▶ 0:15:26Chair Capito: Well, good morning everybody, and thank you all for being here. Just by way of explanation of why we have a lot of empty seats, lots going on on capitol hill so we are expecting people in and out of the committee as we move forward. But I want to thank everybody for being here as we discussed two pieces of legislation.
▶ 0:15:51Chair Capito: A discussion draft titled the wildfire emissions prevention act, or wepa. And s.881, which is sponsored by senators ricketts and klobuchar.
▶ 0:16:07Chair Capito: The wepa discussion draft a men's the process to make it easier for states to reduce wildfireto protect human healthe environment through prescribed burns. The clear air act has been a success story. Since the clean air act was signed into law in 1970, the U.S. has reduced criteria air pollutants by 78%.
▶ 0:16:33Chair Capito: That reduction is largely attributed to significant decreases in emissions from the energy and transportation sectors. Today a large share of emissions that remain come from hard to abate sources such as wildfires. Wildfires are growing in size and severity. The national academies found wildfires pose an increasing threat to air quality and public health.
▶ 0:16:56Chair Capito: In a 202 fact sheet4 -- in a 2024, wildfires account for 44% of the nation's primary missions of fire particular matter. Passing wepa would help us reduce those emissions. In 2023, many americans experienced what western states have been dealing with for decades with smoke from can adian wildfires like getting the east coast.
▶ 0:17:27Chair Capito: We cannot install air pollution control on a wildfire but we can limit the impact such as with prescribed burns. Scrub burns are a proven method to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires and their associated emissions. For example, stanford university scientists recently found prescribed burns can reduce the net of emissions by 14% from wildfires.
▶ 0:17:54Chair Capito: In 20 21, the epa determined targeted prescribed burns can have reduced particulate matter emissions from the 2015 rough fire by 20%. And because a 40% reduction in respiratory-related emergency room visits and premature deaths. However, prescribed burns are severely underutilized as a tool to begin wildfires. According to the gao, the epa's air quality requirements limit the use of prescribed burns that reduce smoke from wildfires.
▶ 0:18:24Chair Capito: This is because emissions from wildfires and smoke impact the states's ability to comply with the epa air quality requirements. The epa exceptional rule accounts for pollution from wildfire smoke but it is complex and resource intensive, and smoke prescribed burns is treated less favorably than wildfire smoke.
▶ 0:18:51Chair Capito: While the rule allows for prescribed burns in theory, the cumbersome process has limited states from using them in practice. The gao stated that state and local agencies may not use the provision because exceptional event demonstrations are technically complicated and resource intensive. Instead of going through this challenging process, state and local agencies often limit the number of eligible burn days to ensure they don't have to use this process, which limits the use of prescribed burns.
▶ 0:19:19Chair Capito: Wepa would ensure states will not be penalized for using prescribed burns and facilitate state leadership on actions that would mitigate wildfire risk. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about the environment and public health benefits that would come from having wepa signed into law. This morning, we will also discuss s. 881, the renewable fuel for oceangoing vessels act.
▶ 0:19:49Chair Capito: Oceangoing vessels include vessels transporting more than 80% of our international goods. Currently, using biofuels to power oceangoing vessels is not a qualified use of the renewable fuel standard or rfs, potentially limiting broader adoption. S. 881 amends the rfs to let companies use biofuels for vessels to comply. In addition, U.S.
▶ 0:20:14Chair Capito: Shipping companies and fuel producers are exploring other various fuel options for maritime use. As these companies explore alternative fuels, they must consider various measures of viability including compatibility with conventional fuels and existing infrastructure as well as cost, emissions, and availability.
▶ 0:20:37Chair Capito: I thank senator ricketts in his role for championing biofuels and look forward to learn more about alternative fuels in shipping today. I will now recognize senator whitehouse for his opening statement.
▶ 0:20:49Sen. Whitehouse: Thank you very much for this hearing. Whether it is reducing our greenhouse gas emissions or ensuring americans breathable unpolluted air, we are following short and urgently need real solutions to very real problems. Let me turn first wildfires. Climate scientists have warned since the very first report back in the early 1990's that wildfires were becoming more destructive.
▶ 0:21:18Sen. Whitehouse: It is getting worse fast as western colleagues by senator curtis know all too well. Insurance markets have noticed and pulled back homeowners coverage in wildfire areas just as they have in coastal areas, translating climate risk into rising cost and availability problems for families. The great climate insurance collapsed, when it happens, will likely prompt a failure cascade.
▶ 0:21:47Sen. Whitehouse: First in the mortgage markets, then home values, that our entire economy. The fed chair has warned us to expect entire regions of the country where mortgages just are not available. I asked that my more complete warnings list be amended to these remarks.
▶ 0:22:06Chair Capito: Without objection.
▶ 0:22:07Sen. Whitehouse: Thank you. As a stanford professor said in our budget committee hearing, these fixes may help when wildfire battles, but without addressing climate change, we are going to lose the war. To vessels. A quick victory is near on maritime fuels. Marine shipping is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, fueling wildfires around the world.
▶ 0:22:35Sen. Whitehouse: If marine shipping were its own country, it would be the world's sixth largest carbon polluter. It also produces 9% of global sulfur oxide and 18% of global nitrogen oxide emissions. So locally as the ships come into port, their fumes pollute neighborhoods along our coast. Most vessels are not U.S. flagged. And most of the goods and related pollution come from china. How is a victory near?
▶ 0:23:04Sen. Whitehouse: The international maritime organization which regulates global shipping is implementing a binding emissions standard with an economic penalty for vessels violating the standard. Industry supports it. A shipping giant has long called for a $150 per ton pollution fee on maritime carbon emissions. And it works. The 2020 policy capping sulfur and marine fuels is already reduced sulfur oxide emissions.
▶ 0:23:32Sen. Whitehouse: To no one's surprise, the trump administration is trying to undermine this process, another trophy for its fossil fuel donors. But few ships governed by this are U.S. flagged. The effect on U.S. consumers will be negligible. Pennies on a pair of chinese made shoes. Senator padilla and I have bills to strengthen ships operating in U.S. waters. I encourage the big international shippers and the imo to stick to their guns and finalize the fee.
▶ 0:24:05Sen. Whitehouse: That is important context for our discussion today on the renewable fuel for oceangoing vessels act. The global shipping community is moving to low carbon fuels like methanol and ammonia to next-generation batteries and where they measure up to advanced biofuels. Biofuels to succeed will need to measure up. Unfortunately, the carbon accounting for conventional biofuels under lifecycle emissions analysis often does not measure up.
▶ 0:24:35Sen. Whitehouse: Studies suggest lifecycle emissions make some biofuels worse than petroleum. The united states is the largest market in the world. Everyone wants to bring their goods to our ports to sell to U.S. consumers we have the opportunity to compete and win in the market for low carbon marine fuels. Actually, a win, win, win for our economy, health, and planet. But not if we don't try.
▶ 0:25:06Sen. Whitehouse: Not if we set up for a competition that does not exist. That is a prescription for failure. Investment already made in hydrogen were setting us up to be a global leader in this space. Unfortunately, the recently passed republican mega bill undermined those investments. I hope together we can rewrite that ship. American families and the rest of the road can no longer afford american inaction and backsliding on dangerous carbon pollution. Thank you, chairman.
▶ 0:25:34Chair Capito: Thank you, senator whitehouse. I will now turn to our witnesses for their opening remarks. And thank all of you for being here. Our first witness is johnny sabo , testifying this morning on behalf of the national association of state foragers. He brings it was of knowledge and experience in forest management and prescribed fires. I'll come, and you may proceed with your opening statement.
▶ 0:26:02Mr. Sabo: Thank you. Thank you for inviting me to this hearing today and to testify on behalf of the national association of state foresters. My name is johnny sabo, and I am the georgia state forester. My comments today focus on the wildfire provisions act of 2025, a bill that we support and that I want to offer my sincere thanks.
▶ 0:26:31Mr. Sabo: Allstate forestry agencies have a common mission to protect provide wildland fire protection on all lands, public and private, and to reduce wildfire risk on tools such as prescribed fire. This is true in georgia where I am as possible for the protection and conservation of george's acres of forests, 88% of which is privately owned.
▶ 0:26:55Mr. Sabo: Our forests are under pressure from a number of threads including forest fires, pests and disease, natural disasters, and other uses. Wildfire risk is increasing from georgia to west virginia to the east in utah, arizona, and wyoming to the west. The usda forest service prox mates one billion acres of land across america are at risk for catastrophic wildfire.
▶ 0:27:22Mr. Sabo: It is nearly universally agreed that a significant increase in prescribed fire and fuels treatment is the answer to reduce the wildfire threat. Most ecosystems in the U.S. involve fire or fire prone and need fire to sustain healthy conditions. We cannot suppress fire indefinitely, and doing so only increases the intensity and damage of a wildfire once one does start.
▶ 0:27:46Mr. Sabo: A tool relied upon to reduce hazardous levels of vegetation that fuel fires through carefully planned and managed emissions. Prescribed fire also improves wildlife habitat and brings life to the soil.
▶ 0:28:03Mr. Sabo: Georgia is a leader in prescribed fire, treating 1.5 million acres annually, utilizing comprehensive burn plans and emerging technologies such as drone-based. Turning to the epa rule for prescribed fire, we have been long-standing supporters with the epa in implementation of the rule.
▶ 0:28:28Mr. Sabo: A key aspect of the wepa is the state partnerships at the heart of the act by placing a priority on the state and the rules and creating things for the epa to review. These partnerships significantly ramped up in the air quality standard in 2024.
▶ 0:28:50Mr. Sabo: States like georgia have been to make sure tools and processes are into this end, the wepa woue essential in codifying an extensive demonstration process given the supreme court ruling that courts cannot referred to agency interpretations of law. We particularly appreciate the bill would clarify and include activities of fire that are intended.
▶ 0:29:20Mr. Sabo: This definition recognizes both the critical need for wildfire risk reduction and through prescribed fire and the emissions that would occur in the absence of human intervention. Also, the economic cost of suppressing large wildfires and the damage it costs far exceed the cost of planned control led burns.
▶ 0:29:51Mr. Sabo: As someone who has served as a wildland firefighter, I believe the core question underpinning the wepa is simple. Would you fight one with prescribed burns or wait for one to accumulate? Prescribed fire is science -based, state led, and essential. Without it, we are left on the defensive. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our responsible management to protect our environment and communities.
▶ 0:30:21Mr. Sabo: I appreciate the committee holding this important hearing and look forward to questions you may have.
▶ 0:30:26Chair Capito: Thank you. Our next witness is jonathan wood. Mr. wood has testified before several congressional committees on environmental and conservation issues and has litigated cases in the supreme court and is involved with the environmental law institute emerging leaders institute. You are recognized for your opening statement. Thank you for coming.
▶ 0:30:51Mr. Wood: Thank you, chairman capito, ranking member whitehouse, and embers of the committee for inviting me to participate in this morning's hearing. I am jonathan wood. Forest health has long been a focus of parts work. Every summer, these guys remind us of mistakes -- of the stakes.
▶ 0:31:17Mr. Wood: The smoke was so bad that the mountains were invisible through brown haye brown hayze. Prescribed fire was suppressed but a large and growing consensus recognizes the need for good fire to restore forests throughout the country.
▶ 0:31:31Mr. Wood: To that end, I and my college prioritize reforms to make it easier to apply good fire on the ground, including establishing montana's fire council to collaborate to promote wildfire use and passing state legislation to establishing permitting, training, and a certification program in montana for land owners that want to use this tool.
▶ 0:32:00Mr. Wood: Park is happy to support the act which would present an obstacle to wildfire. I described the written body of evidence showing that prescribed fire is an effective tool for reducing wildfire severity, improving air and wanted quality. But in my short time this morning to my want to focus on why wepa reforms are essential.
▶ 0:32:27Mr. Wood: Despite wildfire smoke being the largest source of pollutants, the clean air act unintentionally discriminates against prescribed fire smoke. Wildfire smoke is routinely excluded from data. The epa has selected nice the epa has selected n -- the epa has recognized it as a problem.
▶ 0:32:58Mr. Wood: The act was not written with it in mind and includes requirements that are at best an awkward fit for prescribed fire. As a result, the regulations and the attempts to make them work and practice is complicated. The chairman begin by stating that the regulations work in theory but not in practice and that is the assessment of most of the experts that have studied this issue.
▶ 0:33:22Mr. Wood: Indeed there has only been one successful application of the regulations in nearly 20 years since they were first established, and that was a special case that is unlikely to be repeated at the scale required. While southeastern states like my colleague represents have mature fire prescribed -- prescribed fire programs, I am concerned with what this means for western states like montana that are only beginning to develop their programs.
▶ 0:33:49Mr. Wood: Our department regularly expresses concerns about the ability to stand up a program like this and be able to navigate epa's difficult process. Senator padilla explained in a 2023 letter to epa joined by most of the california delegation that "the reality is this process is unworkable for the scale of prescribed fire that would be necessary to protect our communities from increasing catastrophic wildfires." I cannot agree more.
▶ 0:34:18Mr. Wood: I should also note the regulations are legally untested so there are a lot of unanswered questions there. The wildfire emissions prevention act would give states and epa more flexibility for prescribed fire and improve air quality. It would make prescribed fire an event subjected to standards that make sense for prescribed fire and would streamline the approval process.
▶ 0:34:44Mr. Wood: While there is an understandable reluctance to amend the clean air act which I understand, that should not be a concern here. Wepa is a narrowly tailored solution to a specific problem. It would not affect epa's migratory authority, the pollutants covered by the clean air act, or any substantive environmental standard. Ultimately, restoring this nation's forest is essential to improve air and water quality, conserve native wildlife and their habitats.
▶ 0:35:13Mr. Wood: Prescribed fire is one of our best tools for doing this but currently is not being used at the scale needed. Wepa would address a persistent obstacle to its use and should enjoy the broad support of this committee. Thank you again for allowing me to join you today permit I look forward to your questions.
▶ 0:35:29Chair Capito: Thank you thank you very much. Our next witness is kathy metcalf, the president emeritus of the chamber of shipping of america. Miss metcalf has worked in shipping issues for more than 30 years and is well-versed versed in alternative fuel development for the marine industry. Ms. metcalf, you are recognized for your opening statement. Thank you for coming.
▶ 0:35:56Ms. Metcalf: My pleasure, chairman. Thank you ranking member whitehouse. All right, there we go. Once I hear the echo, I know I am in good shape. As a mentioned, I am justifying up half of chamber shipping of america. Well over 30 entities that are engaged in the chartering operation of oceangoing vessels.
▶ 0:36:22Ms. Metcalf: We also have other members that are interested in those operations as well such as classification societies. I have a tendency to do what most aides don't like and, that is to throw the written stuff out because I find it works better. In listening to the comments from the dais, I think it is in order. We are in a parallel universe right now. I sort of feel like I am.
▶ 0:36:51Ms. Metcalf: My colleague from icctv may feel the same way. For decarbonization and new regulations, typically use the industry on one side and governments at the national and international level at the yes side. What we are experiencing now is alluded to by senator whitehouse , the flip of that.
▶ 0:37:18Ms. Metcalf: So first, let me address -- senator ricketts, thank you for the bill on renewables. We completely support that bill. But we support that bill as only one piece of an overall strategy to address decarbonization of marine transportation. This is a very large, complicated spiderweb. If we pull on one side of it, the other gets distorted.
▶ 0:37:48Ms. Metcalf: So we have to work together. First, thank you. Totally support the bill. So let me talk a little bit about marine fuels because with the jurisdiction of this committee, I suspect you may be hearing some other discussions on marine transportation regardless of the administration's position on climate change. The global marine industry is agnostic as far as fuels go.
▶ 0:38:15Ms. Metcalf: We will build ships that burned fuels that are available in ports. That is what we need. With that in mind, they need to be in sufficient quantities to supply the world's fleet. We also have domestic fleets as well, which is a little easier to manage because the range of those voyages are much more determined and shorter. We are not talking about the entire globe.
▶ 0:38:43Ms. Metcalf: With that in mind, I just want to add that there is a number of fuels being discussed over the last 20 agonizing years at the international maritime association. We are on the cusp of an agreement with an extraordinary session scheduled for october. We are hopeful that will move forward likely without the U.S. as a party from what we understand.
▶ 0:39:09Ms. Metcalf: But that is ok because global shipping is not just the united states, although a lot of ships coming to the united states. The good news is if we get a global agreement, those ships coming to the united states will have to comply with the global standard even though the U.S. would not require it. So that is a side benefit of that happening. What fuels are be looking at? Obviously, renewables, biofuels.
▶ 0:39:39Ms. Metcalf: Biofuels are unique in the fact that there is a bunch of different base biofuels and each one has a different profile. Marine engines have to be designed for a specific profile. So I can't just have a marine engine that runs on any biofuel. It is usually a particular biofuel.
▶ 0:39:59Ms. Metcalf: With that in mind, the only concern we have with marine fuels or biofuels is the fact that we will be in direct competition with land-based users. And there is some concerns globally and also within the united states as to whether the quantity will be available in sufficient measure. Let's just talk last now about marine vessels.
▶ 0:40:24Ms. Metcalf: What do we have to look at to make sure we can keep moving in removing carbon? You have to look at patterns, trade vessels. Go anywhere in the row based upon the charter or the buses of the seas, which are the container ships that have very fixed patterns. We have to look at vessel types, power demand, vessel age.
▶ 0:40:49Ms. Metcalf: Is it economical to retrofit a vessel to use alternative fuel, or is it better just to scrap it and go with a new one? Obviously, the infrastructure to be able to take the fuel from the producer to the ship. So I thank you for the opportunity to testify. Thank you, senator ricketts, for your bill. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
▶ 0:41:13Chair Capito: Thank you very much. Our next witness is abirami vijayan. Did I say that correctly? Yes. Thank you. She is a senior claimant attorney. Previously, she was an attorney for epa's regional office in texas and served 11 years in epa's office of general counsel, including as lead for the national ambient air quality standards group.
▶ 0:41:43Chair Capito: Thank you very much for being here.
▶ 0:41:44Ms. Vijayan: Thank you, chairman capito and ranking member whitehouse, for the opportunity to testify today. I am a senior climate attorney with the natural resources defense council. For my experience as a former epa attorney and working with scientists and experts and air quality public health and climate science, I know that wildfires are dangerous to human health and welfare, exacerbated by climate change, and increasing every year in intensity.
▶ 0:42:14Ms. Vijayan: Wildfire destruction causes the U.S. billions of dollars annually and causes a significant amount of air pollution that is unsafe for americans to breathe. Particularly, emissions of find particular matter and ozone. Over 150 million americans live in areas that suffer unsafe levels of smog and pollution, and breathing these pollutants can cause a litany of health issues including lung disease,
▶ 0:42:45Ms. Vijayan: Cardiovascular problems, stroke, and premature death. Under the clean air act, the epa sets air quality standards, and states of course have primary responsibility for assuring the areas within their jurisdiction attain and maintain those standards with the epa then determining those states are in attainment.
▶ 0:43:06Ms. Vijayan: Under section 319 of the clean air act, there is clear legal authority for finding that both wildfires and prescribed fires are exceptional events as implement it by epa's regulations, which again clearly state that prescribed fires can be qualified as exceptional events. I would note that those regulations have been challenged and upheld in the D.C. circuit judge so remain good and effective -- circuit so remain good and effective law.
▶ 0:43:38Ms. Vijayan: While prescribed fires have been used to address wildfires, they historically have not been demonstrated to be make or break events that push states into nonattainment. They do produce pollution, particularly emissions impacting air concentrations of 2.5.
▶ 0:43:59Ms. Vijayan: The epa has developed a strong regulatory framework for states and agencies considering whether to request that prescribed fires be treated as exceptional events. An air quality data influenced by such treatment to be eligible for certain regulatory exclusion. The epa's 2016 exceptional events rule clearly states that prescribed fires can be eligible for treatment as an exceptional event if the required demonstration is made in the regulatory criteria are met.
▶ 0:44:32Ms. Vijayan: Epa has also exquisitely addressed these criteria in those regulations and released a number of helpful guidance documents as well as templates and tools to assist states in meeting those statutory regulatory requirements specifically for prescribed fires. For example, in november of 2024, epa issued a demonstration template for prescribed fire events on wildlands that may impact pm 2.5.
▶ 0:44:59Ms. Vijayan: This template provides clear and happy information on what a demonstration or a prescribed fire would look like as well as a conceptual model for states to assess and develop as appropriate for their particular facts.
▶ 0:45:16Ms. Vijayan: Concurrently with this informative template, the epa also issued a publicly available faq document containing numerous questions and answers regarding the treatment of prescribed fires under epa's regulations and how those states can meet the criteria for exceptional events under clean air act section 319.
▶ 0:45:36Ms. Vijayan: Given the growing wildfire threat, there is a use for other tools that maybe get wildfire risks and states are invested in ensuring they attain and maintain. Having worked on air pollution issues and climate issues for the entirety of my career with specific expertise, I believe the wildfire emissions prevention act is unnecessary to address the issue.
▶ 0:46:03Ms. Vijayan: The clean air act and epa regulations already clearly provide for the consideration of wildfires under the exceptional events program. Amending an already excellent authority actively being implement by the states through guidance and other tools would be redundant at best and at worst result in regulatory or legal confusion that could unnecessarily complicate or hinder protection of public health from harmful air pollution resulting from wildfires.
▶ 0:46:33Ms. Vijayan: Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
▶ 0:46:38Chair Capito: Thank you very much. Last but not least, our final witness is nikita pavlenko, program director for fuels and aviation at the international council on clean transportation. Am I saying that correctly? Has a background in lifecycle assessment and carbon counting with a focus on carbon and alternative fuels like sustainable aviation fuels. Mr.
▶ 0:47:05Chair Capito: Pavlenko, please proceed with your opening statement. They give for coming.
▶ 0:47:10Mr. Pavlenko: Thank you, chairman capito. It is a privilege to be given the opportunity to speak to you today. I am the director of the fuels and aviation program at international council on clean transportation. Icct is an independent organization that provides technical analysis to policymakers to regulators. Our research is focused on reducing the climate and public health impacts of transportation.
▶ 0:47:37Mr. Pavlenko: Our review of the renewable fuel for oceangoing vessels act suggests it will have a negligible impact on reducing air pollution and climate impact of maritime fuels. We can draw upon the example of jet fuel in the renewable fuel standard for some historical context. So while jet fuel was introduced in the rfs by a similar provision in 2014, it did not material affect sustainable air fuel production.
▶ 0:48:06Mr. Pavlenko: A decade later, it remains below 1%. This type of opt in provision does not mandate the production of either maritime or jet fuel. It only means if a producer produces it, they can opt into the rfs program and generate credits. But there is also some further reasons why doable maritime fuels may fail to reach the market.
▶ 0:48:30Mr. Pavlenko: It may face an even steeper slope han sustainable aviation fuels. The likeliest maritime fuels will be akin to the. It is much more lucrative to sell the fuel to the road sector. There is a few reasons why. Renewable diesel commands a higher market price.
▶ 0:48:58Mr. Pavlenko: It can be used for compliance under west coast programs. But instead selling to the maritime market, the producer is losing out on all of these valuable incentives, including renewable maritime fuels in the rfs can also create some unintended second-order effects. For example, the inclusion of a new sector may prompt epa to propose higher volume targets in future rfs rulemakings.
▶ 0:49:29Mr. Pavlenko: Our assessment of the 2025 rulemaking suggests this may exacerbate issues in the program we have identified. The current proposal already raises the advanced biofuel volumes in excess of domestic availability while also reducing the compliance value of important stocks.
▶ 0:49:48Mr. Pavlenko: This has the effect of further increasing the quantity of advanced biofuel needed to meet obligations leading to even greater reliance on foreign imports and raising prices. All of this for very little if any climate benefit. If the inclusion of maritime fuels is used as justification for further increases in rfs targets, we risk deeper trade imbalances, diversion from food markets, and price increases.
▶ 0:50:19Mr. Pavlenko: Now, there are several promising pathways for producing sustainable alternative maritime fuels that could achieve deep greenhouse gas. Whether using residues, crops, or methanol or ammonia. However, the current structure even with this proposed change in eligibility does not create certain value stability to incentivize producers to enter the market.
▶ 0:50:46Mr. Pavlenko: Interviews and surveys of project planners, industry stakeholders, and the industry suggest the policies that mitigate investment risk and complicate top-down mandates are critical to ensure the deployment of the more challenging lowest carbon fuel pathways. Further, promising non-biomass pathways such as blue ammonia or methanol are not eligible in the rfs and would not generate despite their potential emission savings.
▶ 0:51:16Mr. Pavlenko: One potential outside development which may influence is the limitation of the net zero framework from the imo which includes a global fuel standard that can offer a complementary powerful signal. If the policy does move forward, it could then backstop this proposed change in the rfs.
▶ 0:51:39Mr. Pavlenko: But to have a meaningful impact on climate, it must too correctly account for emissions or include some other forms of meaningful safeguards. To conclude, while the promotion of alternative fuels in the maritime sector, doing so through the rfs opt in provision would likely provide a minimal signal.
▶ 0:52:02Mr. Pavlenko: There is a risk that this could further increase the demand for oils beyond domestic ability with unintended trade, climate, and price effects. Thank you for your time, and I am happy to answer any questions.
▶ 0:52:15Chair Capito: Thank you all. We will proceed to questions. Senator curtis will start us off.
▶ 0:52:22Sen. Curtis: Thank you, madam chair. Thank you for letting me chip in line and little bit. We have a couple officers we need to honor. Ranking member, thank you as well. I would love to start by a shout out to my colleague, senator padilla, for his work, and senator hickenlooper, which has a section for prescribed fires in it. Important legislation the senate will be considering soon.
▶ 0:52:52Sen. Curtis: I am also really pleased to be working on a wildfire in emission prevention act. Thanks to committee staff, to the chair, ranking member, and my staff for bringing us to this point. I think it is fair to say in utah we know firsthand the burdensome problem with wildfires. This year has been a record year not just for utah but for the rest. We also know the burdensome problem on waivers and processing through all of this as well.
▶ 0:53:21Sen. Curtis: I also want to start by acknowledging that utah people are into it with leaving this earth better than we found it. A firm belief that that well, we can reduce emissions through the proper prescribed burns. I would like to begin with Mr. sabo.
▶ 0:53:45Sen. Curtis: Can you explain from your perspective why these prescribed burns are so important, particularly in the west where we know that our -- where we now say our wildfire season is not seasonable but year-round -- seasonal but year-round?
▶ 0:54:03Mr. Sabo: Yes, thank you. As you said, they are extremely important. We spoke about or I testified about if we do not have prescribed fire, we are constantly playing defense, which a lot of my colleagues do continually out west. First off, most ecosystems especially in georgia, they need fire to thrive. It actually thins out, is good for the wildlife species.
▶ 0:54:36Mr. Sabo: We also utilized firing techniques that allow us to protect the forest and wildlife at the same time where wildfire does not care. It does not protect anything. It does not hesitate to cause destruction. So prescribed fires are an essential tool which we can mitigate the risk and protect our communities and the firefighters.
▶ 0:55:04Sen. Curtis: We have unique dryness. I went to the park and was surprised at what we call fuel on the floor. It is not the same problem for them because of the humidity we have in the west, which also plays into the prescribed burns. They are complicated. You have to check the humidity. You have to check all sorts of weather conditions. So many layers of checkoff.
▶ 0:55:30Sen. Curtis: I think that is one of the reasons that more leaders of federal intervention in waivers make this near impossible. We have our largest fire in the state this year. I sat down with the forest service and they should be on the map where they did prescribed burns. Almost to the inch where they did prescribed burns, they were able to contain this fire. Had we had more time to do more prescribed fires, we would have been able to contain that fire even more.
▶ 0:55:58Sen. Curtis: Just because of time, I want to pivot to Mr. wood. Can you talk about -- so we have this going on and in the back of the states's minds they have to worry about litigation. As is an even bigger problem. Can you talk about why these losses on states are attempting to use prescribed burns is such a problem and why that is an issue we need to deal with?
▶ 0:56:21Mr. Wood: Yeah, I absolutely think it is a serious concern. I will note that we have not used as regulation in practice very much. It has only been used successfully once, but states like alabama have submitted many determinations to epa. There is a notable litigious group, environment group that has been filing against many of them.
▶ 0:56:48Mr. Wood: But with the perspective of states and prescribed burns, this is another risk added to the pile. You are right out in the west when we are doing prescribed fire, we are buried about humidity, level of fuels, and also some other risks that this is another major thing added on top of it that we will not know the answer to for years. Your bill can be helpful simple find the process and making it much easier to fight fire on the ground.
▶ 0:57:15Sen. Curtis: Thank you. I am out of time. I yield my time. Thank you very much. Thank you for your consideration.
▶ 0:57:22Sen. Whitehouse: I would like to echo senator curtis' words, if done well. I really that I look working forward -- I relay that I look forward to working with our colleagues on a solution here. Miss vijayan, has nasa determined human caused climate change is the main cause for increasing fire whether in the american west?
▶ 0:57:48Ms. Vijayan: Thank you for the question, senator. There is significant research including by nasa showing that climate change is a primary driver and intensifier of wildfires. There is also significant research showing climate change is also exacerbating wildfire threats to the west in particular.
▶ 0:58:10Sen. Whitehouse: And our work has shown that from 2013 to 2022, home insurance costs have more than doubled. Is there evidence that these insurance cost increases relate to wildfire risk in areas that are subject to wildfire risk? And would it be reasonable to say that is likely to get worse if we don't tackle the underlying nasa designated climate problem?
▶ 0:58:40Ms. Vijayan: I appreciate the question, senator. I will note I am not an insurance expert. Based on my expertise as an air attorney and claimant attorney and given the evidence that climate attorney and given the evidence that climate is exacerbating the problem, wildfires are leading to billions of dollars in property damage, so given the wildfire threat is ongoing and worsening, I think it is reasonable to say that -- apologies -- that
▶ 0:59:12Ms. Vijayan: Threats to policy will be at great risk and occurrence. Even though I am not an insurance expert, I do know and have experienced when insurance companies raise rising costs, they pass the costs onto property owners and homeowners, and homeowners are at risk of rising costs as well.
▶ 0:59:36Sen. Whitehouse: And while a prescribed burn is likely and hopefully less of a conflagration than a full on wildfire, it nevertheless creates the same risks of health impact that a full on wildfire does, although as a lesser conflagration to a lesser degree. Is that a fair way to look at this?
▶ 1:00:04Ms. Vijayan: Yes, definitely, senator. It is unquestionable that smoke from fire does cause emissions that lead to pm2.5 and ozone impacts among other pollutants.
▶ 1:00:16Sen. Whitehouse: And the fire does not care whether it is prescribed or not.
▶ 1:00:20Ms. Vijayan: It does not establish between the type of fire.
▶ 1:00:23Sen. Whitehouse: Mr. pavlenko, the I am open has put forward a -- the imo has put forward something with strong support from the international industry. Why do you believe the industry supports those mechanisms?
▶ 1:00:43Mr. Pavlenko: Thank you for the question, senator. When it comes to the industry, in my opinion what they value is stability and unpredictability, so when it comes to investing in maritime decarbonization, you are dealing with in history that is very risk-averse -- with an industry that is very risk-averse. Ships have a long lifetime, much longer than a passenger car for example.
▶ 1:01:10Mr. Pavlenko: So when you are making your choice for fuel, you want stability, predictability, and a global scheme that is consistent across different jurisdictions will help to ensure a level playing field for international maritime shipping industry.
▶ 1:01:27Sen. Whitehouse: To the question of a level playing field, presumably those that want to play well do not want to see lucia get a price advantage -- do not want to see those who cheat get a price advantage.
▶ 1:01:42Mr. Pavlenko: Yes, definitely. However, with respect to the emissions fee, there are still important decisions to be made at imo on how it is levied and how greenhouse gas reductions are counted. It is still critical for imo to ensure a level playing field by ensuring accurate carbon counting.
▶ 1:02:06Sen. Whitehouse: So on that point, let me ask you about the phrase you used, indirect land use change. Why does that matter, and why shouldn't it count?
▶ 1:02:17Mr. Pavlenko: It is critical because it is an important component to make less cycle conditions untreatable to fuels. All else equal, when you create demand, let's say a new demand from the maritime sector for something that uses dedicated cropland, let's say a crop-based biofuels, you are increasing pressure on land use, and that can lead to indirect market effects like deforestation.
▶ 1:02:46Mr. Pavlenko: It is not just limited to deforestation. You can increase yields. You can shift food away from other sectors. That is why you have to use these complex economic models to balance all these different ways of her -- of replying to that demand.
▶ 1:03:06Sen. Whitehouse: Short answer, proper scoring matters. Correct?
▶ 1:03:12Mr. Pavlenko: Yes.
▶ 1:03:13Sen. Whitehouse: Thank you. My time is up.
▶ 1:03:15Chair Capito: Thank you. I will begin my questions. I want to start with you, Mr. sabo. You mentioned in your opening statement that you had 3821 certified burn -- describe to me, are those individuals that can have a prescribed burn on their personal property? Is that how that works?
▶ 1:03:40Mr. Sabo: That is correct, chairman, to the degree those are the professional practitioners. George offers a certified prescribed burn program where we educate the land manager, private forestry consultants, and we teach them how to best manage their smoke if they are burning the extra critical infrastructure.
▶ 1:04:03Mr. Sabo: State laws, resources that are available to them, and give them knowledge to where we know when we issue them an authorization to burn, they are a little better than someone that has never done it before, and they also have to have a few burns under their belt before we actually issue them a certified number.
▶ 1:04:20Chair Capito: Ok. Mr. wood, as I look at it from a practical standpoint, I am on the east coast, west virginia had a lot of forest land and we had our experience with wildfires although nothing compared to what you are seeing in montana.
▶ 1:04:38Chair Capito: If I look at it from a practical matter, what I am hearing are prescribed burns are smaller and were contained to prevent a larger uncontained, which would have more pollution associated with it. From a practical standpoint, what you are trying to prevent are the larger fires that are more damaging to our atmosphere and particulate matter and all of that. That is the crux of the argument we are having here. Am I correct in that?
▶ 1:05:08Mr. Wood: Exactly right. Prescribed fires are lower intensity and you can determine when they happened. As I described my oral testimony, this weekend you could not see the mountains from wildfire smoke. That does not happen from prescribed fires.
▶ 1:05:23Chair Capito: When you say the exception you can use through the epa, no one is using it. Sounds like very few use that.
▶ 1:05:31Mr. Wood: They are trying. My colleague can speak to that. It is just not working.
▶ 1:05:36Chair Capito: Right. Why is it not working? Is it pent-up in regulation? And this bill would clarify those?
▶ 1:05:44Mr. Sabo: It would help bring clarity. Georgia had 89 prescribed fires. It took that long to quantify everything, and we have still not heard back from epa. We are ready to submit another 20 for 2024.
▶ 1:06:06Mr. Sabo: But as these stacked up, if they are denied, if somehow this gets viewed to prescribed fire as a non-exceptional event, we see nonattainment areas potentially and lose the ability for prescribed fire. States like georgia become states that are not utilizing prescribed fires.
▶ 1:06:22Chair Capito: Being in non-containment damages your state how? Obviously the health aspects.
▶ 1:06:29Mr. Sabo: Right. We could lose the ability for prescribed fire. And then even things like we are talking about, attracting industry, different levels there so it takes away the headspace.
▶ 1:06:41Chair Capito: Ok. Miss metcalf, let me talk a little bit about alternative shipping fuel. Did a nice job of educating the uneducated on this issue. We don't have big shippers going out of the state of west virginia. They cannot quite get through the virginia. It is a problem.
▶ 1:06:59Sen. Whitehouse: Give it time.
▶ 1:07:01Chair Capito: Give it time. Oh, I fit right into that, didn't I? In terms of the options, sounds like the industry is active in trying to find alternatives or at least additives in certain areas to be able to bring down the carbon footprint. Where do you see this going? Will it eventually get to a full out noncarbon intensive industry? Or will it be a blend in your mind?
▶ 1:07:29Ms. Metcalf: Thank you for the question. Excuse me. First of all, ammonia hydrogen, my colleague from icct went through a number of the. Slightly political, a hot one, nuclear. There are some nuclear reactors people are looking at. No, I don't think it will be a mix.
▶ 1:07:55Ms. Metcalf: The ultimate goal -- excuse me -- is to go to zero emissions by 2050. That is the goal. Whether we get there or not, we can have that discussion later. That is the goal. And there will be no room for high polluting or high emitting vessels going forward.
▶ 1:08:23Ms. Metcalf: The only point I wanted to make also is that you need to look at decarbonization of any source but especially maritime transportation.is not a light switch -- it is not a light switch. It is a transition and it takes time to get there in a wise and economical way.
▶ 1:08:42Chair Capito: Thank you. Senator kelly.
▶ 1:08:45Sen. Kelly: Thank you, madam chair. I also want to discuss the wildfire emissions prevention act. I wish I had more time to talk about ships, something I am very interested in. But the goal of this bill is to reform the exceptional event process under the clean air act. So basically, the process is intended to make sure that local regions are not penalized for air pollution that they cannot control. This process needs improvements.
▶ 1:09:15Sen. Kelly: And we need to do this in a way that also protects air quality. So I have some technical questions for our witnesses about the specifics of this bill. So let's start with the definition of exceptional events. The clean air act does not explicitly list these types of exceptional events. It just as an exceptional event is something that is not reasonably controllable or preventable. So, Mr.
▶ 1:09:44Sen. Kelly: Wood, can you briefly explain why that is an issue when it comes to prescribed fires?
▶ 1:09:52Mr. Wood: The simple reason is that if you are doing prescribed fire well, it is controllable and it is done on a recurring cycle. As we have talked a lot today, epa is trying to make prescribed fires fit in that language. But if you were writing it from scratch, you would never include that link which to describe prescribed fires.
▶ 1:10:12Sen. Kelly: And prescribed fires can help prevent fires in states like arizona and in the west. But right now the clear air act can penalized estate using prescribed fires if it makes emissions worse. Which just means that we get worse wildfires in the future and that we also get worse air quality. That seems like something we should fix. But this bill goes too far in certain places.
▶ 1:10:40Sen. Kelly: It redefines exceptional event as an event that prevents more severe emissions. Do you agree with that?
▶ 1:10:48Mr. Wood: Yes, that is one of the factors for qualifying under the current text.
▶ 1:10:57Sen. Kelly: Miss vijayan, am I pronouncing that correctly?
▶ 1:11:02Ms. Vijayan: Thank you, senator.
▶ 1:11:04Sen. Kelly: Thank you. There is also a new definition, for actions that mitigate wildfire risk. My read of this is it also could be read to include industrial emissions. Is that correct?
▶ 1:11:20Ms. Vijayan: Senator, I think that is a reasonable read of that new language. I do just want to note that as per my opening statements as well that the existing epa regulations do squarely provide for prescribed fire under the statutory language you are raising concern about as events that are reasonably controllable - that are reasonably controllable or not reasonably controllable.
▶ 1:11:48Sen. Kelly: But to avoid confusion we can solve this because most events are wildfire -- most exceptional events are wildfire related.
▶ 1:11:55Ms. Vijayan: Most exceptional events are wildfire related. I would note the exceptions I alluded to are covered under epa regulations. Those relations have been challenged and upheld by the court so they do remain law.
▶ 1:12:13Sen. Kelly: So there is also an important procedural change in this bill. Right now, the state has to request an exceptional event designation from the epa but the bill flips that on its head. Now a state can deem a day to be an exceptional event unless epa subsequently disapproves the determination. Is that correct?
▶ 1:12:43Ms. Vijayan: That is right, senator.
▶ 1:12:44Sen. Kelly: Mr. wood, is it true epa takes a long time to approve exceptional events?
▶ 1:12:50Mr. Wood: Yes. As my colleague was saying, they had submitted dozens of requests, and they are all still pending.
▶ 1:12:57Sen. Kelly: If a state is trying to put together their latest attainment plan not knowing if an exceptional event is approved or not, it can become a real issue.
▶ 1:13:06Mr. Wood: I would say it is broader than that. If a state is deciding whether to approve a prescribed day, they need to know how this process will work three or four years down the road.
▶ 1:13:17Sen. Kelly: I am hearing the same thing from our air quality planners in arizona sympathetic to this. The language in this draft bill seems pretty easy to exploit right now. Is there anything that will prevent a state from deeming hundreds of days a year as exceptional events and then overwhelming an already overworked epa staff?
▶ 1:13:44Ms. Vijayan: In this bill, I do not think there is really a way to prevent from that sort of exploitation you are referent to, senator. As you know, it ships the ability to determine whether something is an exceptional event. It just gives epa the ability but not the mandate to step in after the fact to evaluate the state's determination.
▶ 1:14:08Ms. Vijayan: So definitely this bill does give states a lot of latitude without really seemingly many protective parameters in determining what exceptional event would be in the first instance.
▶ 1:14:20Sen. Kelly: But what if we were more specific? Even if this bill were to similarly put in some of those parameters, the cause for great concern would still be shifting the authority to the states in the first instance. The clean air act as we know it is a great success in terms of cooperative federalism.
▶ 1:14:50Sen. Kelly: This would kinda turn that on its head. Epa has a great amount of expertise and resources to do the necessary technical and scientific evaluation to determine whether something is actually an exceptional event. As we have seen, the states sometimes don't have the resources whether it is because of funding or just limitations on those resources so they approached epa for assistance.
▶ 1:15:15Sen. Kelly: So it leaves the states -- so to leave state out there on their own without that benefit of technical rigor could have a risk of exceptional events that would be exploited of such a large pool.
▶ 1:15:27Sen. Kelly: Madam chair, hearing out prescribed burns and fixing the exceptional event process, is an important issue for arizona. All we can agree the goal of this legislation isn't to add vague new terms and a cumbersome new process for the clean air act, so might stuff would be happy to work with you to improve meet language to be more specific and to try to get a better bill.
▶ 1:15:54Chair Capito: Senator ricketts. Simple rickets. Thank you to the chairman and ranking member for holding this. And I want to talk about renewable fuel for oceangoing vessels act. I introduced a bill with senator klobuchar. I love this committee because we get to talk about biofuels. It is something that I love.
▶ 1:16:23Chair Capito: I nebraska, agriculture is the backbone of our economy and biofuel provides an important market and benefits energy consumers, agricultural producers and the environment. It is actually a win win. Last time I filled up with 89 octane, is a $.45 a gallon versus regular 89 octane gasoline.
▶ 1:16:46Chair Capito: This is a big benefit for not only consumers but helps the environment and is great for farmers and ranchers and creates a market for producers offering crucial support in challenging years when staying profitable can be difficult and this will be one of the years where it is difficult. I will tell you that the farmers are in a bad position right now.
▶ 1:17:17Chair Capito: The feedstock demand for biofuel production helps stabilize prices for corn -- corn and soybean. It is critical at times like these when we exceeded the prices down. One of the things we have also seen is brazil continuing exports of soybeans. Right now, brazil is projected to export tons more.
▶ 1:17:45Chair Capito: They will export over 100 million at times and we will be 24. That has dropped about 20 million tons from last year. Brazil has the ability to double crop in the art significantly increasing their soybean production. So getting back to what Ms. medcalf was looking for do we have the it supplied between the U.S. and brazil, there are lots of soybeans out there and suppressing soybean prices right now. That is a big challenge for us.
▶ 1:18:17Chair Capito: And this makes how ridiculous it is to say that some who biofuels are taken away from the food supply is simply not true. Expanding into new and diversified markets is critical to drive demand of growing soybeans especially with the chinese marketplace and ensuring stronger returns for american farmers. One market is the maritime sector work oceangoing cargo tanker in ships are driving greater demand for biofuels.
▶ 1:18:46Chair Capito: At its core, fill standard supports american agriculture and directly impacts what farmers receive for what they grow. Because the rfs excludes ocean going vessels, the shipping industry is missing out on cleaner fuel. The act would clear a major roadblock by allowing biodiesel and renewable diesel producers to meet the needs of oceangoing vessels while preserving credits.
▶ 1:19:14Chair Capito: It would expand agricultural market and enhance security and create parity for maritime fuels with over the road and aviation fuel types. The vast majority of oceangoing vessels are operating today and were originally designed to use liquid fuels derived from crude oil, and the iso marine fuel standard.
▶ 1:19:36Chair Capito: The iso modify that standard to allow ship owners to utilize blends of up to 100% biodiesel or renewable diesel in their existing ships. This change would help make this fuels a cost competitive option for ship owners who want to decarbonize using domestically produced fuel and their ships without the need to invest in new vessels or undergo extensive retrofitting.
▶ 1:20:03Chair Capito: Use of cleaner fuels like biodiesel or renewable lease or is a part of cleaning the environment. The ports of los angeles and long beach which together handle 40 percent of containers entering the united states produce 100 million tons of smog every day. More than the daily emissions of 6 million cars in southern california. A typical oceangoing vessel carries between one and 4 million gallons of fuel depending on the size and route.
▶ 1:20:29Chair Capito: If a vessel runs on 2 million gallons of fuel blended with 5% biodiesel, when just one ship makes the switch it cuts about 504 pounds of particulate matter and 564 pounds of hydrocarbons from the air. That is only with the 5% blend. A 100% biodiesel blend one vessel using 2 million gallons would cut particulate matter by 5.0 four times and hydrocarbons by 5.64 times.
▶ 1:21:02Chair Capito: We multiply, and with the savings goes up. It seems to me it is common sense and the immediate solution is to reduce particulate carbon emissions from ports and waterways and used more biodiesel and renewable diesel. The port of portland, oregon is using renewable dues or to reduce environmental impact.
▶ 1:21:28Chair Capito: Tacoma and washington begin using a renewable fuel and it is part of their efforts to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2040. The maritime industry is responding in a policy needs to keep up. Expanding biofuel use and maritime sectors strengthens our energy security and and energy security is national security. Domestic biofuel production is a key piece.
▶ 1:21:54Chair Capito: The minister has released unscented argues that reflect the industry. The administrator has committed to filing the law by releasing them on time with statutory requirements, unlike the previous biden administration the biden epa missed the mark by volumes for the targets at over 2 billion gallons below and finalizing below industry capacity.
▶ 1:22:22Chair Capito: Unlike the biden delays and lowball targets, the trump administration restore confidence in the program a timely rvos. The solution is here and ready to grow. The bipartisan bill would deliver new market opportunities for farmers and playing a role in strong biofuel economy. Thank you, chairman for letting me go on.
▶ 1:22:49Chair Capito: You told me I could do that ahead of time so remember you said that. Ms. metcalf, do you agree that biofuels are practical part of the mix for oceangoing vessels?
▶ 1:23:01Ms. Metcalf: Absolutely.
▶ 1:23:05Sen. Ricketts: Do believe the maritime industry has any?
▶ 1:23:09Ms. Metcalf: Biofuels is one of the dunes we are looking at.
▶ 1:23:17Sen. Ricketts: You mentioned some of the others. What is being developed and where is that being adopted? I mentioned tacoma and portland using biofuels what what else is out there and where is it relative to biofuels as well as the maritime industry?
▶ 1:23:37Ms. Metcalf: In the U.S. we have a lot of detached good ideas that I would like to get some sort of an idea and get them all in one room so we could have a concerted strategy development. But globally we are looking at ammonia, hydrogen, lng, biofuels and electric hybrid although I will when you that people think electric is the answer.
▶ 1:24:09Ms. Metcalf: If you expect to get across with batteries, you would have room for under gallons of fuel because the rest of the vessel will be carrying batteries. There are homes globally and in singapore and northern europe. The maersk foundation is looking at biofuels. Certain areas are focusing on certain fuels. So let's say northern europe is looking at methadone.
▶ 1:24:37Ms. Metcalf: Some other area is looking at hydrogen. So we don't expect one if you will to beat the fuel of choice globally. And so the technology development relative to development of engines that can propel themselves.
▶ 1:25:10Ms. Metcalf: There are a number of technologies out there and fuels development, in one case with biofuels, it is a little bit of chemistry but a lot of agriculture. In the case of the other feels it is a lot of chemistry. When I say ammonia, hydrogen, we also have safety issues. And how to deal with them as a whole new world. So I hope I have entered your oppression.
▶ 1:25:36Sen. Ricketts: Thank you. I appreciate that. If you look at the soybean exports in brazil and the united states, one of the things I have been told is we have shipped a lot of soybeans to the city in the northwest in zero orders from china. We have a lot of soybeans and hand.
▶ 1:25:54Sen. Ricketts: So is there supply able to handle it, obviously they would have to be more investment in plants to do that but we are seeing investment in nebraska and I think with robust rfs it with the continued investment in getting that done. I would also like to submit a couple of letters I have for the record indicating support from renewable fuel and oceangoing vessels act. Thank you chairman and ranking member for the hearing today. And look forward.
▶ 1:26:24Chair Capito: We will submit those without objection.
▶ 1:26:30Sen. Blunt: Thank you to the witnesses for being here today. As written I cannot support that renewable fuel for oceangoing vessels act. I want to recognize the bipartisan effort to focus on legislative solutions that support decarbonizing the marine vessel industry and I hope that we can continue the conversation by focusing our efforts on bipartisan solutions that make significant reductions in
▶ 1:27:01Sen. Blunt: Pollution for maritime fuels. During my time in the house, I fought for the epa clean ports program which was based on my climate action planning reports act. That program was an important step to help ports decarbonize by investing in climate action plans and zero emissions ports equipment infrastructure.
▶ 1:27:25Sen. Blunt: Decarbonizing marine vessels is another critical component to reducing air pollution at ports and in coastal communities like those outside the port of wilmington. Congress established the renewable fuel standard to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help expand the renewable energy industry. Mr. republican Mr.
▶ 1:27:54Sen. Blunt: Repubpavelenko, can you discuss how this would reduced it in coastal communities.
▶ 1:27:59Mr. Pavalenko: I expect it will be minimal. This bill only allows maritime fuel producers to tap into the rfs but at its core is fundamentally a mandate for road sector biofuels and does little to stimulate demand. All it does is narrow the price gap somewhat between producing fuel for the maritime sector and one for the road sector.
▶ 1:28:31Mr. Pavalenko: However, absent some kind of outside policy, the I am a net zero framework or separate maritime fuel policy in the U.S., it won't make very much economic sense to sell it fuels into that maritime record because you are losing out on incentives from west coast trade policies, low carbon fuel standards.
▶ 1:28:54Mr. Pavalenko: It also by including this with finn, you are leaving a few very important options off of the table. For example, onshore power supply using electricity to power ships when they are in has a low hanging fruit, it is cost effective and reduces climate impact and not eligible in the rfs.
▶ 1:29:21Mr. Pavalenko: Similarly, methanol, ammonia, not bio and therefore not eligible. So based on that, I don't expect this to have a very meaningful impact on port emissions.
▶ 1:29:45Sen. Blunt: You said it was not sustaining aviation fuel production. What else can we learn from this provision in helping to support the decarbonization of the maritime industry and encouraging the production of renewable energy fuel?
▶ 1:30:06Mr. Pavelenko: The jet fuel has not lifted the market in the U.S. but it is a bit easier than biomass diesel for the maritime sector because when you produce renewable diesel you get some saf as part of the process. That provision helps monetize it a little bit. But will be can learn from aviation in the aviation sector is that you need a stable source of demand.
▶ 1:30:33Mr. Pavelenko: It is not nearly enough to allow fuel to opt in to the program. The aviation sector is very price sensitive. The maritime sector as well. Without meaningful levers to create a market for those fuels, in most cases those consumers will purchase them unless you subsidize it down to parity.
▶ 1:30:59Mr. Pavelenko: This bill and the rfs don't fully subsidize feels down to parity and enhance their uptake has been small.
▶ 1:31:08Sen. Blunt: I will leave this question for you and you can answer it later, expanding maritime fuel is one way to support decarbonization in the maritime industry and at ports. Mr. pavelenko, can you discuss other things we can do.
▶ 1:31:36Mr. Pavelenko: I'm happy to follow up.
▶ 1:31:39Chair Capito: Thank you. So I would like to ask Mr. sao so I would like to ask Mr. sabo as a practitioner in your estate, how long have you been the state forester?
▶ 1:31:52Mr. Sabo: September 1 was a year and I was the deputy prior to that.
▶ 1:31:58Chair Capito: And to respond to senator kelly's questioning, and my view, it left an impression that as a state forester that you would try to take advantage of loopholes and just go full forward in controlled burns and have it -- I don't know. That is not in georgia's best interest. Do you want to make a response to that?
▶ 1:32:24Mr. Sabo: Absolutely. As a prescribed fire practitioner, we really try to uphold that practice to the highest standard. We don't want to smoke in population centers and take advantage of any rules or loopholes. We just want to keep our citizens safe and our forests healthy. All this does is ensure that we keep that practice.
▶ 1:32:51Mr. Sabo: I have heard it today that it is already there and approved I go back to georgia submitted 129 exceptional events and have yet to hear back. Of than the one that was in I believe california, nothing had ever been approved and that was the single fire in georgia, on a good prescribed vern jay, there is nothing to have hundreds of fires going on around an area at
▶ 1:33:25Mr. Sabo: Av -- any -- and on any good prescribed burn day, there is nothing to have hundreds of fires going on around an area. We have to let the smoke dissipate before night and things like that. Nobody wants to be a bad actor in the prescribed fire community because to a degree, there is a social license to do it. We have a culture of the fire in georgia. Other states like Mr.
▶ 1:33:52Mr. Sabo: Wood alluded to, there will be a little of how do we get into it and what is accepted and what is not. So we don't ever want to lose the social license, if you will to allow us to prescribe burns.
▶ 1:34:10Chair Capito: With no further questions I would like to thank the witnesses and my college for your participation. Senators wish to submit written questions for the record have until 5:00 p.m. On wednesday, september 24 to do so. The witnesses responses to those questions are due back to the committee no later than close of business on wednesday, october 1 and those will be submitted for the record. So with that, this hearing is adjourned and think you all very much.