My name is Molly Dickinson, Head Scientist of the NOAA Climate Change Division.

I have been called

here today by the Environment and Public Works Committee to give my expert opinion on bill number 22015 Hold it All In which prohibits new coal, oil, tar sands, fracked gas and oil shale leases on
Federal land, as well as offshore oil and gas leaks in the Gulf of Mexico, Pacific Atlantic and Artic
Oceans, and the incentivizing and compensation for plugging inactive natural gas wells and sealing/
testing active natural gas wells for leaks.
I agree with the overall aim of this bill, which is to reduce the consumption of carbon based fuels, thereby
reducing the negative impacts on the environment due to that consumption. In March of this year, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported the monthly global average concentration of
greenhouse gases exceeded over 400 parts per million. For the last 650,000 years, carbon dioxide levels in
the atmosphere never exceeded 300 parts per million, but in the last 65 years, we have seen a steady,
unyielding rise in the greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere directly related to the burning of
fossil fuels. It is not mere speculation, it is scientific fact that humans are having a direct and negative
impact on the atmosphere.
This bill, by prohibiting new leases on Federal land, would reduce the production of carbon-based fuels in
the United States.
However, there are many other factors we must consider while reviewing this bill. Stopping new leases
and terminating many existing leases would decrease the production of carbon-based energy, but at the
current time, there is no alternative clean energy source that could replace this loss of energy. Merely
stopping energy production without providing alternative sources of energy is not feasible.
If passed, this bill would mandate that our nation survive on the energy produced by the active wells we
have today. Although some natural gas wells can remain in operation for up to 50 years, the demand for
energy, both in the residential sector and industrial sector, is increasing. Prohibiting new energy leases
would cause a strain on active wells to maintain our nations growing energy needs. In turn, the price for
the scarce energy would increase, leaving many unable to pay for lighting, heating and gas for
transportation, which could have a catastrophic effect on our economy and entire way of life.
Though there has been an increase in energy provided by cleaner energy sources, such as wind and solar,
the energy produced by those sources is not currently enough to make up for the lost energy by
prohibiting new leases that this bill demands.
This bill is a cold turkey approach to the climate change. However, if section 1 and 2 were amended to
call for a steady, reasonable decrease in the amount of leases bought over several years, it would allow
renewable energies to develop and become a significant energy replacement. Companies should also be
incentivized to train employees for renewable energy jobs, or renewable energy development. The
government should also incentivize the research production, develop and use of renewable energy. This
way, the amount of leases would decrease over time, allowing renewable energy to balance the energy
needs of this country, while preparing people for jobs in the renewable energy sector.
As our climate slowly warms, we must decide the best approach to mitigate our impacts on the
environment. This bill, with the amendments I have proposed, would allow our nation to move away from
old, dirty energy sources, in turn stopping the release of greenhouse gases into the environment. This bill
would also ensure that jobs are protected and that the energy demands for this county are meet.