Skip to main content

tv   Climate Environmental Research Program Cuts  CSPAN  March 16, 2018 2:00pm-3:12pm EDT

2:00 pm
when they were prescribing them like candy for children, and these medications are not for children and psychiatrists say they can't diagnose the mental disorders until they are adults, so why are they prescribing them no the children. and if they would look at them more carefully and the school shootings would drop dramatically. i feel that they have trouble, and they go to the psychiatrists for bullying and then they are prescribed the drugs, and then we have a school shooting. what you say? >> and so we have a task force led by secretary of education betsy devoeshgs and one of the things that the task force could look at is the types of drugs that the callers are talking about on the task force and the task force could look at many things, including the impact of violent video games and other
2:01 pm
thi things that they feel might impact the school shootings -- climate and environmental research, and the question is why do we care about this. the significance of this is that the report done by the nov isim group is helping to bring into the all of us extremely important information about the proposed budget cuts that were proposed last year with the fiscal 2018. those same budget cuts which can be proposed for budget for fiscal 2019 are continuing. there is a significant large discussion among policy makers about what should the budget look like, why, what is important. and i think that it is very incumbent upon all of us to really look carefully at this important report. so that we can better fully understand what really is at stake. why do we care about the
2:02 pm
environmental climate science, and why do we care about the facts straight, and what are the fa fact, and what kind of impacts does this have upon all of us upon our lives today, and upon the agencies of the impacts and their constituencies and the users of the data and the scientific research and indeed the impacts that we see up on what goes forward in terms of all of those students who are training in today's colleges and universities in terms of the importance of the continuum of research which has extraordinary impacts upon all of us. and i should also say that the environmental and energy study institute is particularly concerned because as we do all of the briefings for policy makers, we always remember that this organization was formed back in the mid-'80s by a
2:03 pm
bipartisan qaa u kus, and those concerned about the energy and the environmental issues, and how we could learn more to create a better informed policy discussion, and how we could build relationships and networks across all sectors in the pursuit of finding solutions to very important energy and environmental problems that we are confronting our country, but it also means issue s ths that confront the world, because we are all very interconnected. one of the things that i found in terms of looking at the report and as you will see in terms of looking at even the outline of these table the of contents in this report are all of the agencies that are affected. what is critical is that we cannot approach anything in terms of a silo. it is very important to understand the important role
2:04 pm
that each of these 13 agencies are specifically looking at, the role they play and how incumbent it is upon those employees and all tof the research and the r& that they fund that the interrelationships that they have, and the interconnectedness of all of this be understood, and that it indeed be seen as the very complimentary work that it indeed is if we are going to get science right, and if we are going to get our facts right, and if we are really going to make the kind of difference that we need to make. so i am first going to turn to dr. ari petrinas and director of research of the novim group. the novim group is the group who put together this important
2:05 pm
study. and the novim group in terms of putting together the report, drew upon the expertise of scientists of researchers who had worked in both republican and democratic administrations, so there is first rate work that has been done as well as work by people who have beeen leaders i the high level and in very across the board research in the federal government. the novim group is a nonprofit scientific research organization that has been deeply committed to its role as an independent nonadvocacy source of data to provide clear ooptions to the most urgent options facing humanity. dr. petrinos as i said is the chief scientist for novim and prior to, prior to going to novim, he had spent 20 years in
2:06 pm
the government at the department of energy where he directed biological and environmental research at d.o.e. including important contributions to the u.s. global change research program, and the human genome project, and he has been on the staff that has worked with three of our very well known important national laboratories. during 2016, he was also a se senior adviser to then secretary of energy henry moniz where he worked on the directives of the d.o.e. with the national institutes of cancer and the department of veterans administration. ari. >> thank you, carol.
2:07 pm
good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for braving this arctic weather to be with us the today. and by the way, maybe i should not say that, because the arctic is probably enjoying much milder temperatures than we have been. special thanks to the environmental and energy study institute, and to henry la port for helping us put this the together. as you is heard from carol, i'm the chief scientist at the novim group and director of research at novim. we at novim, we have been around since 2008, and as carol has told you, we are not for profit group which we try to the also not advocate, although, sometimes the passions get away from us, and we do advocate, and maybe sometimes advocacy is not a bad thing. we won duct and publish studies
2:08 pm
that are science-based, but also are important both nationally and internationally. kr created in 2008, it is based at the institute for forensics at the university of california at santa barbara. there is a slide, the one slide that we have which is another way of describing it. it is to have as the charter of using in the assembly of science to break down complex scientific issues in such a way as to render them comprehensible to nonscientists. we want to the say that i don't know how many of you are familiar with the chasen group with which is a group of academics, and other scientists that convene once a year in san
2:09 pm
diego. and they have conducted over to the years many studies on behalf of the department of defense, and the intelligence community and since i became involved for the de the department of energy. it was originally primarily just physicists and engineers and mathematicians, and perhaps with my help, it has also trained biologists, and environmental scientists, and one of the members of the advisory committee that we have has called the nshovim efforts as jason for the masses. i have been participated as a a scientist for the group since 2009 when we launched one of the studies that was in geoengineering for climate change mitigation. this is one of the first efforts
2:10 pm
along those lines, and it focused primarily on the use of omitting aerosols in the atmosphere to change the labido of the earth. and we have had those engineering uses as nonintended consequences which is also been something of importance and since that time, there have been many studies by the national akd of science, and we don't advocate that we are engineering something that we should not be doing, but it is important the do the research in case somebody else does it so that we are aware of the possible consequences of such an action that i would, that i would do all of this at least at this stage stage. >> and another study that was conduct conducted is dealing with methane leakages in the u.s., and which is something that became quite appropriate and relevant in the couple of years
2:11 pm
in the obama administration when we had a serious methane leakage problem in southern california. another one of the studies that received a lot of attention and had significant impact was one about the earth surface temperature trends that was something contested during the debates about climate change, and, in fact, that particular study ended up pretty much validating the scientific consensus about the climate change on the average global surface temperatures. there were actual congressional hearings along those line, and some of the scientists involved in that study testified. something else along those usual lines that novim has done in the past is that a development of a
2:12 pm
software package to probe employee pension scenarios, and this is an acute problem that many of the cities in our country are facing. it is a software package to allow the policy makers, the the meyers and the staff to imagine po possible scenarios to deal with the problem of the pension. we open to make that available this year for broad dissemination and application. ongoing, another effort is the intergovernmental panel of climate change education on climate issues. that is done in cooperation and in collaboration with the national geographic. also currently is the awards of the jane noble awards for science writing to gain
2:13 pm
scientific awards of the policy makers for the general public. since i became chief scientist with the help of the advisory committee that we set up, the first study that we launched is the one about the future of luke near energy in this country. we called it american nuclear energy at the krozroads because we are truly with respect to nuclear energy at the crossroads and we can go left and totally abandon nuclear energy or we can perh perhaps be more sensible, and not do that, and many of the reasons why we think that should be that way in terms of going right is very much articulated and included in the report that we published that is available online at the novim website. the last u study that -- the
2:14 pm
last study that we did is a study that is on the agenda today. and i'm very, very pleased to have kaye be the presenter. as you have heard from carol, we were very successful in convening a group of individuals who had really deep and extensive knowledge of the issues presented in this report. it is something that you have sum mized that is already near and dear to my heart as a founder of the global exchange research program, and public law 101-606 that i had in 1990. and we will be available for questions afterwards. and when we do studies of this
2:15 pm
kind, our plan is to not employ advocacy, and so we like to do this particular analysis in a very dispassionate way. so that it can be used by policy maker in terms of making decisions about the future of many of these important programs that have been in effect for many years and have made major contributions to the our understanding about environmental and climate issues. so, carol. >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much for the opening comments and to explain about the wealth of information and studies that are available through nov ishim and through t website and all of the research that has been pulled together. i now want to turn to our next presenter who has made major contribution to this whole
2:16 pm
report, and he brings a wealth of experience. he is current security adviser for the administration of science at to a aaas. and kai had joined the white house agency back in 2009 where he was the assistant director for federal research and development as part of the technology and industry council, and which is an important council of the otp, the office of science and technology policy. that white house office was deeply involved in terms of working with people across all of the agencies, in terms of trying to coordinate, understand
2:17 pm
and research and scientific needs and technology needs and to really look at things in a holistic fashion. in addition, before joining, oe stp in 2009, kai had served as director of the budget of policy coordination at the aaas. and so he brings a deep wealth of knowledge understanding budgets and the impact upon policy, and what that means for the kinds of the analysis that needs to be done in terms of putting together budgets and also looking at their impacts and following all of that through. so, we will now really have kai walk us through the report, and what the key findings are, and what the implications of those, and following the presentation
2:18 pm
of this study, and we will open it up for your questions. thank you. kai. >> thank you. hello. there we are. good. we are here today thanks to novim and esi to be here today, because of the president's 1828 and 1829 budgets for the climate and the reer search development programs. congress is still deliberating, and maybe as we speak on 2018 appropriations, and this is one reason that we are here in washington, d.c., today to talk about the report. we are all here because of the 2019 budget proposal which was released a few weeks ago follows a remarkably similar course of environmental r&d as set forth in the 2018 proposal and so this report is relevant for both 2018
2:19 pm
funding, and 2019 funding. so, i am kai cuzumi and part of the bipartisan team that authored the report. i am here, because i am a long time budget watcher for science funding at aaas and also oeps, and i'm involved in this report in my personal capacity and not with my association with the triple as. so this report is -- that is what i picked up from the government. so this is to inform the policy hold holders and the scientific community and the general public about the risks of the economic, and societal and environmental security and leadership if the environment and cuts are in the proposed budget to become a
2:20 pm
reality. so this novim report which you have a hard copy of, i hope, it finds that federally sponsored climate environment for r&d or for short cerd, and the r&d policy and operational programs that we have gathered together in this report are critical to the climate observations, and critical to the international programs supporting climate and environment efforts globally. these programs total $7.9 billion in the administration's 2018 budget. that is a 2.0 billion or 21% cut from the fiscal year 2017 funding level. needless to say, that is a dramatic cut in budgetary terms. we found that cerd described spans 13 departments and agents and all but two, the department of defense and the smithsonian
2:21 pm
would see dramatic cuts of the cerd funding in the 2018 budget. we have not formally done the analysis on the 2019 budget, but the 2019 budget would have a higher total, but it is still likely to be a dramatic cut of greater than 10% to these programs. so my colleagues and i participated in the project, because we care deeply about the cerd investments and the the benefits they bring the american people. some of us have been working on the programs and working with these programs for a long time and in some cases decades. climate and environment research and development play an important role in our ability to address the problems we face as a nation, and remain a vibrant nation in the 21st century, and through the investments, research, modeling, assessments, workforce development and working effectively with other nations. so those are the themes that we
2:22 pm
tried to lay out in this report. so i presented the budget table. the budget table are the numbers and the kinds of the numbers that i am used to presenting, but most of what i am talking about to dday is not about the numbers. it is about the impact of those investments, and what they mean for the nation. so the u.s. government's investments in cerd play an important role in the nation's ability to address many problems, including reliable economic access to save water, food and energy, and resiliency to natural human hazards that threat threaten our health and national security and avoiding negative impacts on the environment while maintaining a vibrant economy. funding cuts of the magnitude propose proposed in the 2018 and 2019 budgets would threaten our ability to meet these challenges. the proposed cuts to federal cerd would if they become law in 2018 appropriations have d
2:23 pm
devastating impacts on the u.s. capabilities and the same is true for the 2019 budget cuts becoming law in 2019 appropriations. so the report finds that the proposed cuts would, number one, dismantle the programs for the scientific foundation for the agency to protect the health and the economic health and prosperity and safety of the american people. two, they would break the continuity and integrity of the longstanding and the future observations, and the research inf infrastructure needed for climate environmental modeling. three, undermine the ability to detect and understand critical climate and environmental trends and influences on the natural resources. four, they would reduce our ability to train the next generation of scientists, resource managers and the decision makers who can work together to translate science into effective climate and environmental policies and
2:24 pm
approaches. and five, they would diminish the nation's ability to meet international climate commitments. these are the five things that i have laid out map on to the five themes of the report that you have in your hands. and the report makes clear the impacts of the american society. my colleagues and i have looked at the 21% cut of the cerd into the five themes, and we have labeled them as investment and capacity. observations and modeling. adaptation, assessments, workforce and irrational commitment. we start with investment capacity. first, the proposed cuts represent a dramatic loss of the investment required for adequate r&d. the scientific foundation for
2:25 pm
the prosperity and safety of americans, but the cuts being proposed would result in the significant reduction of the number of contracts that can be in the intramural and the extra mural operations of the federal government. for example, reductions in the nsf budget will result in approximately 800 million requiring a cut of the researcher fleet without further investment. and as outlined in the report, it would eliminate the epa for all disciplines and not just the cerd discipline, and third the
2:26 pm
nih reduction would reduce the national institute of environmental sciences for nihs awards to universities by 20%, and reduce the average size of the new nihes award by 90%, and reduce all of the successful awards by 18% to 14%, and then reduce intramural or the nih-conducted ehs research by at least 20%. these cuts along with steep cuts to noaa would cut the impacts and ability to the research including research of hazardous contaminant contaminants. if sustained, this is going to result in the loss of new knowledge and the closure of academic, and education al
2:27 pm
center, and the training of environmental sciences. and secondly, we are in danger of losing the climate and environmental observations, and modeling, and we are in danger of breaking the continuity of longstanding and few u chur observations, and the research infrastructure needed to enable climate and hall mark modeling. these observations are dependent on a variety of research and network facilities including the satellites and the ocean buoys and the long term research and the stream gauge water m monitoring and the marine laboratories and the field stations. most of these networks and facilities are being stressed significantly by the 2018 budget proposals, and they are repeated in the 2019 budget. for example, four key nasa
2:28 pm
environmental satellite emiss n emissioemissio emission -- satellite missions would be disabled. these are important for long term observations of the land surfaces, biosphere and oceans and these are needed for us to understand what is happening to the planet. for noaa the 2018 budget terminates several of the marine observations including a mid range warnings that we need to know what is happening now on the planet. the energy cuts range from 58% to complete program termination and slow progress r towards using computers for models with
2:29 pm
greater certainty of pred predictions, and greater prediction capabilities at reasonable scales, and that is precisely for the informing of adaptations and strategies at the state and local level and funding for most of the department of energy's office of science is restored in the 2019 budget, the cuts to these programs are repeated in the 2019 budget. so let me talk about adaptation and assessments. in adaptation and assessments these proposed cuts threaten to undermine our ability to detect and understand critical climate and environmental trends and influences on natural resources. the loss of the critical measures will limit the ability of governments and businesses and citizens to improve their decision-making processes for the short and long term environmental issues. these types of global data are critical for addressing the
2:30 pm
societal challenges in food, water and energy security. they inform decisions on how best to mitigate and adapt to the environmental change for the general well-being of society. for example, noaa provides the competitive funding to assist the commune u tis in the efforts to strengthen the resilience in the face of severe weather and other environmental changes. many of the efforts will be weakened by the 2018 and 2019 budget proposals. second, energy and water are interdependent, and the energy use is water dependent and water treatment facilities would integrate a system of the water nexus without proper understanding of decision making for a broad range are of users and multiple scales. in the 2018 budget, we will not
2:31 pm
be able to have the water nexus, and put on the path of the termination by the end of the fiscal year that. would reduce increased demands for food, energy and water. third, the information modeling and tools that are produced by the u.s. geological survey are used by the government and the private sector to support adaptive measurement strategies such as managing forests in severe droughts, and anticipating permafrost and glacier changing patterns in the arctic and understanding the flood-related risks. the cuts to the usgs programs will impact our ability to respond opo the changing environment, and including extreme weather events. and usgs is one of the exampls s of the 2019 budget proposed steeper cuts than those in the 2018 budget.
2:32 pm
so fourth, the workforce. these cuts are going to threaten our ability to train the next generation of scientists, and resource managers and decision makers to translate science into effective climate policies and approaches. federal research funding fuels our ability to conduct important res research, but also to educate and train the next generation of scientists and engineers. reduced academic research funding is going to have a short term project impact, and longer term impact on the technical workforce. students' decisions to follow a career path are impacted by the perceptions of the future funding and support of the field or industry. if proposed reductions of the climate industries are founded, fewer will have the opportunity to gain hand's on research information for desired careers.
2:33 pm
and cuts to the cerd will cut up to 25 people including senior scientists and post doctoral scientist, and students and research technicians. although the cuts are less severe in 2019 budget, they are still projections of the fewer people being supported by the nsf in the 2019 budget, and these workforce cuts could happen as some of the greatest economic competitors of the united states are moving ing a gres zifly into the the green economy, and for example, and so the way to play strategies to take over renewable energy, and clean energy, and now to the fifth item. it is the 2018, and 2019 budg budgets.
2:34 pm
in relation to the programs,b and the cuts that you will see on the table that you can find them in any proposed cut. a -- [ inaudible ] >> a second, the key impact is
2:35 pm
with the united states and other nations on the climate observation systems, and the sharing of data sharing from the satellite missions around and the ability to monitor key measurements of the environmental agreements. enforcing and monitoring the compliance with these international agreements often depend on the satellite data such as the satellite data provided by the nasa satellites, and third, the epa has a range of cerd international agreements that are targeted for the reductions or for the termination. and the propose d 2018 budget would as a start reduce the support for clean air allowance trading program, and second, all but eliminate the greenhouse gas reporting program, and third, diminish the capacity to prepare for the inventory of the gas emissions and zinc. and four, several environmental
2:36 pm
partnership program, and eliminate the multi lat reral protocol for the ozone. are let me add that the funding reductions would add this for the u.s. global change program. and this is going to hinder the nation's ability to contribute to international negotiations regarding climate change and necessary and appropriate adaptation measures to be undertaken and these arm so of the important capabilities at stake as congress and the american people and the ex executive branch debate final 2018 funding for the u.s. government before moving on the 2019 funding. as we have talked today, somewhere in this building or across the street, we know that congress is trying to wrap up the 2018 appropriations. we know that congress so far has signalled a reluctance to go
2:37 pm
along with many of the proposed c cuts as it is trying to final idz the 2018 draft appropriation, and the the draft appropriations have for the house and the senate rejected the proposed cuts. in the report, we expressed concern that as congress looks to wrap up the 2018 appropriations, some of the proposed cuts could be sustained. the report also warns that the administration's 2019 budget contains many of the same cuts as those proposed for 2018. therefore, the significant reductions to the cnrd cuts, and i hope it is next week in the omnibus appropriations bill, and so my colleagues and i intend to keep following this important portfolio program as we move from budget year to budget year. so thank you for listening
2:38 pm
today. this report is going out to the decision makers, and the environmental community and the congressional staff and anybody who will listen so they can understand what is at stake from the decisions that congress is making, and i believe they are make it this week with 2018 funding of climate and environment r&d, and also what is at stake with the decisions that congress and administration will make from 2018 and years to come. these are the warning signs. at stake, we see it nothing more than american economic, societal, and economnvironmenta leadership, because we need these studies for our understanding the environment. and thank you for listening to the report. aim happe i am very happy to take questions on behalf of the authored team. thank you. >> thank you. thank you so much for walking us
2:39 pm
through and explaining the conclusions and those extremely important messages. i know that i encourage you to let so many know about this important report and that you need to make sure to read it yourself, but so many times, i -- u i think that about the projected cuts, and if a program disappears or the area of research disappears, you can't just put it back, all that easily two years late ore whateve -- later, because you have interrupted something important and you can't do that, and now that he from talking to people to listening to people over the last 25 years in terms of thinking about what happens to budgets in policy and research. a couple of other things as you
2:40 pm
were talking about the important budgets and in terms of thinking about nasa and noaa and the national geological survey, tan the department of energy, et cetera, that we have seen so many times that as we are seeing with more and more extreme weather events, we are hearing from the low are cal and the state government officials, and we are hearing from them particularly through a whole series of resilience reforms that we are putting together from eei that we are trying to hear from them how important the tools are that are coming from the very agencies and the 13 agencies that are part of the change global research program, and that they have frankly depend upon so much of the day a ta and access to are researchers
2:41 pm
in order to do their own planning locally in terms of thinking about flood zones, and thinking about how to do adaptation planning, what kinds of warnings for their citizen, et cetera. so that has made a profound impact in terms of my hearing directly from people. and so i could be hearing that for all of us to remember that the accountability government office, the g ags ao has been for several years putting the climate at very high on the risk fashi factors in terms of its federal facili facilities and the need to address those issues posed by climate change and how we deal with it, because it does have a
2:42 pm
big impact upon the infrastructure at the federal level in terms of what we are seeing as well as at the state and the local level. in fact, we hope to bring in people with to know about this threat to the infrastructure as well. now, open it up for any questions or comments that you may have, and if you could wait for the microphone if you have a a question. okay. we will start here. >> i'm elizabeth gallon, and i writet for the american energy resources, and i wanted to know if you could talk about when i int interview the people at the federal government, it is a call org a species of person who goes the work there, and when the signals are being sent that we don't have timer or money for
2:43 pm
you, what are the options for aspiring scientists, and where else do they go? do they go overseas at academia r or could i talk about that? >> well, happy to. that gives me the chance to talk about one part of the program that we tried to look at and impacts, and we go to organizations like the american geosciences institute which has does work for the surveys, and they are predicting a shortage of 135,000 geoscientists by 2022. the geoscientists that may go missing are exploration geofizz is cysts, and petroleum geologists, and geologists, and most of the professionals are work manage the priva-- are wor for the private companies such as the oil companies or the
2:44 pm
state agencies, et cetera, but we find that many of them get the training through our public and private universities through graduate programs that are substantially funded by the reree srer research agencies that i am talking about. most of them have gone through gr graduate school because of a fellowship paid for by the national science institute or funded by a professor who is funded by the geological agency or doing the post-docs at the environmental protection agency, et cetera, and this is why, even for scientists who will go on to careers in private industry that federal investment is so crucial for make g shing sure that they the opportunity the to contribute either in the private or the public sector. >> did you want to add anything, ar
2:45 pm
ari? >> my first question would have been what to do despite what gao or in addition to what gao is suggesting. at least until laster year, the department of defense was stressing the importance of the potential of climate change and i don't know if that is changing -- >> they are. that still are. >> i didn't know if it had changed, but with regard to the last question, it would be interesting to quantify the workforce that is not professional or well educated and one of the reasons that the extent to which it has been success successful in my local jurisdiction advocating for the state legislation is that there are potential jobs for people who want to be graduate students, and refine the knowledge gained in, into public universities and if you could speak to that, and it would be interesting. >> well, there is that, and
2:46 pm
first of all the what to do. that is up to you and to all of us, and in terms of the broader workforce, that is a drek sthaun we could have taken and well, for a couple of reasons that we didn't, but you are right, as many of the industries that depend on this federally supported cerd enterprise are the employee of a vast number of people. and extending the geologist example and the oil companies, and the fracking technologies that make possible many skill canned and unskilled jobs have at their base federal investments in these types of programs and understanding the geology, and understanding the impact of water on rocks. simple as that. but out of that comes a basis, and one of the few areas in
2:47 pm
which u.s. industry has made great strides, and has really moved the needle on the composition of the energy sources, and with that of course comes thousands of jobs and both for the geologists i talked about earlier, and also, oil rig workers, and the people who work in the field of fracking sites. that is a example of the broader impact of the climate and the environment environmental research and programs. >> and beyond -- >> and just a scientific engineer that we had in this report. >> i am michael from the research futures, and so the tendency is to look at the biological and geological sciences, but i am interested in the research and investment of
2:48 pm
economic sciences, and where the investment of the r&d that is carried out by the universities and the think tanks and can you talk about the social sciences impact of these cuts if you can aggregate that a little bit. >> thank you as a social scientist, i will enjoy this question. thank you for the opportunity. and you are right that, you know, the social and the behavioral and the economic sciences are an important part of this conversation. they are not well captured in the purview of this report, but certainly, these investments in the cerd are supported and complimented by a number of agen agencies in the social sciences. of course, at the department of interior, and the department of interior as of a few years ago were making investments in decision science and creating a new occupational category of the decisional sciences, and one of
2:49 pm
the things that i was working on at ostp is expanding the availability of decision science and other social science talent to aid, you know, the physical and the natural science age agencies, because they are important. because, all of these r&d insights that are gained from the investments that we are talking about in the report have an audience. and a lot of the audience is decisionmaking by these federal agencies, and there is a emerging science around how you can best incorporate scientific information into making decisions that natural resources agencies have to make as a matter of course. every week, there is some decision to be made about listing or de-listing endangered species or, you know, allow iin or not allowing logging or natural resource extraction in the certain part of the public land.
2:50 pm
and so, the agencies are finding the value of e integras integra sciences and the natural sciences, physical science space of that is being endangered by the report and although i am not -- we haven't done an analysis of the social science consequence of that, i'm a little bit afraid to. maybe that's the next project. >> all right. >> as one of the funders of the u.s. grade research program i have to do a mea culpa. i and many of my colleagues in the early days of the program were almost entirely focused on the physical and chemical asp s aspects of climate change and through the last 20 years plus we've been humbled by our real yagz that we were quite wrong, very wrong, in fact, that we
2:51 pm
neglected it, and i think in the more recent years we have made efforts to make up for the mistakes we made in the early part, and things like the program within the department of energy that deals with integrated assessments, perhaps, was one example where we tried to make amends in some way. it's still, in my opinion, not enough. it's certainly one area of science that gets neglected. it's not just in the environmental and climate program, but it's also in biology and medicine, quite frankly, and i think we need to be more sensitive about the need to invest in the social sciences for many of these programs. thank you for asking it. okay. >> i'm just troubled by what
2:52 pm
seem to be some contradictions. you've written this context of energy and you support fossil fuels when you say fracing is an ind kae indication of tech nol oj gnolo nuclear energy, jacques cousteau has put together a compelling data, compelling the amount of sun and how much energy you would derive from it versus what a nuclear energy would be able to provide in addition to the enormous cost of a nuclear plant, and the radiation that is
2:53 pm
emitted 24/7 in addition to the spent fuels, and your report, which i look forward to reading, has additional or at least a greater emphasis on renewables. can you maybe elaborate on that, please? >> well, what can i say? let me know what you think about the report. ior your comments, thank you for your comments. next question. >> let me add a little bit. the issue of fracing is something that's happening as we speak and whether we take a position on this, we may have very little influence on whether fracing continues or not, but kay has described that we need that ability and we need to have the skience and the research in order to ascertain whether there
2:54 pm
is damage as you've described. so it's not like we are endorsing or advocating, we are rather neutral. we want to make sure the scientific tools are there so that we know whether there is long term or short-term damage, and with respect to the nuclear energy question that you raise, read our report because, yes, you make some good points about that, but there are also other issues that may not be at least initially very obvious why we need to have a hand in the nuclear industry business, so read the report. >> over here first. my name is joe heeser and i'm with the energy initiative.
2:55 pm
this may be taking it a little bit beyond where your report left off, but it appears that congress will restore a number of these funding cuts in the current appropriation cycle if and when they ever get to a final omni bus bill, but nonetheless, i'm wondering just the fact that the uncertainty that's been created by the proposals whether you see that having already seeing it having adverse impacts on these programs and you think that this continual, what may be a yo-yo cycle that may continue for the next couple of years, do you think that in and of itself will have some adverse impacts here? >> you're right that it's outside of the report, but i think the short answer is yes, and it's having an impact. i don't know how many of us have spent time in the executive branch working there, but it cannot help, but have an impact
2:56 pm
to have your program, the one you're working on be proposed for elimination. that is demoralizing even if at the end of the day or at the end of the month appropriations are restored. so this has an impact on people's careers, on agencies' operations and of course, on the long-term nature of both people's careers and the -- and the protection of climate environment, rnd programs and the research results that depend on sustained, reliable federal funding. so, yes, it's having an impact and that's one of the things i'm afraid of. the other thing i'm afraid of with, once again, i hope next week's omnibus because the cuts as i described them are spread out over 13 different federal
2:57 pm
agencies and numerous programs which is why this report is so thick, i am nervous that congress will not save them all and there will be damage that will be sustained within the 2018 appropriations and that's going to compound i think the damage that has already been done with -- as you describe it the yo-yo effect of now it's been ten months since the detailed budget for 2018 came out and that's ten months of uncertainty of federal scientists and other government employees' careers and ten months of uncertainty at the program level of whether they'll even be around after next week. so i do worry about that and if there is a follow-up report, i think we're going to want to at least dig in to some examples of
2:58 pm
what this budget cycle and the next budget cycle have meant for this portfolio. >> just this agony of the last ten months that kay described is discouraging many students that are now undergraduates and are thinking about graduate careers, picking a sort of topics for their dissertations and so on. i know already that there are many individuals who have decided for alternative careers and alternative paths and that's a loss that may have long-term impacts. >> i would also just mention that again, sort of a very ad hoc, anecdotal experience that in terms of any number of people who have left federal agencies have done so because of concerns about what was happening in terms of projected cuts or
2:59 pm
elimination of program, and i also know of any number of people who have been recruited to agencies overseas because of the uncertainty of what was going to happen with regard to continued budgets and funding here, and one of the things that over the years that i've also observed is that when you lose a lot of senior people or people at mid levels and agencies or in terms of thinking about academia that you lose so much institutional history and knowledge that is really difficult to replace and that that is a substantial loss that we just need to be aware of because it really does have an impact in terms of thinking about how we -- how we carry on and really make the most of what
3:00 pm
we can do with budget dollars and how those dollars are invested. so we -- a couple of other questions? a question here and then over here. in answering the question what to do i wasn't expecting you to say this is our program. certainly advocacy groups have to protect themselves and can't be associated with a political program and what to do is the question for all of us, i agree. whatever resistance this congress might provide in the next few weeks with regard to a-team or in the near future with regard to 19, nonetheless, the proposals have been made and the question, what to do about a sense emanating from executive leadership that these kinds of cuts are a reasonable thing to do. who is to say that your analysis is not a fake analysis. there is a disregard and even a
3:01 pm
disgain for knowledge that has crept into our national psyche and the question what to do is as much about that as it is the specific budget year's proposal that is that good ore next year's which are not that good. i look forward to a larger discussion where people can suggest what to do. >> that is a larger discussion and i'll let that hang there as a question for all of us. my involvement in this report shows that my response is we continue to provide knowledge and that's why i was interested in being involved in this report because the budget table, i went over it quickly and that's my area, right? of providing the budget table, but most of the -- the discussion was about i hope it's
3:02 pm
new knowledge or knowledge being researched for this discussion, and what happens to this report? that's not under my control or our control. the only thing that i can do is to put it out there and do what i can including on a floor like this one to communicate what it's about. >> obviously, it's important to have an understanding of what is behind the numbers. >> yeah. michael? >> thank you very much. a follow-up question driven by the earlier remark about renewables. did you drill down into the national laboratory budgets of d.o.e. including the national renewable energy lab budget and the other national labs to figure out where the lab would hit in terms of the national laboratories? >> that was a deliberate decision on our part not to focus on the renewable energy and energy efficiency investments that are primarily about the department of energy.
3:03 pm
additionally, we thought does it make sense to focus the clean energy investments as well as the climate and the environmental rnd investments. so we chose not to deal with those investments which means we did not really look at israel and the other energy laboratories and what would be happening to them. partially because, and we were told we were working on similar studies, but you know, if you take those two pieces together, what's happening with the clean energy portfolio and what's happening with the climate environment portfolio, and i guess a broader story, and i think what happens to be the same story. >> and i've been associated with the department of energy since 1974 and continue to be in one form or another. so to answer your question, yes.
3:04 pm
the programs in energy efficiency and renewable energy in terms of the proposals have been significantly cut. whereas the programs for the national nuclear science administration have been significantly increased. >> i would just add in terms of the office of renewable energy and i think once again in terms of looking at the the budget request would be for a 72% cut overall for efficiency and renewable which includes obviously any number of program eliminations. any other last questions? if not, i just wanted to ask whether there were any last
3:05 pm
words from ari or from kay? >> well, i would add since kay brought it up, we are contemplating a follow-up review report and study, at this point we need to confer with our advisory committee and we will get input. if we are always open for suggestions from the broader community about studies of this type and we will consider it. >> i'm onboard. >> well -- >> thank you very much. >> and to that, obviously reactions input from all of you today is also useful in terms of all of the thinking of the team as well as others and in terms of thinking about questions are and aspects that we explored. so i want to thank you all for coming and being a part of this discussion. i urge you to look carefully at the report, share it with others
3:06 pm
and we just need to make sure that we understand and are as thoughtful as well versed as possible in terms of understanding what is being requested in moving forward, and i want to say thank you very, very much kay and ari, we really, really appreciate you being here and talking with us today about that. >> thank you. thank you. [ applause ]
3:07 pm
3:08 pm
like most of our live coverage you can find this event later in the video library on c-span.org. yesterday the house homeland security committee heard from officials on the 2017 natural disasters including hurricanes harvey, irma and maria. we'll bring you the hearing again tonight and show it in its entirety at 8:00 eastern over on
3:09 pm
c-span. congress is off today and they're back next week with one week left current short-term government funding expiring a week from today midnight march 23rd and appropriations committee covering the spending bill to cover the rest of the 2018 budget year. negotiations continue on a number of policy issues and the government shutdown twice already this year in january for three days over the daca issue and again in february for a few hours while senator rand paul spoke on budget caps and the new budget year, and they'll wrap up work for the current 2018 spending and follow congress on the c-span networks as well as online at c-span.org and the c-span radio app. this weekend c-span's cities tour takes you to winston, salem, north carolina. we'll explore winston salem's literary scene and history. on saturday at noon eastern on book tv author and wake forest university dean michelle
3:10 pm
gillespie with her book katherine and r.j. reynolds. >> r.j. and katherine reynolds were a rather extraordinary couple in the early 20th century. r.j. reynolds was the founder of the r.j. reynolds tobacco company and he turned that tobacco factory into one of the top 100 or so corporations in america by the early 20th century. his wife katherine, 30 years his junior, had a lot of vision and was committed to a pretty progressive way of shaping society for the early 20th century american south. >> then see an extensive collection of memorabilia from louis carol, author of alice in wonderland. >> i found out he bought a typewriter in 1888 and i learned about what kind of typewriter it was. he didn't type books, he typed a few letters and documents and he mostly used it to entertain his
3:11 pm
young friends and when they came to visit him he would let them type volumes and volumes of poetry and this was quite a novelty in 1888 to reproduce something that looks like a printed document right there on your desktop. >> on sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv a look at old salem, and learn about the hidden town project which explores the history of afro-moravans. saturday at noon eastern on c-span2's book tv and saturday on c-span3. working with our cable affiliates as we explore america. next the house homeland security committee learn about the 2017 natural disasters, among those testifying brock long

31 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on