Climate Movement, the massive student
climate strikes we saw all around the world--these are
movements led by young people who are demanding climate justice
for their generation and the generations of young people who
will come after them.
Seventy percent of young people in America say they worry
about climate change. And based on the latest science from the
administration's own National Climate Assessment and the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, they have reason to
worry. Seas are rising, snow pack is melting away, and, in many
parts of the country, droughts are getting worse. Hot, humid
heat waves are becoming more intense. We are faced with more
days where people cannot safely work or play outside. And
higher temperatures mean that other pollutants, like ground-
level ozone from car exhaust, will become even more damaging to
our health.
What is necessary to address the climate crisis is to stop
carbon pollution from accumulating in the atmosphere. That
requires action--urgent action, ambitious action. Every ton of
carbon pollution we avoid, every new solar panel and wind
turbine we bring on line, brings us one step closer to solving
the climate change challenge.
So I want all the young people who are with us here today
and those who are watching at school and across the country to
hear our promise. We can't afford to let you down or disappoint
you.
The time for rejecting climate science is over. The time
for frustration and despair in the face of the climate crisis
must end. This is a time for hope. This is a time for
solutions. This is a time for all of us to come together--all
generations, all political persuasions--for action. You all are
rising to the occasion. We must rise with you.
Finally, when I was preparing for this hearing, I was
reminded that April 4, today, is the anniversary of the date in
1968 when we lost one of our great spiritual and political
leaders, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Dr. King understood how powerful young people are when it
comes to fighting for justice. In 1960, amid some of the most
intense student activism of the civil rights movement, Dr. King
told students at Spelman College, ``Keep moving, for it may
well be that the greatest song has not yet been sung, the
greatest book has not yet been written, the highest mountain
has not been climbed. This is your challenge.''
Today, solving the climate crisis is not just your
challenge; it is the challenge that we all share. And this
committee is dedicated to ensuring that Congress meets it with
you.
I now recognize the ranking member, the gentleman from
Louisiana, Mr. Graves, for an opening statement.
[The statement of Ms. Castor follows:]
__________
Opening Statement (As Prepared for Delivery) of Rep. Kathy Castor,
Chair, U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
This is the first of many Select Committee hearings that is focused
on solutions to the climate crisis. The need for solutions is
increasingly urgent.
The first major warning Congress received about the impending
climate crisis was in 1988. But the Congress didn't act then. Today we
know that oil companies' own scientists warned them about climate
change, too. But instead of action, executives chose to tell Congress
and the American people to ignore the scientists . . . and that we
could afford to wait.
Now the scientific consensus is too unequivocal to deny. What is
clear from the science and what diverse voices, including young people
across America, are telling us every day is that if Congress continues
to delay, we lose. If Congress chooses the status quo, we lose.
In fact, scientists have told us that the world needs to hit net-
zero carbon emissions by 2050 to avoid the worst consequences of the
climate crisis. Getting there means cutting greenhouse gas pollution 45
percent below 2010 levels by 2030.
To get there--and to give ourselves a chance of avoiding the most
catastrophic consequences of climate change--we have to cut carbon
pollution smartly and soon. Taking action now gives us the best
opportunity to transition to a clean energy economy efficiently and
equitably.
We still have time to solve the climate crisis because we've made
some good choices: raising fuel economy standards, supporting wind and
solar jobs, and investing in research and development that is coming to
fruition now. America chose to lead the world in the Paris Climate
Agreement, an agreement vital to the clean energy jobs and innovations
underway across America now.
But every time Congress and the administration choose delay,
American families and business are asked to pay a higher price whether
it's through climate catastrophes, extreme heat, dirtier air or higher
electric bills.
But as daunting as the climate crisis is, we can make choices and
rise to the challenge.
Many businesses and communities across America have been leading
the way. More than 3 million Americans work in the clean energy
economy. Existing energy efficiency standards will save consumers and
businesses $2 trillion on utility bills by 2030. And fuel economy
standards will save the average household another $2,800 a year at the
pump. Still, there is no substitute for bold federal policy initiatives
that meet the scale of the challenge we face.
When we choose clear policies with clear goals, businesses
innovate. They reduce costs. They put clean technology to work.
Our witnesses today will help us examine and prioritize our policy
choices. We're going to look at infrastructure, at deploying more wind
and solar, at electrifying home heating and transportation, at cutting
the most powerful climate pollutants and more.
We're also going to look at funding research and development and
establishing public-private partnerships that move technology from the
lab to the market. We are going to look at capturing and storing carbon
and pulling it out of the atmosphere.
But we have to be clear: technological breakthroughs are not
guaranteed. Choosing to invest in innovation doesn't give us an excuse
to choose the status quo elsewhere.
At the end of the day, technology is just a tool. It's people who
will solve the climate crisis.
The clean energy economy employs millions of people and we can
choose policies that will make those jobs family-sustaining jobs.
That includes elevating transition for workers in the fossil fuel
industry. They deserve a clean energy economy that delivers for them,
in their communities. We need good and patriotic policies for them,
too.
And we need climate solutions that work for people who are on the
front lines of the climate crisis. That means putting an end to
environmental racism and making sure the jobs at the heart of the clean
energy economy are accessible to everyone.
We have to pursue many options to meet our goals by 2030 and 2050.
The one option we don't have any more is delay. We must choose climate
action now.
Mr. Graves. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for
holding this hearing today.
And I want to thank all of you all for coming here today to
share your perspective.
I have the opportunity often to visit with students and go
talk to college classes and high school and elementary school
classes. And I remind them, and I remind our kids, that the
decisions that we make here, just statistically, you all have
to deal for with a longer period of time than we do, right?
Just looking at life expectancy, it is simple numbers.
And whenever Congress comes in and starts appropriating
money and adds to our $22 trillion debt and proposing
legislation that would just continue adding to that, it is a
debt that is going to have to be paid at some point. It is one
example of a long-term consequence that is going to adversely
affect young folks, and it is going to disproportionately
affect young folks.
And so I want to commend every one of you for being here,
for participating in your government, for recognizing the
decisions that we make are going to affect you, and they are
going to affect you for a longer period of time than they are
going to affect people of my generation and older.
You know, I agree with some of the statements that the
chair made in regard to our obligation to be good stewards of
this planet and protect the environment.
Not a very well-known occupation of mine for a number of
years is I was a mountaineering instructor. I was a wilderness
instructor, educator. And there were years of my life where I
spent more time living outside than I did inside. Doing that
job, being in the outdoors, being in the incredible environment
that we have here in the United States and other countries--
absolutely amazing and one of the most important parts of my
life.
When I came up and I started doing policy work up here in
my young 20s, I was so aggravated that I didn't have the
opportunity to be outside. I actually used to drive every
weekend over to Mrs. Miller's State from April to October to go
be a river guide so I could be outside again on weekends.
Growing up in south Louisiana, we fish and have a very
unique swamp and coastal area that--it is an environment unlike
anywhere else I have ever seen, and it is absolutely amazing.
In fact, U.S. Fish has called it one of the most productive
ecosystems on the North American continent. It is an amazing
place.
We need to be good stewards and--let me be clear--we need
to be better stewards of our environment, of our earth. And we
need to ensure that the science that we gain, the technology
that we gain, that we are able to apply it into logical
solutions that actually make a difference.
After spending a little bit of time up here doing some
policy work, I learned a lot about what was going on in south
Louisiana. I found out that we had lost about 2,000 square
miles of our coast, that same coast that I made reference to
earlier as one of the most productive ecosystems on the North
American continent.
And we immediately began working together with Republicans,
Democrats, independents. We literally got to the point to where
we had environmental organizations and Lisa Jackson, who was
the EPA Administrator under President Obama, and energy
companies all working together toward a common goal of a
sustainable ecosystem and sustainable communities.
And despite, at one point, death threats and other charges
against me and the folks who were working on our team, we ended
up putting a plan together that united everyone, a
sustainability plan for the ecosystem and for the community,
that ended up getting unanimous support through four committees
and through our entire legislature.
I believe we have an opportunity to make progress on this
issue. I do. I think we have an opportunity to help bring down
energy costs. I think we have an opportunity to truly pursue an
all-of-the-above energy strategy that helps to reduce
emissions. I think we have the ability to apply American
innovation and know-how to reducing emissions in the United
States and to being a global leader on this topic.
Today--today--the United States spends more money on
climate science and technology than any other country in the
world. Are we spending these dollars in the places where we
need to be spending them? Are we investing in strategies that
are going to actually yield outputs and gains that, again, help
to improve our environment, help to reduce emissions, help to
bring down energy costs? Or are we spending money and studying
things that aren't ultimately going to yield outputs or
outcomes?
I am really looking forward to hearing you all's thoughts
today. I am really looking forward to getting your input and
figuring out how we can work together to next steps to truly
try to redefine this issue and stop this partisan
ridiculousness that surrounds this issue and make progress that
we can truly be proud of and turn over a planet, turn over an
environment to my kids, to the next generation, and theirs that
we can all be proud of.
I thank you and yield back.
Ms. Castor. Thank you, Mr. Graves.
Without objection, members who wish to enter opening
statements into the record may have 5 business days to do so.
[The information follows:]
__________
Statement for the Record of Hon. Suzanne Bonamici
Statement for the Record Climate change is one of the greatest
existential threats of our time; we cannot wait any longer to take bold
action to address it.
The U.S. Global Change Research Program's Fourth National Climate
Assessment (NCA) and the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) report add to the overwhelming research demonstrating
that the consequences of inaction on climate change will be serious and
swift.
Findings from the IPCC report indicate that an increase in global
warming by 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels would result
in extreme heat, rising sea levels, melting glaciers, water scarcity,
lower crop yields, more acidic ocean water, and bleached coral reefs.
The report demonstrated that limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees
Celsius by 2040 would require a reduction in net global greenhouse gas
emissions by 45 percent below 2010 levels by 2030, and 100 percent
below 2010 levels by 2050. The NCA makes clear that greenhouse gas
emissions from human activities are the most substantial factor that
account for the observed global warming over the past six decades, and
carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere are now higher than at
any time in the last three million years.
Without intervention, we will continue to see record heat waves,
more acidic oceans, raging wildfires, unprecedented hurricanes, rising
sea levels, and a surge in extreme weather patterns--all in our
lifetime. Our inaction creates significant consequences for every
person in our country, particularly and disproportionately young
children, seniors, and other vulnerable populations.
We must face this challenge. We have the opportunity and the
imperative to reverse and mitigate the worst effects of climate change
by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and transitioning to clean energy
sources while creating new, good-paying jobs.
In the district that I represent in Northwest Oregon, and across
the country, people are demanding bold action on climate change. I have
been inspired by the advocacy of young people across the country who
are speaking out and demanding that the federal government act on
climate change. These young leaders are reminding us that all three
branches of the federal government, along with local and state
governments, the private sector, and individuals, must all take
immediate action to address the climate crisis.
Confronting climate change will require ambitious action that
acknowledges the scale of the crisis and uses the best available
science in crafting solutions. I am excited to work with my colleagues
on this Committee to fight for comprehensive policies that will
strengthen the economy and protect our planet for future generations.
4Ms. Castor. Now, I want to welcome our witnesses.
First, we have Mr. Chris Suggs, who describes himself as a
speaker, activist, community leader, and entrepreneur. He hails
from Kinston, North Carolina, and is a student at the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Ms. Lindsay Cooper is a recent college graduate who served
as a Louisiana Governor's fellow while studying at Tulane.
After graduation, she joined the Governor's Office of Coastal
Activities as a policy analyst.
Mr. Aji Piper is a plaintiff in the landmark climate change
case called Juliana v. The United States. He lives in Seattle,
near Puget Sound.
And Ms. Melody Zhang is a climate justice coordinator at
Sojourners and serves as co-chair for the steering committee of
Young Evangelicals for Climate Action. She just moved to D.C.
after growing up and attending school in Michigan.
Without objection, the witnesses' written statements will
be made part of the record.
With that, Mr. Suggs, you are now recognized to give a 5-
minute presentation of your testimony.
STATEMENTS OF CHRIS J. SUGGS, STUDENT AND ACTIVIST, KINSTON,
NORTH CAROLINA; LINDSAY COOPER, POLICY ANALYST, OFFICE OF
COASTAL ACTIVITIES, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OF LOUISIANA; AJI
PIPER, PLAINTIFF, JULIANA V. UNITED STATES, SEATTLE,
WASHINGTON; AND MELODY ZHANG, CLIMATE JUSTICE CAMPAIGN
COORDINATOR, SOJOURNERS, AND CO-CHAIR, STEERING COMMITTEE,
YOUNG EVANGELICALS FOR CLIMATE ACTION
STATEMENT OF CHRIS J. SUGGS
Mr. Suggs. Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and members
of the committee, thank you for this opportunity today to
testify about my personal experience with natural disasters and
our Nation's changing climate.
My name is Chris Suggs. I am 18 years old, and I am a
sophomore at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
where I am studying political science and religious studies. I
am from Kinston, North Carolina, where I was born and raised
and my parents were born and raised.
I am here today to talk about the impacts of climate change
that I have seen in my community firsthand and my personal
experiences, urging Congress to take action now.
Kinston is a small town with just a little over 20,000
people located in the heart of eastern North Carolina. My mom,
who is here with me today, is an elementary school teacher and
city councilwoman, and my father is a part-time recreation
supervisor. I love my hometown. Everybody knows everybody, and
it is truly a great place to live.
Once a bustling community with a strong economy based on
textiles and tobacco, today Kinston faces a lot of economic
challenges. Before I was born, lots of industries left the
area, and Hurricanes Fran and Floyd in the 1990s wiped out lots
of businesses and damaged many of our neighborhoods.
This led to disinvestment, lack of community morale, and a
significant population loss. Between 1990 and 2010, Kinston
lost more than 16 percent of its population. East Kinston was
particularly hit hard. A neighborhood there known as Lincoln
City was wiped out by Hurricane Floyd in 1999, the year before
I was born.
From what I have read and heard from members of my
community, that hurricane was devastating--it was beyond
devastating. But from what I have seen, driving down streets
that were once full of homes and businesses but now overground
with brush and wildlife thanks to flooding and FEMA buyout
programs, I know it was beyond devastating.
To this day, there continues to be concentrated poverty and
crime in my neighborhood, in part due to lots of abandoned
structures, outdated and dense public housing, and a lack of
economic development.
At a very young age, my parents instilled in my siblings
and I the importance of serving our community and uplifting
others. That is why, in October of 2014, when issues in Kinston
began getting really bad, I knew I needed to make a change.
Throughout 2014, gun violence become a serious issue in
Kinston, especially among young people. This combined with a
2014 study stating that my neighborhood of East Kinston was the
most economically distressed census tract in the entire State
of North Carolina made me decide that enough was enough.
So I decided to start my nonprofit organization, Kinston
Teens Incorporated, with a mission of empowering young people
through service, leadership, and civic engagement. We host
youth leadership seminars, arrange college visits for high
school students, work to register voters, and make sure our
voices are heard at State and local government meetings.
In my neighborhood of East Kinston, we launched a vacant-
lot transformation program to transform vacant lots into small
parks, community gardens, and other community amenities. A big
part of our work has been to respond to disasters like
Hurricane Matthew and Florence and work to build community
resilience.
The thing about Kinston is that hurricanes aren't even the
worst part of the storm for us; it is the catastrophic flooding
that follows. Kinston sits along the banks of the Neuse River,
which cuts right through our town. That river is one of our
greatest natural assets but also one of the most dangerous. It
has flooded again and again, cutting off parts of our
community, wiping out neighborhoods, and flooding our main
business corridor along U.S. Highway 70.
As a result, my town's socioeconomic challenges cannot be
divorced from the extreme weather we have experienced. Poverty
and hurricanes are deeply intertwined for us in eastern North
Carolina.
In 2016, Hurricane Matthew hit. Following the storm, the
river flood stage hit about 28.3 feet. And within 3 or 4 days,
it was swamping entire apartment complexes, flooding businesses
and churches, and cutting the town in half.
My organization, Kinston Teens, had been in existence for
about 2 years then, and we immediately sprang into action.
Parts of Kinston were cut off from food assets for about 25
days because of flooding. So it took a serious community effort
to make sure that our neighbors were provided with the
resources to survive. It took 3 or 4 weeks for the waters to
completely recede.
When Hurricane Florence hit in September 2018 and caused
that same level of destruction, many families, neighborhoods,
and businesses were once again under water. They were still
recovering from Matthew, though.
But Kinston Teens again sprang into action. We worked with
our city officials and police department to go door to door
notifying people about the evacuation process, telling them
where their local shelters were, and even in some cases helping
people to physically evacuate. We coordinated volunteers to
distribute food, groceries, and phone chargers to families in
the shelters and our first responders.
My community is still rebuilding from Florence and from
Matthew on top of that. And with hurricane season starting in
just a few months, people in Kinston are hesitant about what
might happen this year. In just my 18\1/2\ years on this earth,
my community has experienced two 500-year floods on top of the
floods after Hurricane Floyd in 1999. For these catastrophic
events to happen at such a fast rate, a rate that my community
can't recover from, is deeply alarming.
Climate change is an extra kick to communities and
populations that are already down, especially with how often
these major hurricanes and floods are occurring. My testimony
is a call to action. We have to do something now to address the
threat of a changing climate, reduce our impact on the
environment, and mitigate the effects of these natural
disasters.
Thank you so much for this opportunity to share my story
and my community's story. I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The statement of Mr. Suggs follows:]
__________
Prepared Statement of Chris Suggs
introduction
Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the House
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, thank you for the opportunity
to testify today about my personal experience with climate change, and
the need for urgent and equitable action to address this crisis. Chair
Castor, thank you also for your recent leadership in introducing H.R.
9, the Climate Action Now Act--I'm excited to see Congress taking the
first steps in a long time to act on climate.
My name is Chris Suggs and I am 18 years old. I'm a sophomore at
the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where I'm double-
majoring in Political Science and Religious Studies. I'm from Kinston,
North Carolina, where I have lived my whole life and my parents have
lived their whole lives.
In September 2018, my town was hit by Hurricane Florence--the
second major hurricane in a 2-year period. The storm led to historic
flooding that left entire neighborhoods underwater and caused massive
damage to homes, businesses and infrastructure. Now, more than six
months later, things are finally starting to get back to normal--just a
few weeks ago, the last flood-damaged business finally re-opened. I'm
here today to talk about the impacts of climate change that I've seen
in my community firsthand and why we must take climate action now.
kinston background & kinston teens
Kinston is a small town with just a little over 20,000 people,
located in the heart of eastern North Carolina. I was raised in East
Kinston, a mostly poor, predominantly black neighborhood in the
southeast part of town. My mom is an elementary school teacher and a
city councilwoman, and my father is a parks and recreation supervisor.
I love my hometown--everybody knows everybody, and it is truly an
awesome place to live.
Once a bustling community with a robust economy based on textile
manufacturing and tobacco, today Kinston faces a number of economic
challenges. Before I was born, many industries left the area, and
Hurricanes Fran and Floyd in the 1990s wiped out a lot of businesses
and damaged many of our neighborhoods, leading to disinvestment, a lack
of community morale, and significant population loss. Between 1990 and
2010, the population of Kinston fell more than 16 percent. East Kinston
was particularly hit hard--a neighborhood known as ``Lincoln City'' was
completely wiped out by Hurricane Floyd in 1999. To this day, there
continues to be concentrated poverty and crime in part thanks to lots
of abandoned structures, outdated and dense public housing, and a lack
of economic development.
But despite these challenges, I believe Kinston is a great
community, an awesome community. I grew up loving it and have always
been actively engaged in my school, community, and in my church, Sand
Hill Free Will Baptist Church. At a very young age, my parents
instilled in my siblings and I the importance of serving our community
and uplifting others. That's why, in October 2014, when I was 14 years
old, and issues in Kinston began getting too bad, I knew I needed to
make a change. Shootings were happening nearly every other day,
especially among young people--to people I knew, people I considered
friends. My classmates were shooting each other or getting shot. This
combined with a 2014 study showing that my neighborhood of East Kinston
was the most economically distressed census tract in the state, led me
to decide that enough was enough.
We needed an outlet for young people to be empowered, and to make
changes in their own lives. I'd been involved with Boy Scouts all
throughout middle school, but I knew we needed more--a way to get
people civically engaged and talk directly to our elected officials.
So, I decided to start a nonprofit called Kinston Teens with a
mission of empowering young people through service, leadership, and
civic engagement. We've been going strong for a little over four and a
half years now, working to ensure young people are involved in the
decisions that most affect us.
We host youth leadership seminars, arrange college visits for high
school students, work to register voters, create mentoring programs at
elementary schools, and make sure our voices are heard at state and
local government meetings. In my neighborhood of East Kinston, we
launched a Vacant Lot Transformation Program to transform vacant lots
into small parks, community gardens and other amenities. We've been
able to accomplish a lot in just over four years, but there is much
more to be done. A big part of our work has been to respond to
disasters, like Hurricanes Matthew and Florence, and work to build
community resilience.
hurricanes matthew & florence, and climate change
As I mentioned, the year before I was born, in September 1999,
Hurricane Floyd hit. From what I've read and heard from my parents and
members of my community, it was beyond devastating. I grew up
continuously hearing about how Floyd and Fran, which was an earlier
hurricane in the 90s, forever changed Kinston and our community.
The thing about Kinston is that the hurricanes aren't even the
worst part of the storm . . . it's the catastrophic flooding that
follows. Kinston sits on the banks of the Neuse River, which cuts right
through our town. That river is one of our greatest natural assets, but
also one of the most dangerous. It has flooded again and again and
again--cutting off parts of our community and damaging homes,
apartments and our biggest business corridor, which lies along U.S.
Highway 70. As a result, my town's socioeconomic challenges cannot be
divorced from the extreme weather we've experienced. Poverty and
hurricanes are deeply intertwined for us in Eastern North Carolina.
In 2016 when I was 16, Hurricane Matthew hit. Within three or four
days after the hurricane, entire neighborhoods were under water. During
Matthew, the flood stage hit 28.3 feet--swamping apartment complexes,
flooding businesses and churches, and cutting the town in half. My
organization, Kinston Teens, had been in existence for two years when
Matthew hit, and we immediately got to work. It was a month-long
fiasco. Parts of Kinston were cut off from food access for 25 days
because of the flooding. It took three or four weeks for the flood
levels to completely recede.
Fast forward two years, to last year: September of 2018 when
Hurricane Florence hit. At the time, many families, neighborhoods and
businesses were still recovering from Hurricane Matthew--and Florence
and its floods made sure that these places that were just starting to
get stable again were right back under water.
Kinston Teens again sprang into action. We worked with our city
officials and police department to go door to door before the Hurricane
hit and in the days following ahead of the floods, notifying people
about the evacuation process, telling them where their local shelters
were, and even in some cases helping them to physically evacuate. We
had businesses donate funds, coordinated volunteers to distribute food,
groceries, phone chargers and other supplies to families in shelters
and first responders impacted by the storm. I remember one lady we
helped was a single mother of two kids, who lived in southeast Kinston
and worked at a restaurant on highway 70. Her home was flooded, and her
job was too. We were fortunate to be able to provide food and clothes
for her family while they were displaced in the shelter. It's been
eight months, though, and she's still not fully back on her feet. As
the greatest country in the world, there's no way we can sit idle while
these storms cause such detrimental effects on our citizens' lives.
next steps & climate action needed
My community is still rebuilding from Florence, and from Matthew on
top of that. And there's hesitation and fear in Kinston around what
might happen this year. Hurricane season starts in just a few months.
In just my eighteen-and-a-half years on this Earth, my community has
experienced TWO 500-year-floods--on top of the floods after Hurricane
Floyd in 1999. They're not supposed to happen this often, but they
occurred within the span of just two years--back to back. For these
kinds of catastrophic events to happen at such a fast rate--a rate that
my community can't recover from--is deeply alarming.
For me, the saddest thing about these recurring natural disasters
that are exacerbated by climate change, is that the communities that
are the most affected--like mine--are often the communities that have
ALREADY been hit the hardest by all of society's other problems. You
have poor, rural communities that are completely underwater or get cut
off from their access to food, hospitals, and medical supplies. You
have communities that rely heavily on the farming industry just
devastated by these storms, causing farmers, migrant workers and their
families to lose income while the farms are underwater. And you have
predominantly poor communities, black communities and housing projects
that were built in the flood plains--because those were the only places
they were allowed--that become completely submerged. That's the story
of Kinston, and much of eastern North Carolina.
I've never known a world that wasn't impacted by climate change,
and it's time for that to change. My generation knows we have no time
to waste, and while Kinston Teens and I are here to help Kinston
rebuild and become as resilient as possible-- it shouldn't just fall to
us. We need action. I voted for the first time in the November of 2018
and like millions other young people and first-time voters across the
country, I was voting to keep our communities safe and resilient, and
to protect our families and our homes. We turned out in record numbers
last year, and we're not going away.
Climate change is an extra kick to communities and populations that
are already down . . . especially with how often these major hurricanes
and floods are occurring. My testimony is a call for action. We have to
do something now to address the threat of a changing climate, reduce
OUR impact on the environment, and mitigate the effects of these
natural disasters.
Thank you so much for the opportunity to tell my story today. I
look forward to answering your questions.
Ms. Castor. Thank you, Mr. Suggs.
Ms. Cooper, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF LINDSAY COOPER
Ms. Cooper. Good morning, Chair Castor, Ranking Member
Graves, and members of the committee. My name is Lindsay
Cooper, and I want to thank you for the opportunity to discuss
a Louisiana perspective on climate concerns.
Louisiana really is, in many respects, the perfect case
study for this committee as it grapples with a path moving
forward for action in regard to climate change and its
associated impacts.
But before further detailing the role of Louisiana in this
discussion, let me first introduce myself. I was born, raised,
and educated on the north shore of Lake Pontchartrain in
Louisiana. I attended Tulane University, where I majored in
marine biology and public policy, and I graduated this past
December.
During college, I served as an environmental advocacy
volunteer with No Waste NOLA, a local nonprofit seeking to
reduce plastic waste throughout the city. I also interned for
the Gulf Restoration Network, a local nonprofit focused on
science-based coastal protection. I served as a research
assistant for the Tulane Institute of Water Resources Law and
Policy, and I became president of the Tulane University Green
Club my sophomore year.
Last year, as Chair Castor recognized earlier, I served as
a Louisiana Governor's fellow, where I had the privilege to
work alongside Governor John Bel Edwards in his coastal office
directly on statewide policy initiatives.
It was in this time that I discovered the extent of our
Louisiana coastal crisis and the imperative with which it must
be addressed. Therefore, upon graduation, I joined Governor
John Bel Edwards in his coastal office, where I serve as a
policy analyst. I work diligently alongside the Coastal
Protection and Restoration Authority to move forward policies
that promote coastal wetland protection and restoration in my
state.
However, it did not take this experience in coastal policy
to teach me about devastation from unparalleled climate
threats. In states vulnerable to hurricanes, floods, and
coastal degradation, my family and countless other lifelong
friends have confronted devastation after devastation from
these increasingly intense weather events. In the wake of
Hurricane Katrina, my own family had to relocate for months
while our schools were closed, but many of my neighbors and
friends never returned.
In light of these circumstances, I am compelled to use my
education and experience to fight for the culture, people, and
environment into which I was born.
The Louisiana coast serves many national interests:
fisheries, energy production, port, navigation, and trade
activities. It provides countless ecosystem services and is
home to over 2 million people.
Our coastal wetlands are a key first line of defense to
protect our interests and our people. Louisiana is home to
approximately 30 percent of these national wetlands. But,
tragically, we are losing roughly a football field's worth
every hour and a half due to sediment starvation, saltwater
intrusion, and erosion.
In the decades to come, sea-level rise will play a larger
and larger role in sustainability of our coast. Our communities
have not moved from the Gulf for waterfront views, but the Gulf
has moved to us.
In 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita underscored the
importance of these coastal wetlands for protection of inland
communities, including urban areas like the city of New Orleans
but also less densely populated areas of the southwest.
Some call us a canary in a coal mine or a harbinger of bad
things soon to happen all around us. As Ranking Member Graves
noted earlier, we have already lost 2,000 square miles of
wetlands since the 1930s, and we stand to lose much more in the
years to come without significant action.
To others, we are a living laboratory, a testing ground for
new opportunities and a place where community needs, cutting-
edge science, effective natural and manmade infrastructure, and
good public policy can come together to balance interests of
economy and environment.
But regardless of if you take the pessimistic or optimistic
view, it cannot be denied that we have all of the elements
necessary to craft a large-scale solution for our country. We
have a long, painful history of natural disasters and lived
experience of coastal land loss. We have a strong culture of
appreciation for our natural environment from a recreation and
commercial point of view. And we have an economy that is deeply
connected to access and utilization of energy resources.
We have also found a way to deal with the impacts of our
changing coast that prioritizes science-based decisionmaking
and minimized politics. And since 2007, through our Coastal
Master Plan, we have completed 111 projects across 20 of our
coastal parishes.
So, in conclusion, as a Louisianan, I understand climate
change. It is something my State lives with every day. Even as
we sit here today, our Louisiana coastline is shrinking. People
are migrating inland, and unique Louisiana cultures are being
swept into the Gulf.
So, for these reasons, I ask you to consider my testimony
and the urgency with which we must address this massive
problem.
Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to share the
urgency of what we face and what I am doing back home to help
shape a better future for our coast, my state, and our nation.
[The statement of Ms. Cooper follows:]
__________
Statement of Lindsay Cooper, The Louisiana Governor's Office of Coastal
Activities
Good morning Chairwoman Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and Members
of the Committee. My name is Lindsay Cooper, and I want to thank you
for the opportunity to discuss a Louisiana perspective on climate
concerns. Louisiana is, in many respects, the perfect case study for
this committee as it grapples with a path forward for the nation in
regard to climate change and its associated impacts. Before further
detailing the role of Louisiana in this discussion, let me first
introduce myself. I was born, raised, and educated on the north shore
of Lake Pontchartrain in Louisiana. I attended Tulane University for my
bachelor's degree where I graduated in Marine Biology and Public Policy
in December 2018. During college I served as an environmental advocacy
volunteer with No Waste Nola, a local nonprofit that fights to reduce
waste in New Orleans; interned for the Gulf Restoration Network, a
nonprofit focused on science-based coastal protection; served as a
research assistant with the Tulane Institute of Water Resources Law and
Policy; and, became President of the Tulane University Green Club my
sophomore year.
Last year, I also served as a Louisiana Governor's Fellow where I
had the privilege to work with Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards and
his Coastal Activities Office directly on state-wide policy
initiatives. It was in this time that I discovered the extent of our
Louisiana coastal crisis and the imperative with which it must be
addressed. Therefore, upon graduation, I joined Governor John Bel
Edward's Office of Coastal Activities where I serve as a policy
analyst. I work diligently alongside the Coastal Protection and
Restoration Authority to move forward policies that promote coastal
wetlands protection and restoration in Louisiana. However, it did not
take my experiences in coastal policy to teach me that Louisiana faces
unparalleled climate threats. In a state vulnerable to hurricanes,
floods, and coastal degradation, my family and countless other lifelong
friends have confronted devastation after devastation from increasingly
intense weather events. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, my own family
had to relocate for months while our schools were flooded, but many of
my neighbors and friends were never able to return. In light of these
circumstances, I am compelled to use my education and experience to
fight for the culture, people, and the environment into which I was
born. The Louisiana coast serves many national interests: fisheries,
energy production, port, navigation, and trade activities; it provides
countless ecosystem services and is home to over two million people.
Our coastal wetlands are a key first line of defense to protect these
interests and our people. Louisiana is home to approximately 30 percent
of the nation's wetlands. Tragically, we are losing roughly a football
field's worth of coastal wetlands every hour and a half due to sediment
starvation, saltwater intrusion, and erosion. In the decades to come,
sea level rise will play a larger and larger role in the sustainability
of coastal Louisiana. Our communities have not moved to the Gulf for
waterfront views, but the Gulf has moved to us. In 2005, Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita underscored the importance of our coastal wetlands for
the protection of inland communities including urban areas like the
City of New Orleans and less densely populated portions of the
southwest. In 2006, the Louisiana Legislature created the Coastal
Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA), a first in the nation
organization tasked with coordinating the local and state efforts to
save our coast. CPRA is responsible for developing the state's Coastal
Master Plan every six years which calls for a $50 billion investment in
over 100 coastal protection and restoration projects over the next 50
years. These projects are essential both to create a stronger and more
resilient coast and to reduce wetlands loss. The Master Plan is based
on sound science, public input and bipartisan approval from the state
legislature.
Some call us a canary in the coal mine or harbingers of bad things
soon to happen around us. We have lost 2,000 square miles of coastline
since the 1930s and stand to lose much more in the years to come
without significant action. To others, we are a living laboratory, a
testing ground for new opportunities, and a place where community
needs, cutting edge science, effective natural and manmade
infrastructure, and good public policy can come together to balance the
interests of economy and environment.
Regardless of whether you take the pessimistic or optimistic view
of the outcome, it cannot be denied that we have all the elements
necessary to craft a large-scale solution for the country. We have a
long, painful history of natural disasters and lived experience of
coastal land loss. We have a strong culture of appreciation for our
natural environment from a recreation and commercial point of view. And
we have an economy that is deeply connected to access and utilization
of energy resources located offshore. We have also found a way to deal
with the impacts of our changing coast that prioritizes science-based
decision making and minimized politics. And we have completed 111
projects across all 20 of our coastal parishes since 2007.
In 2017 the Louisiana Legislature unanimously approved the third
iteration of our Coastal Master Plan. When we developed our first plan
in 2007, we had no money, but we knew that we needed a principled
approach to make hard decisions and allocate scarce resources. We
amended our state constitution with tremendous public support to
dedicate all revenues we receive from the federal government from
offshore oil and gas development to coastal protection and restoration.
And in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the state also
has relied on the Coastal Master Plan to guide our recovery and drive
the investment of nearly $8 billion that will come to the State through
2032 as part of the settlement.
In conclusion, as a Louisianan, I understand climate change. It's
something my state lives with every day. Even as we sit here today, our
Louisiana coastal wetlands are shrinking; people are migrating inland;
some unique Louisiana cultures are being swept into the Gulf. For these
reasons, I ask you to consider my testimony and the urgency with which
we must work together to confront this massive problem. Thank you for
allowing me this opportunity to share the urgency of what we face and
what I am doing back home to help shape a better future for our coast,
our state and our nation.
Ms. Castor. Thank you, Ms. Cooper.
Mr. Piper, your turn. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF AJI PIPER
Mr. Piper. Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and
distinguished members of the Select Committee on the Climate
Crisis, thank you for inviting me to provide testimony.
My name is Aji Piper. I am 18 years old and one of the 21
young Americans who filed the landmark constitutional climate
lawsuit, Juliana v. United States.
While I am not a lawyer nor a climate scientist and I only
recently came of voting age, I know that I have constitutional
rights at stake in the actions you take. And I know from
studying climate science and living with the consequences of
climate change today that my health, my community, and my
future and that of my generation is at stake. And I am here to
speak to you as a young person on the greatest issue of our
time: climate change.
It is the constitutional duty of the government to protect
public-trust resources on which we all depend and to protect us
from any damages that it may inflict upon its citizens.
Instead, the government is taking actions that are directly
contributing to the destruction of our planet. It is actively
abusing the trust of its most vulnerable citizens, the youth.
Growing up, my mom always told me that to be an adult is to
take responsibility for my actions and the way that those
actions impact others. She told me that to be a leader is to
take responsibility for the well-being of my community and to
actively work to make it safer and healthy for everyone. I took
that advice to heart. I got involved in activism from an early
age, planting trees with a nonprofit organization.
But as I got older, I began to realize that the
environmental issues facing my community were much larger than
could reasonably be dealt with just by planting trees. Seeing
the skies of my hometown filled with smoke, seeing our snow
pack diminish and our oceans become a rising threat to coastal
communities and an unsafe acidic home to shellfish in
Washington, I knew that in order to fulfill my responsibility
to myself and my community, I needed to broaden the scope of my
civic engagement in order to truly address the issue of climate
change.
Like youth who have come before us in the civil rights
movement and other social justice movements, it is often the
young among us that shine the light on systems of injustice.
And just as my federal government orchestrated systems of
racial segregation in housing policies and sanctioned
discrimination in schools until the middle of the last
century--policies that harmed children--my federal government
has also orchestrated and sanctioned a system of fossil fuel
energy that is harming children in another way, that is
irreversibly threatening our personal security, our health, our
homes, and our communities by creating a dangerous climate
system.
So, in 2015, 21 young people, myself included, filed a
lawsuit against the United States and agencies of the executive
branch to safeguard our constitutional right to a stable
climate.
Since then, first the Obama administration and now the
Trump administration has done everything in their power to stop
our case from going to trial, making unprecedented requests of
the courts, and this is simply because they are scared of what
trial will reveal.
During the litigation, our attorneys found hundreds of
documents demonstrating the United States Government's
knowledge of the threats of greenhouse gas emissions and
climate change since 1961. In short, our government has
consciously sanctioned climate destruction for more than five
decades.
And because climate change is a systemic issue, it requires
systemic change to address it. The burdens of the system's
problems cannot be placed on the shoulders of an individual,
especially not a young person. To combat the systemwide
government actions that have led to the climate crisis, we need
a systemwide reform at the governmental level to address this
emergency.
And for this to happen, we need all three branches of
government to act in concert. The courts need to declare our
constitutional rights and mandate the standard to protect us.
This branch should also recognize our constitutional rights,
make legislative findings on the best science, and enact
legislation not based on political will but scientific
necessity of stopping this catastrophe. The executive needs to
be held accountable to the rule of law and stop promoting
propaganda in support of fossil fuels and promoting lies about
the climate crisis.
While government may play an important role in providing
for our nation's energy, housing, and schools, we don't need
segregated housing and schools and we don't need dangerous
fossil energy. We need policies that don't discriminate and
don't harm children.
All of you took an oath to uphold our Constitution and
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
In 2016, Judge Ann Aiken issued a historic opinion in our
lawsuit, writing that ``the right to a climate system capable
of sustaining human life is fundamental to a free and ordered
society.''
And so I ask the committee: What is your plan to honor your
oath and ensure my right and the rights of young people around
the nation to liberty and a stable climate, as mandated by the
Constitution?
You have a choice. Will you deprive your children and young
people across the country of their fundamental right to
liberty, or will you fight to protect us and our nation for
posterity? What will you tell your children about
responsibility if you fail to act now in the face of crisis?
When you leave office, I want you to be able to walk away
knowing you gave it your all, knowing you can be proud of the
legacy that you leave. The moment is now. The moment is not for
fear or incrementalism. This is the moment for heroism, for
humanity, for standing with children around our country,
standing with me.
Please join your colleagues and publicly support our
lawsuit. Join any future amicus--sorry--curiae--thank you. I
always forget how to pronounce that word--amicus curiae briefs
that Members of Congress file in support of our constitutional
rights and the judiciary exercising its Article III powers in
our case and show children everywhere you care about their
future and the future of all generations to come.
Thank you so much.
[The statement of Mr. Piper follows:]
__________
Aji Piper, Climate Activist and Youth Plaintiff, Juliana v. United
States
Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and distinguished Members of
this Select Committee.
Thank you for inviting me to provide testimony to your Select
Committee on the Climate Crisis. My name is Aji Piper. I'm 18-years-
old. I love vanilla bean ice cream, snowboarding, and writing songs on
my ukulele. I love my family and my friends and my home near the Puget
Sound in Seattle. And I am suing the United States government for
knowingly causing climate change as the largest historic contributor to
the problem and for continuing, even now, to make a dangerous situation
worse.
I have been reading climate science literature since I was 13-
years-old. I have also been studying what my governments have done
about the climate crisis during my lifetime, and even before I was
born. For much of my life, I saw climate change as a problem that would
be solved by adults in nice suits in a faraway Capitol. But as I grew
up, and the coal and oil trains kept rolling through my hometown of
Seattle, and the oil tankers kept sailing in and out of Puget Sound, I
became apprehensive.
The late summer skies over Seattle now regularly fill with wildfire
smoke, people walk around in gas masks, our ocean waters around my
hometown are acidifying and rising, and yet there are still politicians
in Washington, D.C. talking about climate change as if it is an issue
to debate and still talking about promoting fossil fuel energy as if
the pollution from that energy source is not dangerously destroying the
one planet we've got, and the lives and futures of children along with
it. I got to a point where I felt like I could no longer wait for the
solutions to come from the Capitol or the adults that are responsible
to protect young people like myself.
I am one of the 21 Youth Plaintiffs in the constitutional climate
lawsuit, Juliana v. United States. Our complaint asserts that, through
the federal government's affirmative actions in causing climate change,
it has violated my constitutional rights, and those of my generation,
to life, liberty, property, and equal protection under the law, as well
as failed to protect vital public trust resources.\1\ While I am not a
legal expert, nor a climate scientist, and I only recently came of
voting age, the goal of my testimony is to explain my perspective on
the most consequential and far-reaching issues of our time, an issue
that all three branches of this government are duty bound to address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\First Amended Complaint, Juliana et al. v. United States et al.,
No. 6:15-cv-01517-AA (D. Or. Sept. 10, 2015) (Exhibit DD).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
As a young black man, I have grown up with the long-lasting
consequences of unconstitutional discrimination from government-
sanctioned and -engineered segregation. My childhood was shadowed by
trauma from an abusive father. The trajectory of his life was formed in
part by generational trauma of unlawful discrimination. Generations of
black families have lived with the lasting legacy of government-
sponsored racial discrimination, not just in the South, but in places
like Seattle, where white suburbs formed out of federal government
policies with restrictive covenants on housing developments and
federally-guaranteed loans to homeowners that only whites could take
advantage of. Cities across the country are segregated because of these
federal policies that were finally declared unconstitutional after
World War II by the Supreme Court, and that this branch of government
attempted to redress decades later in the Fair Housing Act of 1968.\2\
But the damage had been done and the legacy of that unconstitutional
government conduct remains today in the color and shape of our
communities, the makeup of our schools, the voting districts, and the
disparity in those who were able to acquire home equity and wealth and
those who were not. Unconstitutional systemic government actions have
long-lasting social consequences. Innocent children inherit those
legacies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government
Segregated America, Richard Rothstein (2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to decades of unconstitutional discrimination, in May
of 1963, thousands of children led marches through Birmingham, Alabama
to demand the desegregation of the city in a movement now known as the
Birmingham Children's Crusade. On the first day of the protest,
hundreds of children were arrested. By the second day, police officers
tried to stop the marches by using fire hoses and police dogs to attack
the children. On May 10, 1963, within one week of the first march, the
city acquiesced to the children's demands, agreeing to desegregate
businesses and to free all who had been jailed during the
demonstrations. These youth stood at the forefront of one of the most
pivotal moments in civil rights reform in the United States, using non-
violent protest as a means to advance human rights.
Young people are often on the frontlines of human rights abuses,
experiencing the most severe impacts of bigotry, oppression, and
violence, sometimes in their own homes and often at the hands of adults
in positions of power who do not act in the best interest of children.
They are also inevitably at the forefront of the movements that emerge
to address these issues, as we saw in the Child Labor Law Movement or
the Civil Rights Movement.
Climate change is no different. My generation, and generations to
come, have the most to lose from the sweeping impacts of climate
change. As a result, youth throughout the world have taken the lead in
the movement to address this existential threat. Just last month, over
a million students the world over walked out of class to demand urgent
and sane climate action from the adults in charge.
The entrenched federal government policies of orchestrating,
promoting, supporting, subsidizing, sanctioning, and permitting a
fossil fuel energy system will perpetrate as long-lasting harm on
generations of innocent children as did this body's legal sanctioning
and promotion of segregation. When government sanctions and controls a
system that unconstitutionally deprives children of their basic
fundamental rights to life, liberty and property, that system must be
dismantled, and it is up to all three branches of this federal
government to act now while there is still time to uphold the rights of
my generation, to stop the perpetuation of intergenerational injustice.
Our case, Juliana v. United States
I, along with 20 other youth plaintiffs, Dr. James Hansen as
guardian for future generations, and a youth-led organization called
Earth Guardians, filed the landmark Juliana v. United States lawsuit in
August 2015. Since the time our case was filed, when President Obama
was in the White House, the federal defendants\3\ have done everything
in their power to stop Juliana from going to trial. They have made
unprecedented and drastic efforts to have it thrown out before we get
our day in court. Nonetheless, we have won every step of the way. In
November 2016, we received a historic opinion from U.S. District Court
Judge Ann Aiken, who aptly began her decision by referring to Juliana
as ``no ordinary lawsuit.''\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\The United States Of America; The Office Of The President Of The
United States; Council On Environmental Quality; Office Of Management
And Budget; Office Of Science And Technology Policy; The United States
Department Of Energy; The United States Department Of The Interior; The
United States Department Of Transportation; The United States
Department Of Agriculture; The United States Department Of Commerce;
The United States Department Of Defense; The United States Department
Of State; The United States Environmental Protection Agency.
\4\Juliana v. United States, 217 F. Supp. 3d 124 (D. Or. 2016)
(Exhibit S).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Aiken's opinion stated that:
Exercising my `reasoned judgment,' . . . I have no doubt that
the right to a climate system capable of sustaining human life
is fundamental to a free and ordered society. Just as marriage
is the `foundation of the family,' a stable climate system is
quite literally the foundation `of society, without which there
would be neither civilization nor progress.'\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Exhibit S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of her decision, the district court properly found the
right ``to a climate system capable of sustaining human life'' is both
fundamental to ordered liberty and deeply rooted in our Nation's
history and traditions. The district court also found we should have an
opportunity to present evidence to show that my federal government has
knowingly violated this fundamental right.\6\ In response, the
Executive Branch defendants say that: ``Plaintiffs' purported right to
a `climate system capable of sustaining human life' has no basis
whatsoever in this Nation's history or tradition and is therefore not a
fundamental right.''\7\ My government leaders are denying that the very
foundation of life on Earth, our climate system, is one of my
unalienable rights as a human living in this Nation. They say it is not
one of the rights that I was endowed with when I was born. They say
that my government can deprive me and all human civilization of the
climate foundation of life, and discriminate against me, other children
and all future generations in favor of supporting a fossil fuel-based
economy and the narrow interests fossil fuels support, over policies
that power clean energy and don't threaten my life and my security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\See also District Court order granting in part and denying in
part Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion for Judgment on
the Pleadings (Exhibit T).
\7\Defendants' Reply Brief on Interlocutory Appeal (Exhibit EE).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our lawsuit makes a number of other claims, including that the
United States government has a fiduciary responsibility to protect our
public trust resources, such as the air, fresh water, the sea and the
shores of the sea, not just for my generation, but for future
generations as well. My co-plaintiffs and I are beneficiaries of rights
under the public trust doctrine, unalienable rights that are secured by
the substantive due process clause of the Fifth Amendment and the
Posterity Clause of the Constitution. Defendants have failed in their
duty of care to safeguard the interests of my generation as the present
and future beneficiaries of the public trust.
We have a tremendous amount of evidence, mostly from government
documents, showing that the U.S. government has knowingly endangered
our health and welfare by creating and promoting a national fossil
fuel-based energy system, through controlling (1) Energy planning and
policies; (2) fossil fuel extraction and production; (3) subsidies,
financial and R&D support; (4) imports and exports; (5) interstate
fossil fuel infrastructure and transport; (6) power plants and
refineries; (7) energy standards for appliances, equipment, and
buildings; (8) road, rail, freight, and air transportation; (9)
government operations.\8\ All of these deliberate orchestrated actions
by the United States have cumulatively resulted in dangerous levels of
atmospheric CO2, which deprive us of our fundamental rights to life,
liberty, and property. Importantly, the Defendants have admitted many
of the allegations in our complaint, including that greenhouse gases
``pose risks to human health and welfare'' and ``threaten the public
health and welfare of current and future generations;'' that the U.S.
has emitted 25 percent of cumulative global CO2 emissions from 1850 to
2012; and current CO2 concentrations are ``unprecedented for at least
2.6 million years.''\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\Expert Report of James Gustave (``Gus'') Speth (Exhibit U);
Declaration of Peter A. Erickson (Exhibit E).
\9\Defendants Answer para.para.5, 151, 208-09; 213 (Exhibit FF);
Exhibit R.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the Defendants have been unsuccessful at stopping our case,
they have certainly delayed it, and time is not on our side. Just weeks
before we were set to begin what would have been, and certainly will
be, the most important trial of the century for my generation, the
Supreme Court issued a temporary stay of our trial in order to consider
whether to stay our case and review it before a final decision.\10\
While the Supreme Court ultimately denied the defendants' request and
lifted the stay, the case has bounced up and down between the U.S.
Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the District
Court, while fossil fuels continue to be extracted and burned.\11\ As
our planet drifts ever-closer to the point of no return, we knew we had
to do something.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\In re United States, 139 S. Ct. 16, vacated, 139 S. Ct. 452
(2018).
\11\For the briefing before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on
the government's interlocutory appeal see Exhibit P (Defendants'
Opening Brief); Exhibit Q (Plaintiffs' Answer Brief); Exhibit EE
(Defendants' Reply Brief); see also Exhibit O (Amicus brief submitted
by 80 law professors in support of Plaintiffs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our request for a Preliminary Injunction during the Delay on Appeal
In February, we filed a motion to the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals seeking an injunction to stop the actions by the U.S.
government that are continuing to put me and other young people in
danger by worsening climate change. Specifically, we asked:
This Court should preliminarily enjoin, for the
pendency of this interlocutory appeal, Defendants from
authorizing through leases, permits, or other federal
approvals: (1) mining or extraction of coal on Federal
Public Lands; (2) offshore oil and gas exploration,
development, or extraction on the Outer Continental
Shelf; and (3) development of new fossil fuel
infrastructure, in the absence of a national plan that
ensures the above-denoted authorizations are consistent
with preventing further danger to these young
Plaintiffs.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\Exhibit A.
This injunction is urgently needed because, despite long-
standing knowledge of the resulting destruction to our Nation
and the profound harm to myself and my co-plaintiffs, the
federal government's ongoing development of the fossil fuel-
based energy system is actively harming us and making it more
difficult for us to ever solve this crisis. While a complete
halt on these actions may seem like a radical request to some
of you, scientists tell us that nothing short of stopping these
kinds of additional fossil fuel development can avert the worst
effects of climate change, and prevent us from entering a
period of irreversible baked-in, or runaway, heating. I wish
incremental actions were enough, but the government's long-
standing actions perpetuating a fossil fuel energy system have
put us in this situation. But here's the upshot, our top
experts say that neither the injunction we seek, nor our
ultimate remedy in the case will hurt the economy. In fact,
they say that it will help the economy and create new jobs, and
is our only real shot at preventing our economy from tanking
from the increasing costs of climate disasters, the enormous
economic threats that climate change poses, and the lost
opportunity to lead the market transition away from fossil
fuels that other nations are outpacing us on.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\Declaration of Joseph E. Stiglitz (Exhibit I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please listen to the experts; The harm is real and is happening to us
now
In Juliana v. United States, my co-plaintiffs and I are
very fortunate to be supported by some of the world's top
climate change science and solution experts. I've included some
of their written expert testimony as attachments to my
testimony and I encourage you to read them.
According to Dr. Jerome Paulson, Professor Emeritus at
George Washington University who submitted a declaration in
support of our preliminary injunction filing: ``Each month that
passes by without action by the federal government to reduce
fossil fuel extraction and GHG emissions exacerbates this
already grave public health emergency facing our nation's most
vulnerable population--our children.''\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\Exhibit D, p. 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz testified:
``There is no urgency to promote more fossil fuels. There is no
urgency for energy supply. There is no urgency for employment
or economic growth. There is, however, real urgency to stop the
climate crisis and the already-dangerous status quo from
worsening, and to protect these young people's constitutional
rights. There are very real and substantial societal costs and
risks of moving forward with these fossil fuel enterprises
while this lawsuit is pending.''\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\Exhibit I, p. 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Steve Running, Professor Emeritus at the University of
Montana and Nobel prize winner testified: ``The Federal
Government has for many years had knowledge, information, and
scientific recommendations that it needed to transition the
Nation off of fossil fuels in order to first prevent against,
and now try to stop, catastrophic climate change. We are well
beyond the maxim: `If you find yourself in a hole, quit
digging.'''\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\Exhibit G, p. 26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, Professor of Marine Studies and the
Director of the Global Change Institute at The University of
Queensland stated in his declaration: ``Th[e] absolute amount
of excess heat absorbed by our oceans is tremendous: the
equivalent of energy from approximately 1.5 Hiroshima-sized
atomic bombs per second over the past 150 years, at-present the
equivalent of approximately 3 6 Hiroshima-sized bombs every
second'' (see Figure 1).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\Exhibit F, p. 4.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 1: Distribution of global-warming energy accumulation
(heat) relative to 1971 and from 1971 to 2011. Half of the
human-produced global warming heat has entered the ocean since
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997.\18\
\18\Chart is a modified version of a chart found in Nuccitelli, D.
et al., Comment on Ocean heat content and Earth's radiation imbalance.
II. Relation to climate shifts, Physics Letters A, Vol. 376, Issue 14
(2012).
Over the past month, we have heard stories on the news of entire
towns in the midwest wiped off of the map by massive flooding events
triggered by a historic `bomb cyclone.' Hurricane Florence, which hit
North Carolina last fall and brought historic flooding, Hurricane
Michael, which flattened the community of Mexico Beach, Florida in
2018, and Hurricane Maria that decimated Puerto Rico in 2017, have
become our new normal. These storms will only get worse unless we take
urgent action.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\Declaration of Kevin E. Trenberth (Exhibit B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My fellow plaintiff Jayden experienced one of these climate change-
driven super storms first hand in 2016, when she woke up to find feet
of standing water in her bedroom. Her house in Rayne, Louisiana had
been flooded in a `thousand-year storm', yet these storms seem to be
coming year after year. Her family is still making repairs on their
home after three years.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\Exhibit W.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wildfire
It's not just storms that we have to worry about. I have
experienced firsthand how wildfire seasons extended by two and a half
months throughout the west are shrouding our communities with smoke for
months on end, causing innumerable respiratory health issues, and
taxing our emergency response funds (see Figure 2). It is not just
rural communities that are experiencing this smoke, it is urban areas
as well. I never thought that living in the United States would come
with air quality warnings advising me to stay inside and school and
youth sports activities being canceled so we aren't harmed by breathing
the air. I can't tell you how scary it is to see people walking down
the street in gas masks in August in Seattle, which used to be the most
beautiful time to be outside in the Pacific Northwest.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\Declaration of Steven W. Running (Exhibit G); Declaration of
Aji. P (Exhibit X).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 2: Wildfire smoke shrouds Seattle.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\Agueda Pacheco-Flores, Puget Sound air-quality warnings: Beware
of smoke from British Columbia fires, The Seattle Times (Aug. 13,
2018); available at: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/british-
columbia-wildfire-smoke-is-impacting-air-quality-warnings-issued-for-
vulnerable-groups/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sea Level Rise
If we don't make serious change now, in just a few decades some the
largest cities in the United States will first become uninhabitable and
then be entirely submerged, as well a vast majority of the state of
Florida. My fellow plaintiff, Levi, will watch his family home and the
entire island that he grew up on go underwater with just a few feet of
sea level rise, which could hit by mid-century. He will become a
climate refugee long before then (see Figures 3 and 4).\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\Declaration of Levi D. (Exhibit Y); Declaration of Dr. James
Hansen (Exhibit L); see also Hansen, J., et al., (2016). Ice melt, sea
level rise and superstorms: Evidence from paleoclimate data, climate
modeling, and modern observations that 2+C global warming could be
dangerous. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3761 3812, doi:10.5194/acp-16-3761-
2016.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 3: U.S. government sea level rise projections through
2100.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\Exhibit Z.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 4: Sea level rise projections for southern Florida.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\Exhibit Z.
The economic impacts of sea level rise to our country will be
astronomical. Just 25 years from now, coastal properties in the U.S.
worth some $136 billion will be at risk of chronic flooding. By the end
of the century, that rises to $1 trillion in properties at risk of
chronic flooding--not to mention the billions of dollars that would be
lost in other sectors.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\Union of Concerned Scientists, Underwater: Rising Seas, Chronic
Floods, and the Implication for US Coastal Real Estate (2018),
available at: https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/global-warming-
impacts/sea-level-rise-chronic-floods-and-us-coastal-real-estate-
implications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Security Threat
Many people in communities throughout the United States, including
some along the Washington coast, are already being forced from their
homes because of flooding and sea level rise. All of these people, and
many more, will be displaced permanently if we do not act now. This
displacement would in turn lead to massive geo-political
destabilization. An expert declaration provided by retired Vice Admiral
and Former Inspector General of the United States Department of the
Navy, Lee Gunn, states:
Climate change is the most serious national security threat
facing our Nation today. Climate change contributes to
increased extreme weather events, rapidly changing coastlines,
and conflicts over basic resources like food and water, which
lead to humanitarian crises with increased migration and
refugee flows. Climate change is a ``threat multiplier'' and
``catalyst for conflict'' and directly threatens our military
and the ``Department of Defense's ability to defend the
Nation.'' Climate change poses unprecedented risks to our
Nation's economic prosperity, public health and safety, and
international stability.
Vice Admiral Gunn goes on:
The great danger for young people, is that they are being
handed a situation that is out of their control, a situation
made more egregious due to the fact that the Defendants have a
complete understanding of precisely how dangerous the situation
is that they are handing down to these Plaintiffs.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\Exhibit K.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Health
The medical community across the country is sounding alarm bells
about the public health emergency that climate change is causing. As an
amicus brief filed in support of my case in the Ninth Circuit, on
behalf of 78 doctors and medical professional and 14 medical
organizations,\28\ stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\The organization are: American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and
Immunology; American Academy of Pediatrics; American Association of
Community Psychiatrists; American Heart Association; American Lung
Association; American Pediatric Society; American Thoracic Society;
Infectious Diseases Society of America; International Society for
Children's Health and the Environment; Medical Society Consortium on
Climate and Health; National Association of County and City Health
Officials; National Environmental Health Association; National Medical
Association; and Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.
The medical community widely considers the health effects of
human-induced climate change, GHG emissions, and the other air
pollutants that are emitted when fossil fuels are combusted to
be significant public health threats, representing an
unacceptably high level of risk for the current and future
health of the U.S. population.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\Exhibit N, p. 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Targets You Set Will Matter
What is clear now is that climate change is already dangerously
affecting people within the United States with 1 degree of warming. It
is not just scientists who have come to that conclusion. My co-
plaintiffs and I, along with other communities and individuals that are
experiencing the devastating impacts I have just described, understand
the perils of living in this climate system. The situation is only
going to get worse if the planet becomes 1.5+C warmer than pre-
industrial levels. This is the temperature target that is called for by
the Paris Climate Accord. It is the target called for in the Green New
Deal, and by the countless cities, states, and climate advocacy groups
around the country that have endorsed it. To be clear, 1.5+C of
warming, or approximately 425 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere, is genocide, and a death sentence for human
civilization as we know it. Even the 2018 IPCC report on the impacts of
1.5+C concluded that allowing the globe to warm to 1.5+C will involve
devastating impacts. Chapter 5 of the report states plainly that 1.5+C
is not safe:
Warming of 1.5+C is not considered `safe' for most nations,
communities, ecosystems, and sectors and poses significant
risks to natural and human systems as compared to current
warming of 1+C (high confidence) (see Chapter 3, Section 3.4,
Box 3.4, Box 3.5, Cross-Chapter Box 6 in Chapter 3).
This body should never endorse a target that destroys Levi's island
and much of Florida or my Puget Sound, damages the lungs of children in
the West, decimates the rich croplands of the midwest, or floods homes
across the country from fossil fuel-fed unprecedented storms.
The now-pervasive 1.5+C target first appeared in the lead up to the
2009 UNFCCC Conference of Parties in Copenhagen, Denmark (COP 15), as a
result of the advocacy of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS).
At a time where international political negotiations still revolved
around 2+C, AOSIS advocated for ``well below 1.5+C,'' and relied on the
work of Dr. James Hansen, one of our experts, and his colleagues'
research arguing that a 350 ppm CO2 target was necessary to
preserve a habitable climate.\30\ In later research, Hansen and his
colleagues determined that 350 ppm would only lead to 1+C of long-term
warming, which was an important target to aim for by 2100.\31\ Yet as
time went on and contentious climate negotiations ran their course, the
``well below'' portion of AOSIS's ``well below 1.5+C'' position was
lost, and the world's governments settled on 1.5+C as a compromise
goal. But they did so without any scientific support for the notion
that we would be safe with 1.5 degrees of warming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\Hansen, J., et al., (2008). Target atmospheric CO2: Where
should humanity aim? Open Atmos. Sci. J., 2, 217-231, doi:10.2174/
1874282300802010217.
\31\Hansen, J., et al., (2013). Assessing ``dangerous climate
change'': Required reduction of carbon emissions to protect young
people, future generations and nature. PLOS ONE, 8, e81648,
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081648.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have to ask ourselves: Are we willing to `compromise' on our
safety and our future?
In the long term, 1.5+C warming means melting most of the ice
sheets on the planet and more than 70 feet of sea level rise (see
Figure 5).\32\ The reason we know this is because this is what sea
levels were the last time carbon dioxide levels were as high as they
are today. According to a study by McGranahan et. al., over 600 million
people live within 30 feet above sea level.\33\ The Fourth National
Climate Assessment, using modest estimates of sea level rise, found
that ``[s]ea level rise might reshape the U.S. population distribution,
with 13.1 million people potentially at risk of needing to migrate due
to a SLR of 6 feet (about 2 feet less than the Extreme scenario) by the
year 2100.''\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\Expert Report of Dr. Harold R. Wanless, p. 6-7 (Exhibit Z);
Declaration of Eric Rignot (Exhibit H).
\33\McGranahan, G., Balk, D., & Anderson, B. (2007). The rising
tide: assessing the risks of climate change and human settlements in
low elevation coastal zones. Environment and urbanization, 19(1), 17-
37.7.
\34\U.S. Global Change Research Program, ``Ch. 8 Coastal Effects'',
Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II, Impacts, Risks, and
Adaptation in the United States 335 (2018), https://
nca2018.globalchange.gov.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 5: Map of the south Atlantic and Gulf coasts showing the
inundation that would occur with 70 feet of sea level rise.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\Exhibit Z.
All of these people, and more, will be displaced if we allow the
1.5+C target to remain in place. Even the 2018 IPCC report plainly
states that 1.5+C warming is not safe, but governments and groups
continue to push us towards this disaster. At 1.5+C we also lose the
worlds coral reefs and ocean life becomes threatened, meaning our food
sources disappear and the rich biodiversity of our planet crashes.
The writing is on the wall: this body needs to look beyond the
arbitrary 1.5+C target for one that is based in the best available
science, and that will allow us to avoid the most grievous impacts of
climate change. Scientists tell us that 1+C (350 ppm CO2 ) is
the maximum level of long-term warming that our civilization can
survive this century. And we likely need to return even closer to
preindustrial CO2 levels of 280 ppm over the longer term. So
why aren't we acting like it?
Is it radical to seek integration of all schools instead of just
some? Is it radical to stand up for the rights of children and future
generations? Is it radical to want to stop the danger we face? Is it
radical to want to save what you love?
A Remedy is Still Possible but the Window is Closing
We have the technology to follow the path of emissions reductions
the experts say we need to in order to have a chance at health and
survival for us and our planet. It is within reach to transition to a
decarbonized energy system by 2050, and to increase natural carbon
sequestration through reforestation and sustainable agriculture to
bring us back to 350 ppm by the end of the century.\36\ The U.S. needs
to do its part in the world to make that happen. It will not happen
without us.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\Declaration of Mark Z. Jacobson (Exhibit C); Declaration of
James H. Williams (Exhibit J); Exhibit V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While many critics often cite the expense of a transition to
renewable energy, experts expect a transition off of fossil fuels would
have a minimal increase on national energy costs, and the costs would
be well below the historic spikes in energy costs due to volatile
fossil energy prices (see Figure 6).\37\ This temporary increase in
energy system costs is trivial compared to the oppressive costs we can
expect if we continue to stumble our way into an unmitigated climate
catastrophe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\Exhibit V.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 6: Total spending on the U.S. energy system represented
as a percentage of GDP. Historical spikes from the 1970s oil
crisis and high oil prices in 2006 2010. Modeled variations on
the right illustrate the cost of multiple scenarios that
transition the U.S. off of fossil fuels by 2050.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\Williams, J. et al. Assessing the feasibility of 350 PPM
CO2 targets in the United States. 2019.
Because CO2 is the primary driver of climate
destabilization, all government policies regarding CO2
pollution and CO2 sequestration should be aimed at reducing
global COCO2 concentrations below 350 ppm by 2100. Other
greenhouse gases should also be reduced as much as possible and as
rapidly as possible. Time is running out. We can no longer afford to
base greenhouse gas reduction targets, with tangible consequences for
life and death, on politics rather than science.
We are at a critical juncture--never in my life have I seen so much
momentum to address the climate challenge. We must not waste this
energy, and as such, we must reevaluate our goals and where they are
coming from. We can't truly succeed if we're relying on targets based
on political compromise instead of the best available science.
We have a fundamental right to a liveable future, and that future
requires us to limit global warming to 1+C by the end of the century.
Long-Standing Government Knowledge
My involvement in the Juliana lawsuit has given me insight into the
injustices of climate change, and a better understanding of the United
States Government's responsibility for it.\39\ In preparing our case,
we uncovered documents that show us that the Government has known about
the threats of carbon dioxide for more than half a century. One of my
co-plaintiffs, Alex, uncovered a 1961 letter to President Kennedy,
where U.S. Senator Clinton Anderson voices the predictions of
scientists about catastrophic climate change and sea level rise due to
fossil fuel CO2 emissions.\40\ Just a few years later,
President Lyndon B. Johnson received a more pointed warning in a report
from noted climate scholar Charles David Keeling, and dozens of
university researchers, that ``man is unwittingly conducting a vast
geophysical experiment,'' by burning fossil fuels.\41\ This 1965 White
House report clearly outlined the connection between the burning of
fossil fuels and climate change (see Figure 7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\Expert Report of James Gustave (``Gus'') Speth (Exhibit U).
\40\Exhibit BB.
\41\Report of the Environmental Pollution Panel President's Science
Advisory Committee, Restoring the Quality of our Environment (1965);
available at: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id
=uc1.b4116127;view=1up;seq=11.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 7: Cover of 1965 Restoring the Quality of our
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environment report.
Back in September 1969, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Urban Affairs
Adviser to President Nixon, wrote White House counsel John Ehrlichman
stating that CO2 emissions resulting from burning fossil
fuels was a problem perhaps on the scale of ``apocalyptic change,''
threatening the loss of cities like New York and Washington D.C. from
sea level rise. The 1969 Moynihan Letter urged the Federal Government
to immediately address this threat. Moynihan wrote that it was ``pretty
clearly agreed'' that carbon dioxide content would rise 25 percent by
2000. ``This could increase the average temperature near the earth's
surface by 7 degrees Fahrenheit. This in turn could raise the level of
the sea by 10 feet. Goodbye New York. Goodbye Washington, for that
matter.''\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\Exhibit CC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite these warnings, and the many more that followed, our
nation's leaders actively perpetuated climate change by permitting
fossil fuel extraction on public lands and subsidizing fossil fuel
extraction (see Figure 8).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 8: U.S. fossil fuel production and CO2 concentration for
every presidential administration since President Truman.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\Exhibit U.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historical Precedent for Our Case and Our Unalienable Rights
The Juliana v. United States lawsuit is not without precedent. In
fact, it has ample support in the historic record, and even in the
words of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution. According to expert
historian Andrea Wulf, there are deep roots to the constitutional right
to a stable climate. In her expert report, she discusses how the
Founders believed that ``Nature is the domain of liberty,'' linking
national ``happiness, dignity, and independence'' to the quality of the
lands. She goes on the discuss how James Madison's speech of 1818 was
``emblematic of how deeply rooted the importance of nature in balance
was to the Framers and to the young nation'':
Madison was the first American politician to write that `the
atmosphere is the breath of life. Deprived of it, they all
equally perish,' referencing animals, man and plants. He spoke
of the balanced composition of the atmosphere and the give and
take of animals and plants, which allowed the atmosphere the
aptitude to function so as to support life and the health of
beings, according to nature's laws.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\Exhibit AA.
The Framers adopted John Locke's philosophy (``laws human must be
made according to the general laws of Nature . . . otherwise they are
ill made'') that human laws must conform to nature's laws for the
preservation of humankind. As such, Thomas Jefferson wrote extensively
about this concept, stating ``that our Creator made the earth for the
use of the living and not of the dead . . . that one generation men
cannot foreclose or burthen its use to another.''\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Earle, Sept. 24 1823, The Writings
of Thomas Jefferson vol. VII, 310-11 (H.A. Washington ed. 1854).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of these examples clearly demonstrate the fact that, while the
Founding Fathers were unable to foresee the grave threat of human-
caused climate change hundreds of years ago, they nevertheless intended
to enshrine the protection of the public trust into our nation's
constitution, and to ensure the fundamental right of present and future
generations to access to the natural resources that previous
generations benefitted from, and on which human survival depends.
Wulf goes on to reference other American presidents who have voiced
the Government's responsibility to preserve the natural world for
future generations, such as Theodore Roosevelt, who said:
The function of our Government is to insure to all its
citizens, now and hereafter, their rights to life, liberty and
the pursuit of happiness. If we of this generation destroy the
resources from which our children otherwise derive their
livelihood, we reduce the capacity of our land to support a
population, and so either degrade the standard of living or
deprive the coming generations of their right to life on this
continent.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\Exhibit AA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Conclusion
Growing up with the looming threat of climate change has had
lasting impacts on my mental health. Thinking about the future has been
a constant source of anxiety and depression for me. I have felt as if
there is a pressure cooker boiling over inside of me. I can hardly
focus at times because I am overwhelmed with existential horror about
the fate of planet.
I am a child of abuse. I know the feel of it on my skin and deep in
my psyche. And what my government is doing to perpetuate indefinitely
fossil fuel energy, and not take urgent comprehensive action to try to
stop climate change, is a form of abuse on young people, who don't have
the votes or the lobbying money to stop it. But we cannot just sit back
and take it. Not anymore. Government actions that ramp up the danger,
hurt our health, destroy our homes, endanger our communities, and scar
our emotional wellbeing must stop.
My climate change-induced state of panic is not uncommon amongst my
peers. According to Dr. Lise Van Susteren, another expert on our case
and an Advisor for the Harvard Medical School Center for Health and the
Global Environment, ``it is the emotional toll of climate change that
is even more catastrophic, especially for our children. It has the
capacity to destroy children psychologically.''\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\Exhibit M, p. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Judge Aiken's 2016 opinion, she cites the Supreme Court when it
wrote in Obergefell v. Hodges:
The nature of injustice is that we may not always see it in
our own times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill
of Rights . . . did not presume to know the extent of freedom
in all its dimensions, and so they entrusted to future
generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to
enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning. When new insight reveals
discord between the Constitution's central protections and a
received legal stricture, a claim to liberty must be
addressed.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\Exhibit S.
Today I am telling you, Judge Aiken was right: ``the right to a
climate system capable of sustaining human life is fundamental to a
free and ordered society.''
I didn't become a climate activist because I like shouting outside
of Government buildings or because I want to put my body on the line to
block a tar sands pipeline.\49\ I became a climate activist because I
know that it is my moral responsibility to do everything in my power to
stop catastrophic climate change. Your generation and the ones before
you, sitting in your seats in positions of power, have decimated our
planet. My words stand before you, representing the voices of millions
of children, youth and future generations, who are trying to clean up
the mess of our forebears. For years, the federal government and the
same adults who created the disaster have marginalized us. No more.
Climate change is here now. Waiting for the future is already too late.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\Today, April 2, 2019, Judge Mary Ann Driscoll of Boston, MA
just found that 13 people acting in civil disobedience to protect our
climate from more fossil fuel projects were found not responsible in
light of their necessity defense that their actions were necessary to
protect life. http://www.climatedisobedience.org/
raw_audio_westrox_climatetrial_27march2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is clear: Without youth leadership and a constitutional
guidepost, legislative efforts won't save us in time. The Executive
Branch won't even fully admit climate change is real, and its leaders
do the bidding of the fossil fuel industry. Half measures and
incrementalism will only modestly delay the worst impacts of climate
change. If we want a future worth living, all three branches of our
federal government must recognize our unalienable rights are at stake
and work with the youth at the forefront of this movement, to guarantee
that the constitutional right to a stable climate is recognized and
protected in the United State of America.
Forget about being on the right side of history. If there even are
history books, it will be because of the efforts that we are taking
today. Be on the side of young people right now. Act as if our
fundamental rights to life, liberty, property and equal protection
under the law are as important as yours, those who came before us, and
those who will come after us. We are all connected, and the work you do
during your terms in this powerful office, should be on the right side
of the youth who sit before you and we ask you to stand with us.
That is why I am asking all of you and this entire House to endorse
the fundamental rights and the remedy sought in Juliana v. United
States on the record, and to sign on to amicus curiae briefs in support
of me and my co-plaintiffs, as your other colleagues have, including
Senators Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley, and Sheldon Whitehouse, and
Representatives Debra Haaland, Peter DeFazio, Earl Blumenauer, and
Rashida Tlaib.
We all have a moral imperative. And you have a constitutional one.
If not us, then who? If not now, then when? If not for me, do it for
your children, and your children's children, and for all life as we
know it. Do it because when you took office, you made an oath ``to
uphold our Constitution'' and ``secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and Our Posterity.''
I will do my best to address any questions that you may have.
Thank you.
Aji Piper,
Plaintiff, Juliana v. United States,
Beneficiary of the Public Trust,
and the U.S. Constitution
exhibits
Exhibit A Urgent Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit B Declaration of Kevin E. Trenberth in Support of Urgent
Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit C Declaration of Mark Z. Jacobson in Support of Urgent Motion
for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit D Declaration of Jerome A. Paulson in Support of Urgent Motion
for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit E Declaration of Peter A. Erickson in Support of Urgent Motion
for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit F Declaration of Ove Hoegh-Guldberg in Support of Urgent
Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit G Declaration of Steven W. Running in Support of Urgent Motion
for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit H Declaration of Eric Rignot, Ph.D in Support of Urgent Motion
for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit I Declaration of Joseph E. Stiglitz, Ph.D in Support of Urgent
Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit J Declaration of James H. Williams in Support of Urgent Motion
for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit K Declaration of Vice Admiral Lee Gunn, USN (Ret.) in Support
of Urgent Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit L Declaration of Dr. James E. Hansen in Support of Urgent
Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit M Expert Report of Lise Van Susteren, M.D.
Exhibit N Brief of Amici Curiae Public Health Experts, Public Health
Organizations, and Doctors
Exhibit O Brief of Amicus Curiae Law Professors
Exhibit P Appellants' Opening Brief for Interlocutory Appeal
Exhibit Q Plaintiffs-Appellees' Answering Brief for Interlocutory
Appeal
Exhibit R Findings & Recommendation, Thomas M. Coffin (May 1, 2017)
Exhibit S Opinion and Order-MTD, Ann Aiken (November 10, 2016)
Exhibit T Opinion and Order-MSJ, Ann Aiken (October 15, 2018)
Exhibit U Corrected Expert Report of James Gustave (``Gus'') Speth
Exhibit V Executive Summary of EER Research
Exhibit W Declaration of Jayden F. in Support of Plaintiffs'
Opposition to Defendants' Motions Dismiss
Exhibit X Declaration of Aji P. in Support of Plaintiffs' Urgent
Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit Y Declaration of Levi D. in Support of Plaintiffs' Urgent
Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Exhibit Z Expert Report of Dr. Harold R. Wanless
Exhibit AA Expert Report of Andrea Wulf
Exhibit BB Clinton P. Anderson letter to President Kennedy (February
14, 1961)
Exhibit CC Daniel P. Moynihan memo to John Ehrlichman (September 17,
1969)
Exhibit DD First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive
Relief
Exhibit EE Appellants' Reply Brief for Interlocutory Appeal
Exhibit FF Federal Defendants' Answer to First Amended Complaint for
Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
Ms. Castor. Thank you, Mr. Piper.
Ms. Zhang, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF MELODY ZHANG
Ms. Zhang. Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify before you to tell my story about how I came to care
about the climate crisis as an essential part of my Christian
witness.
My fascination with creation began ever since I started to
speak. My first words, which were in Chinese, my heart
language, were ``chuqu,'' which means ``go outside.'' There
were seasons of my life devoted to poisonous frogs, another to
Michigan birds. As a child, I was rapt with wonder, as children
often are, with the richness and diversity of wildlife that can
be found in God's creation. And when things got overwhelming, I
retreated to my neighborhood parks, which served as a sanctuary
for myself. I still do.
The practice of the presence of God in creation opens up my
imagination and teaches me to listen. ``Speak to the earth, and
it will teach you, or let the fish in the sea inform you. In
His hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all
mankind,'' reads Job.
The scriptures elsewhere erupt with song and mention of
God's abiding love for every corner of creation. Genesis 2:15
says that ``the Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden
of Eden to cultivate it and take care of it.'' In the Hebrew,
these two words are ``avad'' and ``shamar,'' and they appear
often elsewhere in reference to God himself watching over and
protecting us.
To me, it is clear that God has entrusted this great gift
of creation to us, with the responsibility to steward it with
utmost intentionality.
I love people. I can see the imago dei, the image of God,
uniquely reflected in each person I meet. I believe that
scripture could not be more clear about God's command to love
our neighbors as ourselves.
I see that Jesus shows us how much he really means this
when he intentionally makes His home among us. He seeks to draw
nearest to the overlooked and the underheard, the outcasts in
society. He lovingly lays hands on people who have shunned,
heals them and spends precious time with them. Then, Jesus goes
so far as to sacrifice himself to the point of death to
reconcile to himself all things so that we may have new life. I
testify that I am moved and changed by the depth of His
compassion towards me and all of life on earth.
I learned for the first time that our earth was out of
balance in my environmental science class. As I listened to the
stories of thousands of species going extinct and how weather
patterns were being hijacked by climate change, I was shaken to
my core and enraged. The earth is the one home we all have, and
it is God's very first and wonderful gift to us. I can barely
begin to imagine how much it must hurt God's heart.
I decided to continue exploring environmental issues at
university. It was during this time the Flint water crisis
unfolded right next to us in Michigan. I listened in utter
shock and dismay as my classmates shared about their families
having no choice but to drink and bathe in water lined with
lead for years until the mainstream media took it up.
We organized daily water bottle drives to be sent to the
people in Flint. And I learned that 60 percent of their
population was made up of people of color and 40 percent were
under the poverty line.
In this period of my life, I began to understand more fully
what environmental injustice looked like played out in real-
time. I was shaken at the reality of suffering I was
witnessing, and my heart broke for these people, my neighbors.
Congress, today, I stand before you as climate justice
coordinator for Sojourners, a Christian advocacy organization,
and I serve as the co-chair for the steering committee of Young
Evangelicals for Climate Action.
After the Flint water crisis, I saw with new eyes that
ecological issues are not one-off, siloed problems without
consequence to people's lives. I continue to witness the
upending of livelihoods that brothers and sisters are already
facing both here in our very communities and all over the world
as a direct result of the climate crisis.
Just last week, historic flooding after a bomb cyclone in
Nebraska killed three people and ravaged homes. Cyclone Idai
killed 750 people and displaced 100,000 in South Africa.
California wildfires last year were the deadliest, most
destructive wildfires ever on record, and they killed 104
people.
I encounter these stories, and I am changed. If I do
nothing, I am complicit. More than this, I am disobedient.
The impacts of the climate crisis are hitting our most
vulnerable neighbors first, the ones Jesus loved to draw close
to. People of color, women, and people living under the poverty
line and the young generation are already bearing the brunt of
the climate crisis while doing the least to contribute to it.
No wonder why young people care.
As a Christian, I believe God calls us to a total and
radical reimagination and transformation of our relationship
with others and the earth. As political leaders, especially
ones of faith, I implore you to respond faithfully and with
full force to love God and neighbor by enacting just,
compassionate, and transformative climate policies which rise
to the challenge of the climate crisis.
And we don't have a lot of time. So I invite you to dream
beyond this deep-rooted partisanship into co-creating a world
of wholeness together.
And to my fellow believers in the room, we live in the era
of the resurrected Christ. So let us practice resurrection. We
can begin to cultivate wholeness in our communities by
addressing the climate crisis faithfully and with full
attention. It is a fulfillment of the commandment to love our
neighbors as ourselves. And that is my prayer for you.
Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Zhang follows:]
__________
Testimony of Melody Zhang
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you, to tell my
story about how I came to care about the climate crisis as an essential
part of my Christian witness.
My fascination with creation began ever since I started to speak.
My very first words--which were in Chinese, my heart language--were WZ,
which means, ``go outside''. When I learned to read, I had stacks upon
stacks of wildlife binders, scrutinizing over every new animal card I
received each week. There were seasons of my life devoted to poisonous
frogs, another to Michigan birds, and yet another to fish. As a child,
I was rapt with wonder and curiosity--as naturally children often are--
with the richness and diversity of wildlife, plants, colors, and
textures that can be found in God's creation. And when things got
overwhelming, I retreated to my neighborhood parks which served as a
sanctuary for me, a place I could communicate with God and be myself. I
still do. The practice of the presence of God in creation opens up my
imagination, my senses, and teaches me to listen. ``But ask the
animals, and they will teach you, or the birds in the sky, and they
will tell you; or speak to the earth, and it will teach you, or let the
fish in the sea inform you. Which of all these does not know that the
hand of the LORD has done this? In his hand is the life of every
creature and the breath of all mankind,'' reads Job 12:7-10.
The Scriptures elsewhere erupt with poetic song in mention of God's
deep and abiding love and connection with every corner of creation.
Psalm 19:1 says, ``The heavens proclaim the glory of God, the skies
display his craftsmanship''. Genesis 2:15 says that ``the Lord God took
the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to cultivate it and take care
of it''. In the original Hebrew, these two words are avad and shamar,
which mean to serve and to protect. They both appear often elsewhere in
reference to God Himself watching over and protecting His people. How
powerful an image this is! So to me, it is clear that God has entrusted
this great gift of creation to us with the responsibility to steward it
with utmost intentionality and care. The earth is the very first gift
we are bestowed, and in fact our first commandment is to tend it and to
take care of it.
I love people. I can see the imago dei, the image of God, uniquely
reflected in each person I meet. I believe that Scripture could not be
more clear about God's command to love our neighbors as ourselves. When
asked what the greatest commandment of all was, Jesus replies, ``Love
the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.' The
second is this: `Love your neighbor as yourself.' (Mark 12:30-31). I
read on and see that Jesus shows us how much he really means this when
he intentionally makes his home on earth among us (John 1:14), then
seeks to draw nearest to the overlooked and the underheard, the
outcasts in society. He lovingly lays hands on people who have been
shunned; He heals them and spends precious time with them. He tells
provocative parables like that of the Good Samaritan, about a traveler
who gives selflessly to lift up and nurture a complete stranger of the
``other'' race back to life. Then, Jesus goes so far as to sacrifice
himself to the point of death to ``reconcile to himself all things,
whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through
his blood, shed on the cross'' (Colossians 1:15-20) so that we may have
new life. I testify that I am moved and changed by the depth of His
compassion towards me and all life on earth. So, I love because I am
deeply compelled by this revolutionary, powerful love which He embodied
and modeled for me first.
I learned for the first time that our earth was out of balance in
my Environmental Science class at school. As I listened to stories
about thousands of species going extinct, entire forests being cleared,
and how weather patterns were being hijacked by climate change, I was
shaken to my core and enraged that we could allow--and even cause--
these things to happen. The earth is the one home we all have, and it
is God's very first and very wonderful gift to us. I can barely begin
to imagine how much it must hurt God's heart.
I attended university in Michigan and decided to continue exploring
environmental issues. It was during this time that the Flint water
crisis unfolded right next door to us. I listened in utter shock and
dismay as my classmates shared about their families having no choice
but to drink and bathe in water lined with lead for years until the
mainstream media took it up. We organized daily water bottle drives to
be sent to the people in Flint, launched campaigns to fundraise for a
permanent solution to fixing the corrosive water pipes, and reported on
their stories. I learned that 60% of Flint's population was made up of
people of color, and 40% were under the poverty line. I had heard about
environmental issues affecting people negatively, but in this period of
my life I began to understand more fully what environmental injustice
looked like played out in real time. It brought urgency to what I was
learning in school in a way nothing else did. I was shaken at the
reality of suffering I was witnessing and my heart broke for these
people, my neighbors. Didn't Jesus call us to love them, to look after
their well-being? Didn't he say, ``whatever you do for the least of
these brothers and sisters of mine, you do for me'' (Matthew 25:40)?
Congress, today I stand before you as Climate Justice coordinator
at Sojourners and serve as Co-Chair for the Steering Committee of Young
Evangelicals for Climate Action. After the Flint water crisis, I saw
with new eyes that ecological issues are not one-off, siloed problems
without consequence to people's lives. As I grow deeper in my journey
of loving God and neighbor as self, I continue to witness the upending
of livelihoods that my brothers and sisters are already facing--both
here in our very communities and all over the world--as a direct result
of the climate crisis. Just last week, historic flooding after a bomb
cyclone in Nebraska killed three people and ravaged entire homes. The
catastrophic Cyclone Idai killed 750 people and displaced 100,000 in
Mozambique, Zimbabwe, and Malawi. California wildfires last year were
the deadliest, most destructive wildfires ever on record and they
killed 104 people. I encounter these stories, and I cannot help but be
changed. If I do nothing, I am complicit. More than this, I am
disobedient. Indeed, we are seeing deadly, unprecedented extreme
weather events almost on a weekly basis now, all of which are
exacerbated and heightened by climate change. The impacts of the
climate crisis are hitting our most vulnerable neighbors first, the
very ones Jesus loved to draw close to. People of color, women, people
living under the poverty line, and the young generation are already
bearing the brunt of the climate crisis while doing the least to
contribute to it. No wonder why young people care, especially young
women of color like me. We are the first generation who will experience
the most intense impacts of this humanitarian crisis, and our
livelihoods are in jeopardy. Creation and people--both of which God
deeply loves--are in peril and it breaks my heart. Romans 8:22-23 says,
``The whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth
right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who
have''.
As a Christian, I believe God calls us to a total and radical re-
imagination and transformation of our relationship with others and the
earth. We yearn toward a future vision of complete reconciliation for
all of God's created order. As political leaders, especially ones of
faith, I implore you to respond faithfully and with full force to love
God and neighbor by enacting just, compassionate and transformative
climate policies which rise to the challenge of the climate crisis. And
we don't have a lot of time. That is why it takes courage, and the
creativity, energy, and moral leadership of young people like us.
Congress, I invite you to dream beyond this deep-rooted history of
partisanship into co-creating a world of wholeness together. To my
fellow believers in the room, we live in the era of the resurrected
Christ. So then. Let us practice resurrection. We can begin to practice
the cultivation of wholeness in our communities by addressing the
climate crisis faithfully and with the full attention it demands of us.
It is a tangible fulfillment of the commandment to love our neighbors
as ourselves. That is my prayer for you. Thank you.
Ms. Castor. Well, thank you all very much for your
passionate and insightful testimony.
I recognize myself for 5 minutes for questions.
You all have given voice to the fact that climate change is
one of the most urgent, complex challenges humanity has ever
faced. We must wrap our heads around it. We have to wrap our
heads around the scale of the problem and the potential
consequences of failing to rise to the challenge.
As a result, some people react to the crisis with fear and
apprehension and even despair. And those are understandable
feelings. But in recognizing a crisis, Americans can rise to
the occasion. We can come together to see our way to solutions.
The witnesses we have just heard from have found resolve in the
face of crisis and have taken action to be part of the
solution.
So I would like to ask each one of you, where do you find
hope and optimism in the face of such a daunting problem?
Mr. Suggs, will you start?
Mr. Suggs. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Chair Castor.
I believe that I find my most hope and my optimism in the
faces of people in my community. I have seen how resilient and
how responsive we have been to these natural disasters that
affect us so extremely.
Hearing the stories of how Hurricane Floyd in 1999, the
year before I was born, devastated so much of my community but
how people immediately went back and tried try to rebuild.
People stayed in Kinston and started businesses and homes
elsewhere in the community. They loved our community so much
that they did not allow the catastrophic flooding from Floyd to
overall destroy them.
And then when Hurricane Matthew hit in 2016, I remember
standing on a picnic table right along the banks of the Neuse
River. And I and my organization, Kinston Teens, organized a
prayer gathering and a volunteer rally to bring our community
together. This was the day after the hurricane hit but in the
days before the flooding. And I stood on top of a picnic table.
There were around 350 people surrounding me--all walks of
faith, all walks of life, all races, all political parties,
everything. We came together in prayer, and we immediately
started volunteering, preparing sandbags placed in front of
homes and businesses and doing whatever we could to help our
community prepare for the floods.
And that is where I see my optimism coming from, that is
where I get my faith from: just from how resilient my community
has been in spite of all the challenges.
Ms. Castor. Ms. Cooper.
Ms. Cooper. I wholeheartedly agree with what Mr. Suggs
said. And I think I am most hopeful when there is a vision.
I was just reading the proverb on the wall that says,
``When there is no vision, the people perish.'' And in
Louisiana, that is what we are really learning to embrace.
I work for the Governor's Office of Coastal Activities, and
I am so encouraged just to see the plan that we have, the work
that we are doing, to go to these sites to see new barrier
islands that we are building, new wetlands that we are
building, and people who can live in their communities in south
Louisiana because of this vision that we have.
And I think a vision for Louisiana and a vision for our
whole nation is so important in this way, because without that
our people will perish and our people of Louisiana will perish
as well.
Ms. Castor. Mr. Piper, you expressed a bit more frustration
in your remarks, but what do you want to see?
Mr. Piper. I would say that the hat hasn't dropped, so to
speak, on the climate crisis. We still have time to act. And so
I will not feel despair, because we haven't failed yet.
Ms. Castor. Ms. Zhang.
Ms. Zhang. I am definitely energized by the creativity and
the joy that young people bring to this movement. I was just at
the climate march, the youth climate strikes, a few weeks ago,
and there was just a palpable joy there. And people--there was
color, and there was fun, and there was dancing, part of it.
And I think that is why we are sustained in our movement,
is that we know when to have fun and to not make light of the
issue but really to be able to sustain us for the long run.
Ms. Castor. You know, if you want to be spurred into
action, you may want to pick up the new book, ``The
Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming'' by David Wallace-
Wells. I have been reading it on the airplane going back to
Florida.
The author points out in the book that the majority of
carbon emissions from fossil fuel combustion have occurred
since ``Seinfeld'' premiered 30 years ago in 1989 and that we
have 30 years to turn it around.
But I am not sure that we have that long. The IPCC has
concluded that we must reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050
in order to have a chance to keep warming below the significant
level. So for every bit of extra warming, the world will
experience more heat waves and heavy precipitation events, sea-
level rise, species loss.
2050 is just 31 years from now. All of you will be about
our age, the age of us on the dais. And I really appreciate
everything that you have said today to help spur us on to
action and kick off our first hearing.
With that, I will recognize the ranking member for 5
minutes for questions.
Mr. Graves. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And I want to say thanks again to all of you for being
here, and I appreciate your testimony.
And, Mr. Suggs, having been through numerous disasters, I
really want to commend you for your work. One of the most
uplifting things you can do is go to someone who is a disaster
victim and offer them a helping hand. And it is the most
important thing that you can do, is to just offer folks help,
offer them assistance. Folks are often looking around trying to
figure out where to even start.
And so I really want to commend you, recognizing that you
were impacted by the disaster, but rather than sitting around
licking your wounds, you actually lifted those up. And so thank
you very much. A huge, huge impact on communities, having been
through many disasters myself.
You know, I want to ask each of you a question. One of the
challenges we have here in this committee is we have to
recommend actions. We have to recommend what actions the
Congress should take in changing laws and policies. And there
are so many things. We could probably go around this room, and
we could probably get hundreds of different recommendations.
And so one of the things we need to do is we need to determine
which of those actions actually make the most sense, which of
them are going to have the biggest impact, looking at
tradeoffs.
Do you believe that we should apply some type of criteria
to our decisions, looking at which recommendations we are
making are actually going to have the biggest impact on
temperature or sea rise, and also take into consideration
looking at economic impacts, if, for example, one
recommendation would have dire economic consequences? If there
is another one that can achieve the same objective but not have
as dire economic consequences, I mean, don't you think we
should consider--or do you think we should consider things like
that before we make recommendations?
Mr. Suggs.
Mr. Suggs. Thank you, Ranking Member Graves.
I absolutely do believe in practicality. I believe that,
when it comes to policy, when it comes to legislation, when it
comes to any type of action items that are taken on behalf of,
you know, such a large country as the United States, we do need
to think of all the logistics. We need to make sure that we are
not making matters worse in any capacity.
So, considering the issues that we faced in Kinston, for
example, I do want some ambitious action to be taken, but I
don't want anything to happen that may disparage my community
even more or disparage another community on the other side of
the country. So I definitely believe in practicality.
Mr. Graves. Thank you.
Ms. Cooper? Quickly, do you have----
Ms. Cooper. Yes. I agree, I think economic implications can
be a large consequence of climate action. And so I think what
is most important is working on both sides of the aisle in a
nonpartisan, bipartisan manner to implement these policies that
we are working towards in this committee and the ideas that we
are working towards.
Mr. Graves. Thank you.
Mr. Piper.
Mr. Piper. Yes. Thank you for this question.
I am mostly in agreement that economics definitely must be
considered, seeing----
Mr. Graves. And let me clarify the question. I am sorry.
Economics is one, but also just looking at the efficacy of
these recommendations. If we are making a recommendation,
should we evaluate, you know, sort of what impact it is going
to actually have in terms of the environment, looking at
temperature changes, looking at sea rise and things like that?
So not just economic, but actually looking at and quantifying
the types of, you know, say, benefits that these
recommendations would yield.
Does that make sense?
Mr. Piper. Yeah, that makes--well, I was saying that
economics obviously must be considered, but I think, more
importantly, recommendations must be made following science and
what scientists say is needed to protect the natural resources
and to avoid dangerous effects of climate change. And I think
that definitely must be considered when making recommendations.
Mr. Graves. Thank you.
Mr. Piper, I will actually ask you one other question. I
read through all of your testimony. That was long. I want to
make sure I understand one thing about your recommendations.
As you know, under Paris, there were targets that were
established under the previous administration. Do you believe
those targets are appropriate, or do you think that--no, you
don't?
Mr. Piper. No, those--so the targets in Paris, the 1.5-
degree Celsius global warming kind of cap that they have will
actually lead to catastrophic disaster. And so we cannot hold
those as a standard if we are to take any actual action on
climate change.
So, while it may seem like they are really radical or
positive kind of caps or targets, they are not as----
Mr. Graves. Aggressive.
Mr. Piper [continuing]. Aggressive as they need to be.
Mr. Graves. And so, fair to say, your perspective, that you
wouldn't support Paris targets because you think they should be
more aggressive than Paris?
Mr. Piper. Yes. But I still recognize that it is a step in
the right direction.
Mr. Graves. Thank you.
Ms. Zhang, I apologize, but very quickly, if you could
respond.
Ms. Zhang. Absolutely. I believe as Christians we are
called to bold and compassionate action, and sometimes, you
know, that takes courage.
I know that solar energy already employs more than coal,
oil, and natural gas combined. So it is definitely not either/
or, but it can be both/and. And so it is a boost for the
economy. And 70 percent of the American public are concerned or
very concerned about climate change.
Mr. Graves. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Castor. Thank you.
Ms. Bonamici, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Chair Castor and Ranking Member
Graves.
And thank you to all of our witnesses. And I also want to
especially welcome the other students and children who are here
at this hearing today.
You know, I represent a district in Oregon, and in the
Pacific Northwest, we know climate change is not a distant
threat; it is reality. We have had smoke from wildfires. We
have acidic oceans that are threatening the shellfish industry;
decreased snow pack limiting access to skiing and snowboarding,
and that is affecting our outdoor recreation industry. Droughts
and extreme weather patterns affect our agriculture community.
We are concerned about warmer temperatures in the Columbia
River further endangering salmon. And rising sea levels, of
course, on our coast threaten homeowners and small businesses.
So the science is clear, and the consequences for continued
inaction are serious.
And, you know, we have talked a little bit about the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, and then, of
course, the Fourth National Climate Assessment. Some people say
those were wake-up calls. They are more than that. They are
alarming.
I am glad we are starting this committee's work by
highlighting the efforts of young leaders across the country,
reaffirming the urgency of taking action.
And, Mr. Piper, thank you for your leadership on the
Juliana case to hold the federal government responsible for
failing to act on climate change.
I know that one of your advisors is Dr. James Hansen. And
when we are talking about--Chair Castor mentioned something
about 30 years. Dr. Hansen was one of the first experts to
testify in Congress about climate change, and the year was
1988. It could have been in this room, because this is the
Science Committee room, and he was with NASA at the time.
I remember 1988 well, because that is the year my son was
born. He is now 30. So when we look at when the first testimony
was here in the U.S. House--and 30 years have passed. And so I
think it is a lesson for us that we must heed the call.
And so I am inspired by your work and your advocacy
especially, Mr. Piper, in my home State of Oregon, where, of
course, the case is filed.
You noted that the district court found the right to a
climate system capable of sustaining human life is fundamental
to a free and ordered society. That is from the opinion,
district court opinion. And a stable climate system is quite
literally the foundation of society.
So you mention in your testimony that it should be the
responsibility of all three branches of government, not just
relying on the courts. So can you expand a little bit about
that? If the case is pending in the courts, why shouldn't we
let the courts decide? Why should we take action in Congress?
Mr. Piper. So the courts don't make the laws--first, sorry.
I want to thank you for the question.
Ms. Bonamici. That is okay.
Mr. Piper. But the courts don't make the laws. And, you
know, they interpret the laws. But we need laws and policy to
be made in order to move forward on this.
And so, while in the courts what we are asking the court to
do is recognize our rights and see the Constitution demands
that our rights be protected and that laws need to be made,
ultimately the laws need to be made by the legislative branch.
Ms. Bonamici. Of course. Right. Thank you. And I certainly
understand that and know that that is our responsibility here
on the Select Committee. We are going to be working with
several of the committees in making sure that we get the best
policy.
Mr. Suggs, you said that East Kinston is a low-income,
predominantly black neighborhood, and the effects of natural
disasters exacerbated by climate change are often compounded
with limited access to food, hospitals, medical supplies.
So it is really inspiring to hear about your work. What can
we do at the federal level to support vulnerable communities
like yours to help you prepare and cope with the effects of
climate change?
Mr. Suggs. Thank you so much, Ms. Bonamici.
I believe that there are so many different approaches we
can take: one definitely addressing the human impact on the
environment, reducing emissions and things of that sort; but,
also, doing things on a more local and really immediate level,
implementing some flood-mitigation efforts.
Because there are so many communities and neighborhoods
like mine that are located in low-lying areas along the banks
of rivers and along the Outer Banks of North Carolina that
could use some efforts to mitigate the floods, to prevent our
rivers and banks from overflowing. So there are so many efforts
that could be taken when it comes to that approach as well.
Then, also, investing in economic development and education
to help empower the people in those communities to come up with
solutions themselves as well. Because it is a multiple way
approach that I believe could really make a difference in our
community.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you so much.
And I want to again thank all the witnesses who are here.
When I think back to that year, 1988, when James Hansen,
NASA scientist, was here testifying about climate change, let
us not think about the future and looking back and saying they
did nothing. Let this be the time that we take action. Let this
be the year, let this be the Congress when we heed that call.
Because it is about your future; it is about the future of the
next generation and the generations to come.
So thank you for your leadership, Chair Castor, and I yield
back.
Ms. Castor. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Miller, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you, Madam Chairman. And thank you all
for being here today.
As many of you may be aware, my home State of West Virginia
is abundant in natural resources. Coal and natural gas from
West Virginia help fuel the world and create good paying jobs
for my constituents. I have seen the devastation that a top-
down, one-size-fits-all government approach can cause.
We saw this with the war on coal from the Obama
administration. The decimation of the coal industry in my State
ravished our economy, particularly in the southern part of the
state. It created great hopelessness and ultimately led to the
rise in our opioid crisis. My district is slowly recovering.
The heavy hand of the federal government has consequences,
and it can ruin communities. This is why I want to empower our
state and local governments, as well as our communities, as we
seek to find solutions and policies for our environment.
Ms. Cooper, given your experience in state government, what
are some of the policies and regulations on the federal level
that make it difficult to start and complete restoration
projects?
Ms. Cooper. Thank you for the question, Mrs. Miller. I
think on the state level with our coastal protection and
restoration that we are doing in Louisiana, we have a whole
agency that just is dedicated to this with state-of-the-art
coastal scientists modeling systems and engineers that are
working on this issue.
But I think a problem that we face a lot is in permitting
on the federal level and with funding. Those would be two of
our main problems. Funding in that we don't receive all of the
money from offshore oil that we would like to fund our
restoration projects.
And then on the permitting side, these processes are long
and arduous, and they take years to get through. And when we
are trying to restore the environment, it is challenging to
wait this long, because you know the wetlands continue to
degrade more and more as we wait in these permitting processes
and as this takes longer. So if we can get that done faster,
then we can restore even more wetlands.
Mrs. Miller. So removing some of the red tape is what you
are saying, in essence?
Ms. Cooper. Yes.
Mrs. Miller. Okay. What are some of the ways the Federal
Government can be a better partner to help our state and local
governments?
Ms. Cooper. As I mentioned with the offshore revenue
sharing, we are a part of this partnership called GOMESA
funding from offshore revenue that happens from the Gulf Coast.
And we are responsible for a large portion of the offshore oil
and revenues that come to the federal government. And I think
if we were allocated our proper amount, in that we would be
able to fund more restoration projects that we are working on.
Mrs. Miller. Okay. Thank you.
And what are some best practices, in your experience, that
the State of Louisiana has implemented to preserve the
environment without costing jobs in the energy industry?
Ms. Cooper. Right. So as you know, coming from West
Virginia, our economy as well is heavily reliant on the
industry that surrounds us. So we find it most successful to
partner with the industries that we are working with.
We receive a lot of our funding from state mineral
revenues, from offshore oil, like I had mentioned, and from oil
spill compensations. And so we find this partnership works best
for us, because we couldn't do restoration on the scale that we
do without receiving the funding that we do through these
programs. So I think developing those partnerships and learning
to work in a compromising manner is really the only way that we
can provide long-term solutions to this problem.
Mrs. Miller. And you are using innovation in that equation
as well?
Ms. Cooper. Yes, yes. Definitely.
Mrs. Miller. All right. Thank you so much.
Madam Chair, I yield back my time.
Ms. Castor. Thank you.
Mr. Huffman, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Huffman. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, for bringing
these young leaders as our first hearing of the select
committee to remind us that we are dealing with a crisis. If
you believe that we have the luxury of time, if you believe
that we have the luxury of incrementalism, I would submit that
you are in the wrong room and probably in the wrong century.
Just last month, I joined students at Casa Grande High
School in Petaluma, in my district, in a climate walkout. The
first time I have ever encouraged kids who were skipping
school. But they were engaging in civil disobedience, or what
our colleague Congressman John Lewis might call good trouble.
And the reason why is very clear. There comes a time when there
is an issue and a cause that is so important that you have to
engage in some unconventional tactics. And the climate crisis
is that issue.
All over the country, all over the world, young people are
finding their voices on climate change. And I thank the
witnesses today for offering their voices and calling on those
of us in office to heed that call. This level of engagement and
activism is one of the best things that I have seen in my many
years of beating my head against the wall on this issue. And
trust me, I have been at it for a while.
Just as the youth of the 1960s became the fulcrum of change
for ending segregation for civil rights, for voting rights, I
think the students who led this walkout, and the students who
are here and the young people who are here today, are motivated
by the need to address climate change and its impacts in a way
that is very similar. It reminds me of the 1960s and the civil
rights movement.
You are focused on the loss of coral reefs, sea level rise
that will endanger coastal communities worldwide, food
shortages, and many other catastrophic impacts of climate
change. And don't let anyone tell you that your demand to have
a livable planet for your lifetime and for your children is
unreasonable or extreme or radical. It is really not. It is
essential that we hear your voice.
For the many students in my district, this is deeply
personal. Their communities are still recovering from wildfires
that were the deadliest and most costly in our State's history,
a situation that will only get worse with climate change. Last
year, California's Fourth Climate Change Assessment found
wildfires larger than 25,000 acres could become 50 percent more
frequent if we fail to act.
So you are calling for swift action to stop climate change,
and that is the right message, and I believe you are the right
messengers. But I know that when young people call for change,
they are often ridiculed and dismissed as being unreasonable.
They are urged to think incrementally. That might have been the
right conversation a few decades ago. And it was over four
decades ago. In 1981, just down the hall in this very building,
one of the first congressional hearings on climate change was
held. Ms. Bonamici referenced a 1988 hearing with Dr. James
Hansen. Well, in 1981, a Congressman named Al Gore held a
hearing on this subject. And don't you wish that we could go
back in time and tell the Members of Congress in that room and
tell the world that was tuning in to that hearing, listen to
this man. He is right. In just a few decades, we are going to
start losing our coral reefs. We are going to have several
multibillion dollar extreme weather catastrophes a year in this
country. This is a real crisis, and you don't have the luxury
of time.
So we can't go back in time, unfortunately, and speak to
the Congress of 1981 or the people of 1981. As the saying goes,
the best time to plant a tree is 10 years ago, right? But the
next best time to plant a tree is right now. And we need to
plant a lot of trees very quickly.
So the good news is today you are speaking to the United
States Congress. And some folks are tuning in, I hope, on C-
SPAN, which Al Gore helped to create, by the way.
So do you have a final word or sentence to this moment for
the Members of Congress who are listening, for the folks who
are tuned in on Al Gore's C-SPAN, that hopefully are listening
this time and understand the urgency?
I open it up to any of you to speak to that.
Ms. Cooper. So I appreciate your statement and your
question as well. I think in Louisiana, we see the detrimental
impacts of a changing climate like none other. And anyone can
see that, regardless of what political party you are,
regardless of what industry you work in. Everyone can see that.
All the communities that we are working with, all of the
people. And even at a Federal level, you can see the coast of
Louisiana degrading. And I think what I would emphasize to
Congress is compromise, to put aside our partisanship----
Mr. Huffman. Can I followup on that? Would you indulge the
shortest of questions? I know I am beyond my time, but, Ms.
Cooper, I am very moved by your passion for preventing the
impacts and addressing the resiliency needs of the Louisiana
coast, to you and Mr. Graves, who is a real champion on this.
Please tell the folks back home that he is constantly beating
this drum. My answer is, yes, let's do it. Let's act boldly to
preserve your coastline and to build your coastal resiliency.
But wouldn't you agree that at the same time as we do those
things, if we are making the climate warmer by failing to
address emissions, we are not really helping you? Would you
agree with me on that?
Ms. Cooper. I would, but I believe that it is all about
compromise. I don't think it has to be zero percent oil and gas
or 100 percent oil and gas. I think we need--what we need is a
gradual transition. We need technological innovation that keeps
pace with our transition away from oil and natural gas. I don't
think it can happen overnight.
In Louisiana, too much of our jobs and our livelihood and
economy is dependent on this. And so I stand firmly behind
that.
Mr. Huffman. I appreciate that. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Castor. And I would like to welcome Congresswoman Mary
Gay Scanlon of Pennsylvania for joining us today and sitting
in. So welcome.
Now, Mr. Armstrong, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Armstrong. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thanks to
everyone sitting here.
We have a big closeup group, program in North Dakota, and
our high school kids are out here over the course of the last 3
weeks. And my favorite thing in the entire time I am in this
town is when I see young people becoming engaged in things,
whether I agree with them, disagree with them, or anything. I
think it is fantastic. I think you bring perspective that we
oftentimes lack hearing from when we are in this town.
And so as we go through this--I am from North Dakota. We
have kind of--we produce the world's food, we produce the
world's energy. So trying to figure out how you want to make
sure that we keep these competing interests at play is
sometimes interesting.
So I called the smartest kid I know who I used to coach as
a 12-year-old in baseball, and he submitted a letter which,
when I am done, I am going to ask for unanimous consent to put
in the record. But I know I don't always read those, so I am
going to read--we will get you one.
So I am just going to read the letter from my good friend,
Tanner Hopfauf.
Dear Congressman Armstrong, I am writing to share my input
in response to the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
announced hearing entitled Generation Climate: Young Leaders
Urge Climate Action Now.
The hearing is described as a contrast to a typical
congressional hearing. The committee will hear from young
leaders who are urging policy leaders to take climate action
now and finally address climate crisis.
I work in the oil and gas industry in North Dakota, and I
consider myself a young leader who would be directly impacted
by climate action being discussed in Congress. This is a
complex issue, so I hope the committee will consider my
perspective, which is shared by many young leaders throughout
the country who may not be represented at the hearing today.
I grew up in southwestern North Dakota in the rural town of
Dickinson. I attended K-12 here and graduated from Dickinson
High School in May of 2014.
While in high school, I decided I wanted to pursue a degree
in engineering. And with the increase in activity and
opportunities presented by the oil and gas industry, I knew
petroleum engineering was my goal. Once I learned that the
University of North Dakota offered a bachelor's degree in
petroleum engineering, I applied and was accepted.
While attending UND, I was fortunate enough to have an
internship during each of the three summers, two of which were
in western North Dakota. Upon graduating in 2018, I accepted a
position with an exploration and production company and have
been there since. My career thus far in educational decisions
would have been drastically different were it not for the oil
and gas industry in my community.
My story is not unique. Before the oil and gas industry
became established, many young adults from rural North Dakota
were forced to look for jobs and career opportunities out of
State after graduating. Simply put, the jobs that offered long-
term career advancement that would appeal to young adults
entering the workforce did not exist in North Dakota. As a
result, our rural communities were shrinking, and we are losing
our small town culture and way of life so many had enjoyed for
generations.
The oil and gas industry has completely changed this
outlook. Local citizens now have the opportunity to go to work
and have careers in the areas they have always called home.
This industry has provided a spark to our communities and has
given a breath of life back to them.
Communities that have been shrinking for many years have
now begun to grow and prosper. People are choosing to move and
live in rural North Dakota because of the careers that are now
available. Additionally, local residents now have the ability
to remain in their hometown while having successful and
meaningful careers. The boom in the economy has provided so
much for the individuals that are working directly in the
industry, but it has also positively influenced the way of life
for all citizens living in the area and even the entire State.
Rural citizens have benefited from increased
infrastructure, advancing education systems, and additional
sources of entertainment. So many things that rural North
Dakotans would have never thought possible or to be available
in their communities now are available because of this
industry.
The oil and gas industry is reshaping North Dakota and the
economy at the local and the State level. The industry has put
North Dakota on the map and continues to provide many
opportunities for rural North Dakotans. Without this industry,
our economies would cease to grow, job opportunities would no
longer be abundant, and, once again, local citizens would be
forced to look out of State for career opportunities.
I stand behind the oil and gas industry and will continue
to support its involvement in the rural North Dakota
communities. I am proud to have grown up in Western North
Dakota. I am proud to have graduated from college in eastern
North Dakota. And I am proud to be an active member of the
workforce that the industry has established in North Dakota.
The oil and gas industry in North Dakota has revolutionized
the way we extract oil and gas from the land and has an
incredible record of post-production reclamation. We live where
we work and we take our environmental stewardship very
seriously.
And there is another paragraph, but in the interest of
time, I would just ask for unanimous consent to enter this
letter into the record.
Ms. Castor. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
__________
Letter for the Record from Tanner Hopfauf to Representative Kelly
Armstrong
Dear Congressman Armstrong,
I am writing so share my input in response to the Select Committee
on the Climate Crisis' announced hearing, entitled ``Generation
Climate: Young Leaders Urge Climate Action Now.'' The hearing is
described as ``in contrast to a typical Congressional hearing, the
committee will hear from young leaders who are urging policymakers to
take climate action now and finally address the climate crisis.'' I
work in the oil and gas industry in North Dakota and I consider myself
a young leader who would be directly impacted by the ``climate action''
being discussed in Congress right now. This is a complex issue so I
hope the Committee will consider my perspective, which is shared by
many young leaders throughout the country who may not be represented at
this hearing today.
My name is Tanner Hopfauf, I grew up in southwestern North Dakota
in the rural town of Dickinson. I attended K-12 here and graduated from
Dickinson High School in May of 2014. While in high school, I decided I
wanted to pursue a degree in engineering and with the increase in
activity and opportunities presented by the oil and gas industry I knew
petroleum engineering was my goal. Once I learned the University of
North Dakota (UND) offered a bachelor's degree in Petroleum
Engineering, I applied and was accepted. While attending UND, I was
fortunate enough to have an internship during each of the three
summers, two of which were in western ND. Upon graduating in May of
2018, I accepted a full-time position with an exploration and
production company and have been there since. My career thus far and
educational decisions would have been drastically different were it not
for the oil and gas industry in my community.
My story is not unique. Before the oil and gas industry really
became established, many young adults from rural North Dakota were
forced to look for jobs and long term career opportunities out of state
after graduating high school and college. Simply put, the jobs that
offered long term career advancement that would appeal to young adults
entering the workforce didn't exist in ND. As a result, our rural
communities were shrinking and we were losing our small town culture
and a way of life so many had enjoyed for generations before. The oil
and gas industry has completely changed this outlook, local citizens
now have the opportunity to go to work and have fulltime careers in the
area they have always called home. This industry has provided a spark
to our rural communities and has given a breath of life back into them.
Communities that had been shrinking for many years before have begun to
grow and prosper. People are choosing to move to and live in rural ND
because of the jobs that are now available. Additionally, local
residents now have the ability to remain in their home town communities
while having successful and meaningful careers. The boom in the economy
has provided so much for the individuals that are working directly in
the industry, but it has also positively influenced the way of life for
all citizens living in the area and even the entire state. Rural
citizens have benefited from increased infrastructure, advancing
education systems, and additional sources of entertainment; so many
things that rural North Dakotans would have never thought possible or
to be available in their communities now are because of the oil and gas
industry.
The oil and gas industry is reshaping North Dakota and the economy
at the local and state level. This industry has put North Dakota on the
map, and continues to provide many opportunities for rural North
Dakotans. Without this industry our economies would cease to grow, job
opportunities would no longer be abundant, and once again local
citizens would be forced to look out of state for career opportunities.
I stand behind the oil and gas industry and will continue to support
its involvement in rural North Dakota communities. I am proud to have
grown up in Western North Dakota, I am proud to have graduated from
college in Eastern North Dakota, and I am proud to be an active member
of the workforce the oil and gas industry has established in North
Dakota communities.
The oil and gas industry in North Dakota has revolutionized the way
we extract oil and gas from the land and has an incredible record of
post-production reclamation. We live where we work so we take
environmental stewardship very seriously. As this committee moves
forward, I hope they will acknowledge the excellent stewardship of our
resources that is happening in North Dakota right now, and all the
economic opportunities and prosperity it has created for our residents.
Ours is a young, vibrant industry that I hope can gain more respect and
understanding rather than be used as a scape goat to win political
points. I am a young leader and I want my voice to be heard. Climate
change and the policies being discussed pose a direct threat to my
industry, and I don't want to be collateral damage in this political
debate.
Thank you for your work on this committee and for representing my
voice and the voices of so many others working and thriving in western
North Dakota.
Sincerely,
Tanner Hopfauf.
Mr. Armstrong. Thank you.
Ms. Castor. Thank you, Mr. Armstrong.
Mr. Casten, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Casten. Thank you, Madam Chair, for putting this
hearing together.
And thank you to all our witnesses. You know, we always
start off these things by thanking witnesses. And there is sort
of a pro forma to that, and somehow it seems insufficient for
you guys today. You deserve more than just thanks.
You know, as a lot of people have said up here, over the
last four decades, we have had a bipartisan consensus to do
nothing. And that is shameful. That is bipartisan agreement,
but it is an agreement for inaction, at least on the scale that
is required.
Now, some of that action may be driven by corruption, some
is driven by denial, some is driven by cowardice. But I think
in all cases, there are far too many in this town who are
content to sit and wait for public opinion to force them to
act. And acting in response to polls may make you an effective
politician, but it is the opposite of leadership.
What you all have done in getting to this point is
leadership. You are shaping public opinion. You are forcing
people to mobilize for the greater good, even if that is
contrary to their own individual interests. And that is worth
more than just a pro forma thing. So thank you. Thank you for
being here and for driving that conversation. What you have
done is leadership distilled, and what we have done so far is
shameful.
Now, as Mr. Piper noted, this is a first step. It is a
small first step. But all of us on both sides of this dais is--
you know, as Robert Frost said, ``We have promises to keep and
miles to go before we sleep.''
So let's hold us accountable to those promises, let's hold
you accountable to those promises, and start thinking about
what the next steps are. As we all think about those, I want to
start just with a little bit of advice for you all.
I have spent my entire career trying to do something about
climate change. First as a scientist, then as an engineer, then
as an entrepreneur. I built a couple companies. Everything I
ever did was built on profitably reducing greenhouse gas
emissions.
I used to think that dealing with climate change was a
technology problem. Laws of thermodynamics were somehow holding
us back. Then I thought it was an economic problem, that the
laws of economics were somehow holding us back. And I am in
this job now because I have come to the conclusion that it is
the laws of the United States that are holding us back.
Now, the good news is that is the only one of those laws
that can be changed. So that is a cause for some optimism. But
it took me about 20 years to come to that realization. And if
you will humor me with some advice, it is only to hope that you
can be smarter than I have been.
My first piece of advice for you is do not waste your
energy preaching to the converted. It is good for your ego. It
will make you feel good. It is not necessary. Number two, do
not waste your energy celebrating those who agree that climate
change is real. They deserve no more praise than people who
will acknowledge that their tin foil hat does not prevent the
aliens from reading their thoughts.
So what do you do? Lead not by persuading people who
already are there, lead not by telling people they are immoral,
but lead by getting people to understand that their self
interests are aligned with your larger purpose.
People who are motivated solely by economics like the not
pay for fuel. People who are motivated solely by national
security like the idea that we could have a military that
doesn't depend on sending money to people we don't feel very
good about. People who are motivated--they feel macho by
getting behind the wheel of a really fast muscle car, love the
acceleration of an electric vehicle. Meet people where they are
and get them to go.
And so my question for you all who have done a better job
of leadership than we have is to maybe share in the few minutes
we have left how you have persuaded people who disagree with
you to act for the greater good and what we can learn from your
experience.
Mr. Suggs.
Mr. Suggs. I will start. Thank you, Mr. Casten. I will
share that I believe sharing stories is one way to really build
bridges. And when I have opportunities to share the stories
that are from my community and how people's lives have been
just totally changed by these catastrophic events, I believe
that is the way to build rapport among each other, and we see
where we are coming from.
And when I can hear the stories of--like the gentleman from
North Dakota just shared about the young man who works in the
oil and gas industry, and when we can hear those stories and
we--I believe that is the path that we use to find compromise,
so--but when we can share stories, I believe that is the way to
really persuade people to hear the other perspective.
Ms. Cooper. I appreciate your advice, Congressman Casten.
And I find that it is important in this instance to have shared
experiences. In Louisiana, I get to see this on a personal
level, which I am very privileged by. But to see individuals
and communities, as I had briefly noted before, that are losing
their cultures, that are losing their environments every day
already to these climate crises. And we can all see the impacts
of intense weather events in our communities. And if not in our
communities, then we can see this on national television. It is
everywhere. We have disasters happening all the time. And I
think relating to one another in that shared experience manner
is the best way to move forward, because you can't deny that
those things are happening.
Mr. Casten. I think out of respect to my colleagues, I
think we are out the time. But I appreciate your responses. And
sorry to not leave time for all of you.
Ms. Bonamici. [Presiding.] Thank you.
And I want to explain. Chair Castor and Representative
Lujan had to run to another committee where they are having
votes on amendments and bills, so they will return.
And at present, I would like to recognize Representative
Levin for 5 minutes for your questions.
Mr. Levin. Well, thank you so much. So grateful for,
finally, the first hearing of this select committee. Grateful
to serve and really grateful to all of you. I think my friend
Mr. Casten said it well; you give us hope, and we are grateful
that you are here.
I think the work of this committee is significantly
overdue. This is a scientific, health, political, economic,
national security, environmental, and moral issue. My
constituents in Southern California feel the impact of climate
change every day in many different ways. Increased coastal
erosion that has caused infrastructure to collapse, sea level
rise, longer and more extreme droughts, and unprecedented
wildfires.
These examples are underpinned by clear and compelling
evidence, including from institutions in my district, like the
Scripps Institute of Oceanography. And they reinforce the
stories that we have heard from you, both in your written
testimony and here this morning.
I have no doubt that what we continue to highlight here
will just add to the overwhelming evidence that we better
transition away to a more sustainable future, but we better do
so in an economically productive way. And what I mean by that,
like Mr. Casten, I had been in the clean energy industry for
about 15 years, and it is an incredible economic opportunity,
and we cannot lose sight of that. And it should be shared by
all regions of this country, especially those that have been
dependent on fossil fuels.
As far as the heavy hand of the federal government, I would
like to remind my colleagues of the tens of billions of dollars
that we subsidize fossil fuels with each year. The real
question, in my mind, is whether Americans will be using clean
energy technologies that are developed here, that are
researched, developed, deployed here, with American jobs and
American ingenuity, or whether we are going to be using
technologies that are developed and deployed first in Asia and
Europe, and whether we are going to lead or whether we are
going to cede our global leadership.
So I commend you all for your leadership. It was a similar
belief in the need to act on climate that prompted my own
campaign for Congress after working as an environmental
activist and lawyer for about 15 years, as I mentioned. And I
actually began my campaign by sending my opponent a copy of the
book, ``Climate Change for Beginners,'' which is written at
about a third grade reading level. Everybody here should check
it out. If you have a family member that doesn't believe in
basic science, hand it to them.
But the reality is that our President also denies the
scientific consensus on climate. When he visited my home State
of California last year in the wake of our devastating
wildfires, he suggested we rake our forests, that would solve
the problem.
So, Mr. Piper, I wanted to turn to you. How would you
respond to this current administration's omissions and outright
denial of science?
Mr. Piper. Thank you for the question. And I sued them.
Mr. Levin. Well, that is--care to opine on that, sir?
Mr. Graves. I would like to clarify for the record, you
actually sued the Obama administration.
Mr. Piper. That is true. That is true.
Mr. Levin. Please do clarify for the record, Mr. Piper.
Don't worry about that. They are voting down the way.
Mr. Piper. Okay. Yeah. Sorry.
On a less humorous note, on a more serious note, I think it
is hard to honestly hold a response to such strong illogical
climate denial, because there is not much you can say.
Something as ridiculous as telling somebody to rake a forest in
order to reduce the effects of a wildfire season that is out of
our control, it blows my mind.
But I guess in, like, honestly, when I think about how I
respond to that, it would have to be that I place my faith in
the proceedings of the court, in the hope that the court can
disregard the disbelief, recognize the science and the
constitutional obligation and the constitutional rights of the
youth, not only my, you know co-witnesses here, but also all
the youth across America to a livable climate and a stable
future.
Mr. Levin. And I was very interested, Mr. Piper, to see
that your case highlights some of the federal subsidies for
fossil fuels. Can you briefly expand on the role that these
fossil fuel subsidies play in your case?
Mr. Piper. You know, at the moment, like, right now, I
don't have that off the top of my head, but I am actually happy
to get back to you with that.
Mr. Levin. That would be great.
Finally, and if I could just run just a second or two
longer.
Mr. Suggs, can you talk about how the repeated flooding has
affected Kinston's economy, small businesses, the workers who
rely on wages from those businesses?
Mr. Suggs. Thank you, Congressman Levin. I will say I
mentioned it earlier in my testimony how U.S. Highway 70 runs
right through town. It is our main business corridor. It also
runs almost parallel with the Neuse River. So many of our
businesses are located along that highway. If you want to get
from our State capital to Raleigh to North Carolina's beautiful
beaches, you have to go down Highway 70 in Kinston.
And when hurricanes and floods hit, that entire highway is
flooded. So millions of businesses along that highway, and
grocery stores, restaurants, clothing stores, are under water
and submerged. People are out of work for weeks or months while
these businesses have to rebuild.
Kinston in east North Carolina is also big on agriculture.
And you have farms and migrant farmworkers and their families
and the farmers' families who are out of work for months while
their farmland is under water.
So I mean, it definitely is a huge--takes a huge toll on
our economy. People sometimes leave our community because of
the constant flooding. So that also affects population loss,
and that has a trickle-down effect on the economy. So there are
so many ways that----
Mr. Levin. Thank you, Mr. Suggs.
To the extent that we consider the economic impacts of
climate change, let's be fair and evenhanded about those
impacts.
And I yield back. Thank you.
Ms. Castor [presiding]. Let's see. Ms. Brownley, you are
recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Brownley. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. And thank you
for having this hearing, our first major hearing today. I can
think of no better group of witnesses to kick off this
committee than the young leaders sitting before us today. You
represent, as many of us have already expressed, but you
represent the generation that will bear the full brunt of the
failures of our generation and previous generations to prevent
this crisis if we do not act.
I must say I am heartened that even and despite of the
federal government's inaction, that all of you have expressed
hope and still believe that the government can, in a
nonpolitical way, truly and boldly address this climate crisis.
So there is no question that the time to act is now.
And I am proud to represent a district in California. And I
believe this committee has a historic opportunity to learn from
California's example and many other solutions that we can find
nationwide and, quite frankly, worldwide.
There are so many questions that I would like to ask all of
you, but I know my time is limited. But, Mr. Piper, I am just
so extraordinarily impressed. As you said, you sued the
government, and I am very impressed that you were able to pull
that together. And I understand that in your lawsuit, there
were 21 plaintiffs that were 21 years or younger. I can't
imagine your joy and your feeling of success when the judge
held that--your argument that you have a due process right to a
climate system capable of sustaining human life. It must have
been an extraordinary moment. And the disappointment still
continues that the case has not been fully resolved.
But you talk about this issue. We talk a lot about the
climate crisis with regards to its economic impact, to its
health impact, to its national security impact. But you are
really describing this, quite frankly, as a civil rights--
fundamentally, a civil rights issue.
And so I wanted to ask you first if you were intentional in
terms of having 21 plaintiffs that were 21 years or younger.
And, if so, why? But I also wanted to ask you, if you could,
talk a little bit more about your belief and why the climate
crisis is so much a civil rights issue to our time.
Mr. Piper. Thank you, Ms. Brownley, for this question. In
regards to the ages and number of the plaintiffs, I believe it
is just coincidence of fate, not necessarily something that is
specific and intentional.
And then with it being--oh, my. I honestly forgot the
second part of your question. Could you please.
Ms. Brownley. You have talked about the climate crisis
being a civil rights issue. And, you know, if you could just
talk a little bit more about that. I would like to hear the
other panelists sort of weigh in on what their feelings are
that this climate crisis is indeed a civil rights issue of our
time.
Mr. Piper. Yeah. So I think it is the--so the easiest way
to say this is the Public Trust Doctrine, which is, in common
law, states that the government holds a responsibility to
protect the natural resources of the air, land, and the water
for posterity. And when we recognize that no life on this
planet can be held without those three natural resources,
without having clean air, clean water, and land that is capable
of sustaining life and growing life.
And then specifically in regards to our Constitution, I
believe it is the Fifth Amendment that says that the federal
government cannot deprive its citizens of the right to life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or property without due
process of law. And in that way, we have to recognize that the
federal government's destruction of the environment through its
conscious building of a fossil fuel infrastructure is a
violation of the Constitution.
Ms. Brownley. Thank you. Five minutes goes by quickly.
Thank you very much, and I yield back.
Ms. Castor. Votes have been called on the floor, but we are
going to try to--oh, excuse me. We are in recess. Okay. Good.
I was going to counsel everyone to be concise. But now I
think we are okay.
So, Mr. Palmer, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Palmer. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Ms. Cooper, you talked about some of the issues involving
Louisiana. And I know the focus is entirely on human activity
and what the government ought to do in regard to human
activity. Louisiana has been involved in some major floods, one
a couple of years ago that caused tremendous damage. And there
is a lot of discussion about what the federal government's
responsibility is in that.
Isn't it true that the Army Corps of Engineers had a study
that lasted 20-something years, maybe 30 years, looking at
building a diversion canal from the Comite River over to the
Lilly basin that would largely have mitigated any problems from
that flood or at least made the problem much more minimal than
they were?
Are you aware of that? Can you talk about it a little bit?
Ms. Cooper. Yes. Thank you for the question, Mr. Palmer. I
am not familiar specifically with that project. I can get back
with you on the information needed afterwards.
But I can speak to how our restoration projects and the
projects that we are doing are all aimed at reducing flood risk
for our communities. And I am sure, as you might have seen, we
have flood maps for our entire coast. And we are trying to
figure out where the biggest flood risks are now and in the
next 50 years. We set up like a low and a high scenario of what
could be the lowest expectations and the highest. And so we are
trying to plan our projects around that information. And so we
are putting projects in areas that need it the most and making
our investments worth the most.
But in regard to that specific project, I would be glad to
get back with you on that.
Mr. Palmer. Well, you don't need to, because I know a good
bit about it. I wanted to know what you know about it.
And the issue here is, is that I know the climate is
changing. Climate has a history. It has always been changing.
And there are some serious consequences from climate change
that we need to be prepared for.
I worked for two international engineering companies. I
worked in environmental systems. I ran a think tank for 25
years. And there is a fundamental principle in addressing
issues, and that is you first have to properly define the
problem. If you don't properly define the problem, then the
solutions you come up with generally are going to be off the
mark. And there are very serious consequences when dealing with
climate change if we don't properly define the problem. If you
put all the emphasis on anthropomorphic impact and you don't
take into account natural variation and other issues, then we
are going to suffer.
For instance, there is an ice shelf in the Antarctic. Are
you all familiar with the ice shelf, that there is some
concerns about it? I see Mr. Piper is nodding his head.
The last time that ice shelf broke off was 125,000 years
ago. Okay? Any idea why it broke off?
Some folks think it was climate change. And there is a high
probability that that was part of it, because we have gone
through cooling periods and warming periods. But it is also
highly probable that it is basic physics. Because an ice shelf
is not an iceberg. It is not displacing its mass in water. It
is not an ice sheet on land. It extends out over the surface of
the water. In this particular case, it is probably 5 or 6 feet
above the water.
And at some point, just basic physics are going to come
into play where the weight on the end will cause it to break
off, and it will--if it doesn't freeze back in place, whatever
it does, once it hits the water, it is going to cause sea
levels to rise.
If we don't take into account the natural variations and
that climate is changing and take action to mitigate for those
probabilities, as they failed to do Louisiana with the Comite
River Canal, then you are going to have some serious problems.
If we had built that canal 30 years ago, and Mr. Graves and I
have talked about this quite a bit, I think you wouldn't have
had the billions and billions of dollars in damage. You
probably wouldn't have had the loss of life and the destruction
that you had.
So my encouragement is for you to stay involved, but look
at the total picture. Don't focus on just one thing.
And with that, Madam Chairman, I will yield back.
Ms. Castor. Thank you, Mr. Palmer.
Mr. Lujan, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Lujan. Well, good morning, everyone. And, again, thank
you to all of our witnesses today for your testimony, for the
courage to be here today and what you are doing with your lives
to make a positive difference, not just in our communities, but
really having a positive impact around the world. Each of you
has made the case that it is past time for Congress to act to
protect the health and safety of our young people and our
Earth. And I applaud your efforts. We agree with you, most of
us agree with you.
I am going to start off my remarks today by sharing a
little data and a little bit about my age.
In 1990, I was 18 years old. In the 29 years since, we have
seen the impacts of climate change. To begin in the nearly
three decades since I was the age of some of our guests here
today, nearly half the industrial emissions that have ever been
emitted into the atmosphere for the entirety of human history
have been released. It has had a dramatic impact on our world.
The polar caps then were 40 percent larger. Our seas were
about 3 inches lower. Our entire planet has warmed, and we have
seen a new wave of biological extinctions. Famine, natural
disasters, negative human health. That is how I define the
problem.
I would say that this requires immediate action. Our
changing planet affects our health, our food, our ecosystems,
and our way of life, and we cannot wait for another generation
to act.
Ms. Zhang, I appreciate how your testimony ties
environmental issues with issues of injustice. In Pope Francis'
encyclical Laudato Si, he stressed the importance of protecting
our most vulnerable from the impacts of climate change. He
says, I quote, ``We are faced not with two separate crises, one
environmental and the other social, but rather with one complex
crisis which is both social and environmental.''
The Pope goes on to recognize that we have a moral
obligation to act on climate change for future generations and
to protect the poor, marginalized, and those most at risk.
So my question for you is, can you speak to why the
religious community believes we need to reduce emissions,
reduce pollution, and address climate change?
Ms. Zhang. Absolutely. Thank you so much, Mr. Lujan, for
your question. I believe that--the Bible says a good man leaves
an inheritance for his children and his children's children.
And I think this inheritance in terms of both abundance of
natural and fiscal resources, I think that I--I believe that
God is speaking word through our generation. And I think that
the religious community cares a lot about this because it is
directly tied to our love of God and neighbor. And we see that
this is a humanitarian crisis that is not something
hypothetical and is happening in the future but is already
impacting people, people who Jesus called us to draw closest
to, and he himself modeled that for us.
And so that is some of the work that my organization, Young
Evangelicals for Climate Action, and Sojourners, a Christian
advocacy organization, focus on transformation through a
biblical call to social justice. That is the work that we do.
And, you know, we are called to steward the very first gift
that we are given by God. And this is something that God cares
a lot about. And if we take the time to know the creatures on
Earth and to spend time in it, I think that that is--in the
knowing, really, is where loving begins. And I think we are so
disconnected as a society now to that original calling that it
really--it starts from a practice of stewardship and a practice
of a personal experience with Earth. And so that is what we
hope to do.
And I am in the room with Interfaith Power and Light, and
there are numerous interreligious organizations that are
working for this. So thank you.
Mr. Lujan. And based on some of the earlier line of
questioning, I have a simple question to each of you, which is
really yes or no. Do you think that we should be doing
everything we can to reduce pollution?
Mr. Suggs.
Mr. Suggs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Lujan. Ms. Cooper?
Ms. Cooper. Yes. I agree.
Mr. Lujan. Mr. Piper?
Mr. Piper. Definitely.
Mr. Lujan. Ms. Zhang?
Ms. Zhang. Absolutely.
Mr. Lujan. And I hope that we don't lose sight of our
responsibilities here as we look to find common ground to get
this done. But we need to act. And I think that Mr. Huffman has
highlighted the cost of inaction. And I hope that you all take
to heart the importance of highlighting what happens if we
don't do anything. This Congress needs to act.
And I know the call for bipartisanship, you are not saying
sit idly by and wait another 10 years to do something. I think,
Ms. Cooper, you would even say, it is time to act, come
together, find some common ground, and get to work. Would that
be correct?
Ms. Cooper. That is absolutely correct.
Mr. Lujan. I appreciate that.
I have to run down to a vote, and I will see you all a
little bit later. Thanks for being here.
Ms. Bonamici [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Lujan.
I now recognize Mr. Neguse for 5 minutes for your
questions.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. And I also want to
thank Chairwoman Castor who I know had to step out, but for her
leadership and, in particular, for setting the agenda of this
committee to have the young folks that have joined us today be
our very first witnesses with respect to our first substantive
meeting. I certainly appreciate her leadership.
And I want to thank each and every one of you, as my
colleague Mr. Casten mentioned, not in a pro forma way. I mean,
I know that you all have traveled a great expense to
Washington, D.C., to come visit with us today. And just know
that your testimony is incredibly powerful, and it certainly is
inspiring to us and to the country.
Climate change is the existential threat of our time that
we must begin addressing immediately. And it shouldn't be a
partisan issue. As Congress discusses the threat of climate
change, we cannot lose sight of what is truly at stake. The
conversations we have now, the decisions that we make today
will decide the quality of life for the witnesses that are
gathered here today in front of this committee. We must choose
to protect their access to clean air, clean water, and a stable
climate. And this is not an abstract issue as has clearly been
demonstrated today during the hearing. Climate change is
staring us right in the face.
In my home State of Colorado, I represent Colorado's Second
Congressional District--Boulder, Fort Collins, northern
Colorado. Over 50 percent of the district I represent consists
of public lands. And so my constituents are already beginning
to experience firsthand the impacts of this crisis. Increased
flooding, erosion, rising temperatures, and faster snowmelt all
have real-life consequences to my constituents.
But addressing these impacts starts with an acceptance of
science. And with great respect to my colleague on the other
side of the aisle, with respect to his comment regarding
defining the problem, I don't know that this committee needs to
necessarily define the problem. The scientists, the experts
have defined the problem for us. The IPCC determined that we
have 12 years to ensure that the increase in global temperature
remains below the threshold required to avoid the most severe
impacts of climate change.
Let me just give you a sense of some of the key findings in
the IPCC report, that carbon dioxide is at an unprecedented
level not seen for at least the last 800,000 years; that sea
level is set to continue to rise at a faster rate than over the
past 40 years. And that, yes, over the last two decades, the
Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have been melting, and
glaciers have receded in most parts of the world.
That is the science. And there are a variety of important
recommendations from the top minds in the country on this
issue. And despite the clear and unified voice from the
scientific community on this issue, the administration has
continued to propose drastic cuts to climate research funding
and to make remarks that are blatantly false. Just this week,
the President claimed that the noise of wind turbines causes
cancer. And while, you know, that may be funny to some, these
kind of claims are dangerous. When we ignore facts, when we
ignore science, we ignore the duty that we have to future
generations.
And the good news is that this generation is paying
attention. Almost every meeting I have had with young people
since taking office 3 months ago has been about the
environment. Last month, like my colleague, Representative
Huffman, I joined young people in my State, in Boulder, in the
youth climate strike, including folks from the Climate Reality
Campus Corps at CU Boulder, Defend our Future, many other
groups. And it was incredibly encouraging to see so many young
people demanding action.
And on that note, I would be remiss if I didn't also
recognize that, as one of the original cosponsors on the Green
New Deal, there is a group of young people that really have
inspired the country, and certainly have inspired many of my
colleagues, the Sunrise Movement, that have pushed for
significant action to move the needle against climate change by
pushing for the Green New Deal.
At the end of the day, like many of my colleagues here, I
am a parent. My wife and I have a 7-month-old daughter,
Natalie. And as we think about the future that she is going to
inherit--you know, so much of the work we do here in Congress I
see through the prism of being a young father and making sure
that she inherits a world that is perhaps better than the one
that I inherited. And the good news again is that when my
daughter is my age, you all will be the leaders running for
office, serving in Congress, sitting in these chairs, making
these decisions. And I have no doubt that, given that reality,
we will truly make progress on this important issue.
So, with that, I will ask a question of Ms. Zhang similar
to the question Assistant Speaker Lujan mentioned.
I was struck by your testimony, your written testimony,
accounting your work helping out folks in the Flint water
crisis in Michigan. And I am wondering if you could share with
the committee how that experience changed the way you thought
about the moral implications of how environmental justice
issues impact communities and, in particular, communities of
color.
Ms. Zhang. Thank you for your question. I think that before
the Flint water crisis happened, when I was in university, I
was studying environmental issues, but studying them from an
ecological perspective and caring about creation. But I did not
realize that climate change was already impacting what Jesus
calls the least of these, people who are being impacted. And
not only in the Flint water crisis, but there is a zip code in
my district, 48217, in Detroit, where people are living within
10 miles of toxic pollution plants, and they are--60 percent of
them are people of color, and most of them are in poverty.
And I think of the, you know, recent EPA rollback of the
MATS rule. And I think that 100 percent of their livelihoods
are in danger because of this. And this happens often all over
the country. And this is a deep issue of environmental justice
very much so. And we care both about creation and about people,
and this climate change issue affects both drastically.
So thank you.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you. Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Castor [presiding]. Thank you.
Mr. Carter, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Carter. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the
opportunity to be recognized. And if I may, could I yield time
to my colleague, Mr. Palmer?
Ms. Castor. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Palmer. I thank the gentleman.
I want to ask unanimous consent to enter a couple of things
into the record. One is the IPCC's climate change Physical
Science Basis. And just want to point out that what they found
in this report, there is no robust trends in annual numbers,
tropical storms, hurricanes, major hurricanes accounts that
have been identified over the last 100 years in the North
Atlantic basin. A couple other points that I think will be
relevant to some of the comments from my colleagues.
And the other is from the Climate Science Special Report
from the Fourth National Climate Assessment that says that the
IPCC AR5, the annual report, fifth annual report, did not
attribute changes in flooding to anthropomorphic influence, nor
report the technical changes in flooding, magnitude, duration,
or frequency. And would like unanimous consent to enter that
into the record.
And, with that, I yield back to the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. Huffman. And, Madam Chair, just for clarification, we
are entering the entire reports into the record, right, not
select schedules that may tell partial stories?
Mr. Palmer. I am entering the pages from the annual report.
If the gentleman would like to read the entire report.
Mr. Huffman. I would just suggest we enter the whole
report. I mean, I certainly wouldn't want any misleading
partial sections. I wouldn't want Bob Barr redacting it. I
would like to see the whole report.
Mr. Palmer. Well, you certainly have the--you can object to
unanimous consent, if you want to, or you can enter the entire
report on your behalf, but I am entering those.
Mr. Huffman. Either way. I will defer to my colleague,
whichever way he wants to go. If he would like to enter the
partial sections of the report, I would propose we additionally
enter the entire report.
Ms. Castor. So, without objection, we will accept Mr.
Palmer's unanimous consent request and recognize--we will go
ahead to Mr. Carter and then come back to Mr. Huffman.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Carter. Okay. Well, thank you.
And reclaiming my time. First of all, let me thank all of
you for being here. And I mean that sincerely. We appreciate
your interest in this. This is encouraging to have all of you
here and testifying on such an important subject. It is
important. Climate change is real. Our climate has been
changing since day one. And protecting our environment is real.
We understand that. And that is what we want to do here.
I am going to start with you, Ms. Cooper, and ask you, for
a number of reasons, not the least of which is because I have a
grandchild that lives right near Tulane, and I notice that is
where you went to school. So obviously, very important to me. I
just wanted to ask you: You are a recent college graduate, from
what I understand?
Ms. Cooper. Yes, sir, I am.
Mr. Carter. And you graduated from Tulane?
Ms. Cooper. Yes.
Mr. Carter. I am just interested in knowing what spurred
your interest in climate change? Was it your studies at the
university or was it the impact that, perhaps, the climate has
had in Louisiana? Or just what exactly was the impetus there?
Ms. Cooper. So I have always been very interested in the
outdoors. I grew up with two brothers, and our lives were
digging holes and mud fights. And that kind of was my
background. And then when Hurricane Katrina hit, I wasn't
entirely sure of what the implications were, because I was at
such a young age in just fourth or fifth grade. But just seeing
how that affected my community and members around me I think
has had a lasting impression on me far beyond that time when I
was that age.
And so when I went to Tulane University, I got invested in
the Tulane Green Club and I got invested in the local
nonprofit. And that really opened my eyes to the issues that we
were facing in just that one city. And I knew that if New
Orleans was having such strong implications of climate change,
how much more our coast and then how much more our Nation and
world aside from that.
Mr. Carter. Well, certainly, New Orleans is an interesting
situation. Thirty percent of all the wetlands combined with the
offshore production, energy production that they have. So I
think it is an interesting example, if you will, of what is
happening out there and what we could be doing and what we are
doing right, what we could do better.
I just wanted to ask you about some of the work the
governor's office has done to partner with the private sector
and the energy companies to help improve our climate. Are you
aware of anything like that?
Ms. Cooper. So a lot of our partnership, as I mentioned
before, a lot of our revenue comes from the offshore as well as
onshore drilling endeavors in Louisiana. And I see this as a
perfect partnership, because we cannot do the restoration at
the scale we do without this.
We have completed 111 projects already. We have 76 more on
the way on our coast. And this could not be possible without
utilizing the resources that are already there and knowing the
impact that it is having on our area.
Mr. Carter. Right. Okay. Well, thank you, Ms. Cooper.
And thank all of you again for being here and for your
input and for your participation. It is so encouraging to see
youth participating in the process. And I want you to know how
much we appreciate this.
And thank you, Madam Chair. And I yield back.
Ms. Castor. Thank you. I would like to recognize Mr.
Huffman for----
Mr. Huffman. Thanks, Madam Chair.
I would just like to request unanimous consent to enter
three reports in their entirety into the record. The first
would be the entire IPCC report, including its very explicit
conclusions about anthropomorphic climate change. The second
would be the recent National Climate Assessment, the Fourth
National Climate Assessment, including its conclusions, that by
the end of the century, we are likely to experience literally
hundreds of billions of dollars in economic damage per year if
we don't make major changes. And finally, a March 28, 2019,
report by the World Meteorological Organization, that also
makes clear the impacts of anthropomorphic climate change,
including the impacts of extreme weather.
Ms. Castor. Without objection, those are entered into the
record.
[The information follows:]
__________
ATTACHMENT: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
The report is retained in the committee files and available
at: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/
WG1AR5_all_final.pdf
ATTACHMENT: Fourth National Climate Assessment
The report is retained in the committee files and available
at: https://science2017.globalchange.gov/downloads/
CSSR2017_FullReport.pdf
ATTACHMENT: WMO Statement on the State of the Global Climate in 2018
The report is retained in the committee files and available
at: https://library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=5789
Ms. Castor. I would also like to note I did have an
opportunity to glance at Mr. Palmer's request here. And while
it talks about the trends in the number of tropical storms,
hurricanes, major hurricane counts, I can tell you, as a
Floridian that has lived through the past few years, that, yes,
the number may not be impacted, but the intensity, the size,
the amount of moisture in the atmosphere when you are talking
about flooding, those are at issue. And those are going to be
some of the issues that we address here going forward.
I want to thank you all for being here, for being the voice
of this generation. We hear you. It is now our obligation, our
moral responsibility to take action. That is the charge of this
select committee. From this point forward, we will be focused
on solutions. This will be a solutions-oriented committee. And
that includes a just transition, creating the--making sure we
are on track to create the clean energy jobs of the future.
We need everyone's help, all Americans, to develop the
patriotic solutions for this country, for our planet going
forward. So thank you all.
Mr. Ranking Member, did you have one?
Mr. Graves. I do.
Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent that we include for
the record a statement by Mr. Benji Backer, president of the
ACC, in the record hearing.
And just to ensure that nothing is left out in the lines of
Mr. Huffman's wishes, I want to ask if you could insert the
Encyclopedia Britannica, 2019 version, into the record as well.
So that is my last request.
[The information follows:]
Statement for the Record by Mr. Benji Backer, President, ACC,
Submitted by Ranking Member Garrett Graves
``To whom it may concern,
When you examine the issue of climate change in this country, we
are told that young liberals are invested and young conservatives don't
care. However, as a college student and lifelong conservative political
activist, I know firsthand this isn't true.
In 2017, alongside my Millennial peers, I founded the American
Conservation Coalition, an organization dedicated to conservative
environmental solutions, including climate change. In just over a year
since our founding, we've expanded to 120+ college campuses with
enthusiastic conservative leaders representing us on each respective
campus. Why have we succeeded? Because young conservatives are
concerned about climate change--and it's a priority for them. Young
conservatives feel left behind by the opposing party, as well as their
own, on the issue of climate. They care about it and want to see
solutions, but they first want the status quo to change. In fact, 59%
of Millennial conservatives believe climate change is having an effect
on the United States, according to last year's Pew poll. The percentage
has been rising each year, and over 90% of independents and liberals
see it as a problem as well. Additionally, recent polling shows that
66% of all conservatives believe in man-made climate change.
Young people, specifically young conservatives, are discouraged by
the partisan bickering that the climate movement has embraced.
Unnecessary partisan quarreling on climate change has alienated
important voices and prevented meaningful results. Whether it's the
Democratic Party proposing unrealistic resolutions such as the Green
New Deal and perpetuating false doomsday scenarios, or the Republican
Party's stagnant inaction and frequent use of climate denial language,
both political parties have failed us on climate change thus far. To
young people, the issue of climate change transcends party lines. Our
environment is not a partisan issue, and it shouldn't be treated as
such to promote political agendas. This is an issue that has massive
implications for our children's futures, as well as our own.
In terms of solutions, we urge Congress to explore policies that
mitigate climate change without an increase in taxes and big
government. Through a smart policy proposal that includes the right
incentives, public-private partnerships, an all-of-the-above energy
approach, and technological advancements, the United States can
continue to take the lead on climate change.
While other countries must act on climate change, and the United
States has taken many steps in the right direction, I join my young
conservative peers in calling for even greater action. We're tired of
big-government and anti-economic policies that consistently fail. We're
tired of the false alarmism and doomsday scenarios. We're also tired of
conservative inaction and denial. We're ready for climate change to be
a priority through bipartisan reforms that include important sources of
energy (including nuclear, natural gas, and hydropower), technological
advancements, smart market incentives, and corporate leadership. It's
time for a new wave of climate action in this country that acknowledges
and engages with a growing, improving economy to foster an improved
climate.''
Ms. Castor. Thank you.
Thank you all for joining our kickoff hearing for the
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. We will look forward to
seeing you at the next hearing.
The committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:52 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]
| MEMBERNAME | BIOGUIDEID | GPOID | CHAMBER | PARTY | ROLE | STATE | CONGRESS | AUTHORITYID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Castor, Kathy | C001066 | 7883 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | FL | 116 | 1839 |
| Lujan, Ben Ray | L000570 | 8058 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NM | 116 | 1939 |
| Griffith, H. Morgan | G000568 | 8200 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | VA | 116 | 2070 |
| Bonamici, Suzanne | B001278 | 8367 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | OR | 116 | 2092 |
| Huffman, Jared | H001068 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 116 | 2101 | |
| Palmer, Gary J. | P000609 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | AL | 116 | 2221 | |
| Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" | C001103 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | GA | 116 | 2236 | |
| Graves, Garret | G000577 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | LA | 116 | 2245 | |
| Levin, Mike | L000593 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 116 | 2383 | |
| Neguse, Joe | N000191 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CO | 116 | 2384 | |
| Casten, Sean | C001117 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | IL | 116 | 2398 | |
| Armstrong, Kelly | A000377 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | ND | 116 | 2417 | |
| Miller, Carol D. | M001205 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | WV | 116 | 2460 |
Disclaimer:
Please refer to the About page for more information.