Speeches By EPA Administrator
"Global Climate Change: Threats and Solutions" Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida09/18/1997
| Carol M. Browner, Administrator|
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Remarks Prepared for Delivery
"Global Climate Change: Threats and Solutions"
Florida State University
September 18, 1997
Thank you, President D'Allemberte, for that introduction. And thank you, Nick Iarossi,
for your warm welcome to FSU. I'm delighted to be here. And I'm grateful for this opportunity
to have this discussion on a topic of critical importance to the future of our country -- and to our
planet, as well.
It's appropriate that the venue for our meeting today is a class entitled "Introduction to
Atmosphere" -- appropriate because the issue of global climate change is one that challenges all of
us to learn more about our atmosphere, as well as how human activity is affecting it.
So I want to thank Nancy Dignon and her class for providing this forum, as well as Dr.
Peter Ray, the Chairman of the Meteorology Department, for helping make it possible for me to
be here with you today.
Four-and-a-half years ago, when President Clinton and I went to Washington, we called
on businesses, communities, and all levels of government to build a new generation of
environmental and public health protection -- one that builds on the successes of the past and
meet the challenges of the next century.
Today, we can look back on four-and-a-half years of progress in protecting public health
and the environment. Real people in real communities are reaping real, everyday benefits.
We're cleaning up more of the nation's hazardous waste dumps -- in fact, more in the last
four years than in the previous 12 years combined. And we're planning to clean up 500 more
over the next four years.
Across this country, we are helping cities begin the process of cleaning up and
redeveloping their abandoned industrial properties -- the brownfields -- which at the same time
helps to save the pristine, open spaces outside our cities.
Under the leadership of President Clinton and Vice President Gore, we have taken
measures to improve our air quality -- the strongest measures in two decades -- that will prevent
thousands of premature deaths each year, and improve health protections for people of all ages.
We have enacted new laws to protect our drinking water and our food from dangerous
We have expanded the public's "right-to-know" about toxic pollutants in their own
neighborhoods -- so they can take steps to protect themselves and their families, and so they can
take action to work with industries and reduce pollution in their communities. Indeed, this has
been one of our most effective tools in fighting pollution.
But, of course, the job is not done. We cannot rest. We still face tremendous
environmental and public health challenges.
This administration is determined to continue to meet these challenges head-on -- with
standards that are second to none, vigorous enforcement of those standards, by giving the
American people the tools to reduce pollution in their own communities.
But the new generation of environmental protection means something else, too.
It means what the President has said, on many occasions, and what has proven to be true:
that environmental protection and economic progress do go hand-in-hand. Over the past four-and-a-half years, we have proved that you can have strong environmental protection and still
have strong economic growth and prosperity. We do not have to choose between our health and
our jobs. In fact, the two are inextricably linked.
We believe in building upon this progress. We must bring to this challenge that which has
long made this country great -- our creativity, innovation, ingenuity. We must reward those
willing to do more than just an adequate job -- to go further, to push the envelope, and to create
new technologies and new ways to prevent pollution. We must seek to build the kinds of
partnerships -- between industries, governments and communities -- partnerships that get the job
The challenge of global warming will test this philosophy as never before.
The science on this phenomenon is compelling.
More than two-thousand of the world's foremost experts on the global environment have
come together to conduct a joint assessment on global warming. They are now telling us there is
ample evidence that, for the first time in history, pollution from human activities is changing the
Modern industrial activity -- particularly the burning of fossil fuels -- namely coal and
petroleum products -- is filling the atmosphere with carbon dioxide and other "greenhouse gases,"
which trap the Sun's heat in the atmosphere and cause the steady, gradual warming of the Earth's
The average surface temperature is now a full degree Fahrenheit higher than it was at the
beginning of this century -- and it may rise another two to six degrees over the next century.
That may not sound like much to many people. But here's what the scientific community
says it will mean over the course of the next century:
More frequent and more intense heat waves, causing thousands more heat-related deaths.
Severe droughts and floods will become more common. Tropical diseases like malaria will expand
their range. Agriculture will suffer. The oceans will rise, perhaps by several feet over the next
century -- swamping many coastal areas.
This will be our legacy to our children, if we do not look for some way to begin reducing
our emissions of greenhouse gases.
As the President has said, this is a great challenge for our democracy. We have the
evidence, we see the train coming, but most ordinary Americans, in their day-to-day lives, cannot
yet hear the whistle blowing. Unless they live in a place where they have experienced a couple of
hundred-year floods in the past decade, the consequences of global warming are not yet readily
apparent to them.
But, again, the scientific evidence shows that these consequences are on the way.
Do we know everything there is to know about global climate change? No.
Do we know exactly what will happen in the decades ahead? Of course not.
But we have enough to go on -- based on years of rigorous scientific analysis -- to know
that we must begin dealing with this problem. And we should act sooner, rather than later,
because -- scientists say -- of the substantial "lag time" involved. Global warming will continue
for many years after we begin reducing the emissions that are causing it. Even if we begin today,
you probably won't see the results of any progress we make today until your own kids are in
In December, the nations of the world will meet in Japan to seek a global agreement on
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases that cause climate change.
President Clinton is committed to securing realistic and binding agreements that ensure
that all countries -- both industrial and developing -- participate in this process and do their part to
address the challenge of global warming.
Although the U.S. now produces more than 20 percent of the world's greenhouse gases,
our share is expected to decline over the next couple of decades as nations like China and India
increase their level of industrialization -- and with it their emissions of climate-changing
So we cannot go this alone. Pollution does not know political boundaries. And the
challenge of global warming brings a whole new perspective to the notion that the nations of the
world "are all in this together."
But those who oppose action are on the march. Some industries are funding a massive
advertising campaign attempting to portray the fight against global warming as a loser for
America. They warn of dire consequences -- drastically higher fuel prices, economic catastrophe.
In the words of one campaign sponsor: "All pain and no gain."
They are wrong.
Addressing the challenge of global warming is not about ratcheting down our economy. It
is about investing in new technologies and using America's technological leadership to develop
new ways to make things, new ways to get where we want to go, to work and to play.
It's about economic growth. Those who are first in bringing pollution-reducing
technologies to market are going to be very well-positioned in the global economy of the 21st
Century. And American industries are leaders in developing these technologies.
Much of it has to do with getting more out of the energy we are currently using.
According to the National Academy of Sciences, we can cut global warming pollution by
one-fifth -- right now, at no cost -- simply by using technologies that are already on the market.
In fact, many of our industries can actually save money in the process.
For example, using available technologies, the typical manufacturing plant can cut its
pollution and energy use by 10 to 20 percent -- and recoup its investment in two years. After
that, the yearly cost savings are pure profit. That's an attractive deal, and many companies are
already taking advantage of it. We need to encourage more to do so.
When you reduce energy use -- when you use more efficient equipment and make better
use of electricity -- you reduce the need to burn fossil fuels -- the coal and petroleum -- that
contribute to global climate change. Every little bit helps, but we are finding opportunities for
Office buildings can cut their global warming pollution and their utility bills by 30 percent
or more -- and they can do it by investing in efficient lighting, office equipment, heating and
cooling systems, and building materials. These investments pay for themselves over two to four
Sometimes the energy savings come from obvious sources -- more efficient motor systems
in factory equipment, advanced turbine systems, computer workstations that use less electricity --
or capturing the enormous amounts of heat that is wasted during electricity generation and, rather
than throwing it away, using it to meet our heating and cooling needs. We can save billions of
gallons of oil.
Sometimes you can find a huge potential for energy savings -- and for pollution reduction
-- where you least expect them.
Exit signs, for example -- like the ones you see over the doors in the buildings right here
on campus. Did you know that, in this country, a billion dollars is spent each year on electricity to
operate exit signs?
Now they make LED signs that are every bit as effective, but use 75 percent less energy.
Think about it. Simply by focusing on one item -- exit signs -- you can save more than a thousand
dollars a year for a 100,000-square-foot building. And, by using less energy, you're helping
reduce the creation of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming.
So this is not a question of who is going to sacrifice and how much. Rather, it is about
investing in new technologies -- available technologies -- that make our industries more efficient,
more profitable -- and cleaner in the process.
And we need to provide incentives for industries to develop even better pollution-reducing
technologies. We've found that the best way to do this is through market-based strategies like
"emissions trading" -- where overall emissions are "capped" and pollution reductions are traded
on the open market. These market-based strategies allow industries to find the most flexible,
cost-effective ways to reduce their pollution. And they get government out of the business of
mandating particular technologies.
We are also looking to make great strides in efficiency and energy savings of the products
that many of us use every day in -- in our homes and on the road.
After you are graduated from this university -- and have a few years to earn enough
money to purchase a new car -- you'll likely be able to choose one that gets as much as three
times the gas mileage of today's vehicles -- without sacrificing safety, performance, size or
affordability. That's because government and the auto industry are working in partnership to
develop a new generation of automobiles.
Considering that today's typical car emits more than 10,000 pounds of carbon dioxide
each year, tripling the gas mileage is going to go a long way toward reducing greenhouse gases.
A new generation of consumer products is enabling homeowners to cut this pollution --
and their energy bills -- by 30 percent or more. I'm talking about energy-efficient lighting,
refrigerators, heating and cooling equipment, washing machines, and other appliances -- as well as
energy-efficient insulation, windows, and other building materials.
Now, how are you supposed to know which consumer products are making use of these
new technologies? How can businesses and public institutions make the most of their energy
EPA and other federal agencies are working with thousands of private sector partners to
bring these technologies into more widespread use.
You can look for our "Energy Star" label to find energy-efficient computers, copiers, and
other office equipment -- as household appliances. We believe that, over the next 15 years, these
more energy-efficient products have the potential to cut the nation's utility bills by $100 billion --
and, most importantly, to reduce global warming pollution by a huge amount.
Right here in Tallahassee, the city government is doing something to prevent emissions of
nearly 15 million pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year. How? By upgrading
the light bulbs on city property. And the taxpayers here will save some $325,000 in electricity
costs -- each year.
That's just one city. The state of Florida will be reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 800
million pounds a year -- and its annual utility costs by $17 million -- when it finishes its upgrading
the lighting at state facilities. Right here on this campus, Florida State University will be reducing
carbon emissions by 27 million pounds -- the equivalent of taking 2,700 cars off the road.
You get the picture. But this is just the tip of the iceberg. Over time, as we increase the
use of available technologies -- and as new technologies come on line -- this nation can make
tremendous strides toward a future where prosperity and economic growth can co-exist with a
cleaner, healthier environment.
As the great science writer, Arthur C. Clarke, once said: "Any sufficiently advanced
technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Well, now is the time to believe in magic -- and to believe in our own ingenuity.
But we're going to need more than magic to see us through.
Global warming is for real. We must squarely face its potential consequences.
I believe we can build a shared commitment and a consensus -- among the American
people, among industries, among the nations of the world -- to develop the kinds of strategies and
market-based approaches that will enable us to solve this enormous problem while enabling the
economy to grow.
We owe it to our children -- to all the children of the world -- and all of the generations to
come -- to give it our best effort.
One hundred years from now, let the people of the world look back and say: "They saw
the challenge. They answered the call. And they did not flinch the face of their responsibility to
build a better world for us."
Thank you. And now to your questions.