Skip to playerSkip to main content
  • 2 years ago
At a House Science Committee hearing on California's CARB train emissions reductions rule on Thursday, Rep. Rich McCormick (R-GA) grilled Alan Abbs, Legislative Officer of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, about climate.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript


Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Transcript
00:00Mr. McCormick, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
00:02Mr. McCormick. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
00:03Mr. Abt, you just brought up an interesting point about the
00:05ocean rising. How much has it risen in the last 50 years?
00:07Mr. Abt. I will have to get back with you on that,
00:12Congressman.
00:13Mr. McCormick. Not a significant amount. Obviously, 50
00:15years. Since 1970, what is the carbon emissions, the carbon
00:20content of the atmosphere? Is it greater or less than what it
00:22was in 1970?
00:23Mr. Abt. Could you repeat that question again?
00:27Mr. McCormick. The carbon content, the carbon dioxide
00:28levels in the entire earth atmosphere, was it greater or
00:31less than it was in 1970?
00:32Mr. Abt. I would say greater.
00:34Mr. McCormick. Do you care to state that, bet money on
00:38that?
00:39Mr. Abt. I will let you answer the question, either that I am
00:43right or wrong.
00:44Mr. McCormick. Okay. What percentage of the atmosphere is
00:48made up of carbon dioxide, percentage of the atmosphere?
00:50Mr. Abt. It is a little over 400 parts per billion.
00:53Mr. McCormick. So 0.04 percent, right? Of that, how much comes
00:57from human beings?
00:58Mr. Abt. About 11 percent.
01:01Mr. McCormick. About how much comes from the United States?
01:03Mr. Abt. 14 percent.
01:05Mr. McCormick. Of that, how much comes from trains in the
01:08United States?
01:09Mr. Abt. 0.5 percent. So we are talking about eliminating
01:130.000003 percent of the earth's atmosphere carbon dioxide.
01:21That is what we are talking about. Is that a negligible
01:25effect when it is compared to nitrogen, 71 percent?
01:28Yes. Thank you. So I love science. I love science. Let's
01:32talk about science, no, not as a religion, but as science,
01:36because that is what this is about. And how much heat is
01:39produced when we have to produce massive amounts of
01:41electricity? That is what this is about. Do we want to
01:46hamstring ourselves by spending trillions of dollars based on
01:49some California code of a religion of carbon dioxide?
01:54Georgia's ports, along with the intertwined railroads and
01:57highways, and I would say Georgia is famous for its
02:00railways for a long time now, are the epicenter of both
02:03Georgia and the southwest U.S. economy. Ironically, Georgia
02:06typically benefits from California's outrageous regulations
02:11because we get a lot of business that move to our State
02:13because of it. However, California's Air Resource Board's
02:18CARB latest rule to make freight rail zero emissions
02:21jeopardizes the interconnected freight rail network.
02:25Meanwhile, the EPA's own study stated that freight railroads
02:29contribute to, what did I say, 0.5 percent, 0.5 percent of
02:33the total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. I already talked
02:35about the negligible effect we began with. As a matter of
02:39fact, if you eliminate all the cars' emissions in the United
02:42States, 0.000167 percent, in case you are wondering, is how
02:47much of the atmosphere we are talking about. Negligible.
02:50Guys, that's science. If California were to receive this
02:53waiver from the EPA for the proposed rule, it would allow
02:57California to dictate the emissions policy for the entire
02:59country at devastating economic impact. What could we spend
03:04that money on? If you want to have a scientific discussion
03:06about how we save the Earth, don't start with that. Because,
03:09by the way, based on a Senate scientific study, Pluto, Mars,
03:14Jupiter are all heating too. Is it because of their carbon
03:18emissions? Of course not. Let's have a real scientific
03:21discussion about climate change. This is what is driving me
03:27crazy, guys. When we have these conversations, Mr. Jeffries,
03:30can you further explain how a California decision would
03:32impact railroads, the supply chain and military bases in
03:35Georgia?
03:36Mr. Jeffries. Well, because we operate a nationwide
03:39interconnected network, whatever happens in California,
03:42whatever regulations in California are effectively national
03:44regulations because 70 percent of our locomotives move in and
03:47out of the State of California. And I should just point out
03:50that maybe most folks on this committee may not be aware, but
03:53we are self-funded. We fund all of our own infrastructure, all
03:57of our own investments to the tune of about $21 billion a year.
04:00This is not coming from the Federal Government. These are
04:03business decisions that we are making. And so it has
04:06to come back from the Federal Government.
04:07Mr. Laird. Unfunded mandates, right?
04:08Mr. Jeffries. Absolutely.
04:09Mr. Laird. Love it when the government does that.
04:10Mr. Baker, in your testimony you mentioned that the
04:12California Air Resource Board acknowledged that their rule
04:15would potentially bankrupt the short-line industry and stated
04:19that it is possible some of these businesses would be
04:21eliminated if they fail to comply. California sees the
04:25elimination of critical player in the supply chain as a cost
04:29of doing business. It's crazy. The Georgia Northeast Railroad
04:34is a Class III short line that runs through my district. Can
04:37you speak to the unique nature of the short-line business
04:40practices and why meeting California's mandate by 2035 is
04:44not feasible?
04:45Mr. Laird. Yes, sir. The Georgia Northeastern Railroad is a
04:48great example of a typical short line, but they are
04:51maintaining lines in small towns in rural America that are
04:56marginal, frankly, that otherwise are at risk of not
04:59existing. And to do that, they have to run efficiently, smart,
05:04and clean. And so they do everything they can to get
05:07cleaner, including upgraded cleaner locomotives when they
05:10can, but they just can't afford this mandate. It would force
05:14many of them out of business in California and if it went
05:18national in Georgia, too.
05:19So with that, I'm going to rest my case that this is not
05:22based on science. It's based on California's religion that
05:26doesn't have any effect on the outcome of the atmosphere, that
05:30there is global climate change, but it's not due to trains. We
05:34don't need to spend we don't need to put businesses out of
05:38order and change everything based on California's idea that
05:41they're going to fix the world with electronic trains. I'm
05:44sorry. With that, I yield.
05:46Gentleman yields back. We'll go next to the gentlewoman from
05:48New York, Congresswoman Tenney.
Comments

Recommended