Alan Lowenthal: “My amendment would do two important things. First, it would preserve the Energy Department's ability to select projects…”

“My amendment would do two important things. First, it would preserve the Energy Department's ability to select projects based on merit, and, second, it would preserve a very basic scientific tenet, the ability of the Department of Energy to replicate scientific results. Right now, the underlying bill mandates the prioritization of certain scientific fields over others, and it terminates science initiatives that can validate or question the results of previous scientific research. It is additionally unfortunate that in this formerly bipartisan bill, the majority is again attempting to specifically target and terminate the valuable research programs of some of our Nation's brightest scientists if they study climate change. I think this is shortsighted, I think it is irresponsible, and I believe it is wrong. In order to ensure America's energy security, we must understand the multiplying risks to our energy infrastructure due to a changing climate. In order to ensure America's energy security, we must understand the lifecycle impacts of the fuels we use. And in order to ensure America's energy security, we must lead the world in developing clean renewable sources of energy. For this vision to become a reality, the Department of Energy must support sound scientific processes that include selecting the most meritorious methods and questions that they wish to research and verifying those results through replication. H.R.…”