Lisa Murkowski

Allowing these unsafe and unsightly wells to litter Alaska's wilderness while threatening wildlife, human safety, and damaging the pristine Arctic environment is unacceptable.

We would like to take that to the next level and give sort of a tenant-based Energy Star, if you will, to incentivize tenants to save energy.

I appreciate Mr. DeBoer's raising S. 1000, which Senator Portman and I have been working on for over a year.

We're not here for TV.

Increasing our nation's energy efficiency creates jobs, saves businesses and consumers money, and increases economic productivity by providing appropriate targeted tax incentives and defined goals.

So you've got a mandatory audit on all private buildings over a certain size?

My personal belief is that energy efficiency is not only all of the things that everybody's testified to, but it's also a way to bridge some of the differences on our energy strategy in this country.

As we discussed at the hearing, the National Park Service's official position on S. 2273 is one of 'no objection.'

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In Alaska that mountain is referred to as something else. We don't refer to it as Mount McKinley. We just call it Denali.

I appreciate that it is absolutely a balancing that goes on. But I'm concerned that we may actually be putting some maintenance projects on hold as we bring in new units as we see an expansion.

I certainly hope that the difference is not that in order to have the support from the Park Service you actually have had to have been a legislator, who affected that change.

Thank you all. I appreciate your testimony this morning.

I am a huge advocate of geothermal power and the resource itself.

You made a statement that, let's see, no geologic review before injection.

We were in West Virginia this weekend looking at--we were at the Marcellus. They were speaking exactly to that process of the recycling and how that all plays into it.

It sounds like so much of this is, is we are learning. That's an important piece to recognize in all of this as well.

In terms of scale do we need to double the monitoring that we're doing?

I think that the focus here on CCS and waste water injection is an interesting one.

We've got new EPA rules that essentially ban construction of new coal fired power plants unless CCS is out there.

Federal Research concludes quake risk from drilling low, avoidable.

Is it--it's not fair to describe that the risk or the consequences between waste water injection and CCS are comparable.

I introduced a Senate Resolution calling for the U.S. to work on eliminating tariff and non-tariff barriers to clean energy goods and services.

Is it about just deploying it, making sure that you've got the wind turbine up, but if that wind turbine isn't connected to anything, if it's not generating, is that something then that says China is more successful in deploying this?

I believe the U.S. should continue to rigorously enforce its trade laws to level the playing field when there are unfair disparities.