Senate Hearing: Power Plants & Global Warming

By June 28, 2007Energy, Global Warming

Interesting hearing going on at this moment at the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, “Examining Global Warming Issues in the Power Plant Sector.” (Live Internet broadcast here.) Testifying at the hearing are utility executives who see wisdom in regulating carbon dioxide emissions.

In his opening statement, Ranking Minority Member Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) disagrees with that approach, but offers a cooperative, productive discussion on the matter. And he states what should be obvious to all but the utopianists:

A key aspect of [Inhofe’s Clean Skies] legislation is something that too often gets sugar-coated in this debate – we cannot get ahead of the technology and we must not disrupt energy markets.

I also believe our nation needs more energy and more diverse energy. While we continue to move toward greater efficiency, we will continue to need more energy to supply our growing nation. We need more nuclear generation, more natural gas exploration, more coal and more hydro. We need clean coal and coal-to-liquids. And the legislation I have supported makes it clear that I back up my beliefs with action.

Next week: A hearing on global cooling? From Investor’s Business Daily:

Chicken Little may have to be measured for a winter coat, if the observations of R. Timothy Patterson, professor of geology and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Centre of Canada’s Carleton University, are accurate. Writing in Toronto’s National Post, Patterson reported on his research that involved analysis of core samples of more than 5,000 years of mud recovered from the bottom of Western Canada’s fjords.

In summary, his research showed “a direct correlation between variations in the brightness of the sun and earthly climate indicators (called proxies).” Patterson notes that hundreds of other studies using proxies from tree rings in Russia’s Kola Peninsula to water levels of the Nile show exactly the same thing.

UPDATE 11 a.m.: CSPAN-3 is carrying the hearing, available online.

Join the discussion 3 Comments

  • Tom Harris says:

    Thanks for highlighting the article of our Science Advisory Committee member, Professor Patterson. His whole piece can be seen as the June 20 upload on our news page at


    Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (thermofluids)
    Executive Director
    Natural Resources Stewardship Project
    P.O. Box 23013
    Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2


  • Shepherd says:

    Those with a conflict of interest might consider taking stock of their own persisting claims of calamity. How often have we heard that responding to global warming will wreck havoc upon industry, cause job losses, or lead to an economic collapse.

    As the successful defense of an evidence-derived basis for statements supporting claims that humans are having an impact on the climate which will result in some negative results, I can’t help notice those refusing to budge have little evidence to support why.

  • aydede says:

    man made global warming is the greatest lie of the century!!!!!

Leave a Reply