Obama’s Ambitious Global Warming Action Plan

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,127
8,145
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
Obama’s Ambitious Global Warming Action Plan

Obama Addressing the threat of Climate Change | White House Weekly Address 6/22/2013 - YouTube

In advance of President Obama’s speech Tuesday afternoon laying out his three-pronged plan to cut releases of greenhouse gases and the impacts of global warming, White House officials circulated detailed fact sheets and discussed the plans with journalists, including me, last night. They laid out an impressive array of steps, most of which have long been in the pipeline or anticipated and which can be carried out without congressional approval. [Georgetown University, which is hosting the speech, will stream it here at 1:35 p.m. Eastern time.]

The 21-page White House “climate action plan” is easy to search and read, so I encourage you to sift it yourself.

The three main sections describe planned regulations, rules and standards aimed at cutting releases of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from power plants, heavy vehicles and buildings; a suite of new steps to cut vulnerability to climate and coastal hazards; and a fresh summary of international initiatives the administration plans to pursue with other countries.

“While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change,” one circulated statement said, “the President believes we have a moral obligation to our kids to leave them a planet that’s not polluted and damaged.”

Of course this climate plan is just rhetoric until it is translated into on-the-ground actions. And the most significant steps, such as the rule-making that would cut carbon dioxide pollution from existing power plants, will take a decade or more to come to fruition.

But if you doubt the reality of this shift, just look at the news coverage from Monday of the drop in the price of shares in coal companies ahead of the speech. This headline in Street Insider says it all: “Coal Stocks Routed as Pres. Obama Preps to Tackle Carbon Emissions.”

The plans on the international front appear to set the United States on a different track from the World Bank, which has signaled strong concerns about climate change but still supports the construction of new coal-burning power plants in some big developing countries (India, for example) if they are the most efficient design. In an interview Monday night, a senior White House official said that the United States would end financial support for such projects except if they have systems for capturing carbon dioxide (none do) or are in the “world’s poorest countries.”

Obama’s plan for boosting the country’s capacity to withstand climate-related hazards has some great sections, including this line:

The President will direct federal agencies to identify and remove barriers to making climate-resilient investments; identify and remove counterproductive policies that increase vulnerabilities; and encourage and support smarter, more resilient investments, including through agency grants, technical assistance, and other programs, in sectors from transportation and water management to conservation and disaster relief.

What’s particularly welcome there is the language on “removing counterproductive policies that increase vulnerabilities” — which I hope will lead to some of the steps I recently described that could cut costs from future wildfires in America’s “red zones,” as well as shifts in how federal flood insurance is priced. There are echoes of points I explored in this January piece: “Obama’s Second-Term Options on the Environment.”

Here are the main points, as laid out in a White House fact sheet:

President Obama’s Plan to Cut Carbon Pollution

Taking Action for Our Kids

We have a moral obligation to leave our children a planet that’s not polluted or damaged, and by taking an all-of-the-above approach to develop homegrown energy and steady, responsible steps to cut carbon pollution, we can protect our kids’ health and begin to slow the effects of climate change so we leave a cleaner, more stable environment for future generations. Building on efforts underway in states and communities across the country, the President’s plan cuts carbon pollution that causes climate change and threatens public health. Today, we have limits in place for arsenic, mercury and lead, but we let power plants release as much carbon pollution as they want – pollution that is contributing to higher rates of asthma attacks and more frequent and severe floods and heat waves.

Cutting carbon pollution will help keep our air and water clean and protect our kids. The President’s plan will also spark innovation across a wide variety of energy technologies, resulting in cleaner forms of American-made energy and cutting our dependence on foreign oil. Combined with the President’s other actions to increase the efficiency of our cars and household appliances, the President’s plan will help American families cut energy waste, lowering their gas and utility bills. In addition, the plan steps up our global efforts to lead on climate change and invests to strengthen our roads, bridges, and shorelines so we can better protect people’s homes, businesses, and way of life from severe weather.

While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, we have a moral obligation to act on behalf of future generations. Climate change represents one of the major challenges of the 21st century, but as a nation of innovators, we can and will meet this challenge in a way that advances our economy, our environment, and public health all at the same time. That is why the President’s comprehensive plan takes action to:

Cuts Carbon Pollution in America. In 2012, U.S. carbon pollution from the energy sector fell to the lowest level in two decades even as the economy continued to grow. To build on this progress, the Obama Administration is putting in place tough new rules to cut carbon pollution—just like we have for other toxins like mercury and arsenic —so we protect the health of our children and move our economy toward American-made clean energy sources that will create good jobs and lower home energy bills. For example, the plan:

• Directs EPA to work closely with states, industry and other stakeholder to establish carbon pollution standards for both new and existing power plants;

• Makes up to $8 billion in loan guarantee authority available for a wide array of advanced fossil energy and efficiency projects to support investments in innovative technologies;

• Directs DOI to permit enough renewables project—like wind and solar – on public lands by 2020 to power more than 6 million homes; designates the first-ever hydropower project for priority permitting; and sets a new goal to install 100 megawatts of renewables on federally assisted housing by 2020; while maintaining the commitment to deploy renewables on military installations;

• Expands the President’s Better Building Challenge, focusing on helping commercial, industrial, and multi-family buildings cut waste and become at least 20 percent more energy efficient by 2020;

• Sets a goal to reduce carbon pollution by at least 3 billion metric tons cumulatively by 2030 – more than half of the annual carbon pollution from the U.S. energy sector – through efficiency standards set over the course of the Administration for appliances and federal buildings;

• Commits to partnering with industry and stakeholders to develop fuel economy standards for heavy-duty vehicles to save families money at the pump and further reduce reliance on foreign oil and fuel consumption post-2018; and

• Leverages new opportunities to reduce pollution of highly-potent greenhouse gases known as hydrofluorocarbons; directs agencies to develop a comprehensive methane strategy; and commits to protect our forests and critical landscapes.

Prepares the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change. Even as we take new steps to cut carbon pollution, we must also prepare for the impacts of a changing climate that are already being felt across the country. Building on progress over the last four years, the plan:

• Directs agencies to support local climate-resilient investment by removing barriers or counterproductive policies and modernizing programs; and establishes a short-term task force of state, local, and tribal officials to advise on key actions the Federal government can take to help strengthen communities on the ground;

• Pilots innovative strategies in the Hurricane Sandy-affected region to strengthen communities against future extreme weather and other climate impacts; and building on a new, consistent flood risk reduction standard established for the Sandy-affected region, agencies will update flood-risk reduction standards for all federally funded projects;

• Launches an effort to create sustainable and resilient hospitals in the face of climate change through a public-private partnership with the healthcare industry;

• Maintains agricultural productivity by delivering tailored, science-based knowledge to farmers, ranchers, and landowners; and helps communities prepare for drought and wildfire by launching a National Drought Resilience Partnership and by expanding and prioritizing forest- and rangeland-restoration efforts to make areas less vulnerable to catastrophic fire; and

• Provides climate preparedness tools and information needed by state, local, and private-sector leaders through a centralized “toolkit” and a new Climate Data Initiative.

Lead International Efforts to Address Global Climate Change. Just as no country is immune from the impacts of climate change, no country can meet this challenge alone. That is why it is imperative for the United States to couple action at home with leadership internationally. America must help forge a truly global solution to this global challenge by galvanizing international action to significantly reduce emissions, prepare for climate impacts, and drive progress through the international negotiations. For example, the plan:

• Commits to expand major new and existing international initiatives, including bilateral initiatives with China, India, and other major emitting countries;

• Leads global sector public financing towards cleaner energy by calling for the end of U.S. government support for public financing of new coal-fired powers plants overseas, except for the most efficient coal technology available in the world’s poorest countries, or facilities deploying carbon capture and sequestration technologies; and

• Strengthens global resilience to climate change by expanding government and local community planning and response capacities.

source: http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/obamas-global-warming-action-plan/

//////////////////////////////

This is NOT an anti-Obama thread, this is to debate Obama's stance on Global Warming/Climate Change and who this new legislation will effect business and the US economy??
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,889
126
63
More regulation + higher taxes = fewer jobs, lower growth, climate continuing to change
 

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
I know he won't be able to get the disastrous Kyoto Agreement and its Carbon Credit fiasco through Congress. So the largely consensual programs of reducing pollution aren't as aggregious.. even though they are in support of a malevolent anti-human political agenda in AGW.. propelled by an utterly made up threat and fear mongering for the easily decieved. It still represents a huge and unnecessary diversion and evisceration of American and Western economic potential already driven the brink by Free Trade.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister

This is NOT an anti-Obama thread, this is to debate Obama's stance on Global Warming/Climate Change and who this new legislation will effect business and the US economy??

gopher will be so relieved

More regulation + higher taxes = fewer jobs, lower growth, climate continuing to change

That sums it up quite nicely.

... Except for the raft of new permits allowing for the drilling of shale oil and gas... Maybe they have a form of carbon-free hydrocarbons that they are developing to help reduce the carbon foot print
 

Cobalt_Kid

Council Member
Feb 3, 2007
1,760
17
38
The US uses massive amounts of fossil fuels:

US coal productions and consumption.

U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: 2010 Year in Review - Energy Information Administration

Coal production in the United States in 2010 increased to a level of 1,085.3 million short tons according to preliminary data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), an increase of 1.0 percent, or 10.4 million short tons above the 2009 level of 1,074.9 million short tons (Table 1). In 2010 U.S. coal consumption increased in all sectors except commercial and institutional while total coal stocks fell slightly for the year. Coal consumption in the electric power sector in 2010 was higher by 4.5 percent, while coking coal consumption increased by 37.9 percent and the other industrial sector increased by 7.1 percent. The commercial and institutional sector, which prior to 2008 had been called the "residential and commercial" sector and is the smallest of all the coal-consuming sectors, declined by 3.1 percent in 2010. (Note: All percentage change calculations are done at the short-tons level.) U.S. coal exports increased from the 2009 levels due mostly to higher demand for metallurgical coal, while coal imports decreased for a third year in a row.

The increase in coal consumption for electric generation during the year was the consequence of improving domestic economic conditions further bolstered by a cold winter and warm summer in important coal-consuming regions. Preliminary data show that total generation in the electric power sector (electric utilities and independent power producers, including useful thermal output) in the U.S. increased in 2010 by 4.2 percent. Coal-based generation also increased, resulting in a 42.0 million short ton increase in coal consumed in the electric power sector. Coal use in all the sectors other than the electric power sector increased by 13.9 percent to a level of 72.7 million short tons.

The international coal trade markets for most of 2010 were reflective of a worldwide economic rebound. U.S. coal exports rose sharply for the year. U.S. coal exports totaled 81.7 million short tons, an increase of 22.6 million short tons over 2009 levels. Exports of metallurgical coal rose by 18.8 million short tons and accounted for most of the increase in total exports. U.S. imports of coal fell to 19.4 million short tons or 3.3 million short tons below 2009 levels, in part due to recent increases in the price of imported steam coal to almost parity with domestic levels.

Over 1 billion tons of coal was mined in the US in 2010, most of it used domestically.

US oil consumption.

List of countries by oil consumption - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Over 19 million barrels of oil a day in 2010.

US natural gas consumption.

List of countries by natural gas consumption - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Almost 700 billion cubic meters in 2011.

There's simply no way to replace this with renewables like wind and solar that have low energy density, are intermittent and will need to cover huge areas of the nation.

If Obama is serious about replacing fossil fuels then he's going to need to invest in nuclear power in a big way and that includes developing and building advanced reactor designs like molten salt breeder reactors.
 

Cobalt_Kid

Council Member
Feb 3, 2007
1,760
17
38
Obama is simply following the law.

That's true, the US Supreme Court has found that CO2 does constitute a pollutant and that the EPA must regulate it's emission.

Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First, the petitioners were found to have standing.[6] Justice Stevens reasoned that the states had a particularly strong interest in the standing analysis.[7] The majority cited Justice Holmes' opinion in Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co.:

"The case has been argued largely as if it were one between two private parties; but it is not. The very elements that would be relied upon in a suit between fellow-citizens as a ground for equitable relief are wanting here. The State owns very little of the territory alleged to be affected, and the damage to it capable of estimate in money, possibly, at least, is small. This is a suit by a State for an injury to it in its capacity of quasi-sovereign. In that capacity the State has an interest independent of and behind the titles of its citizens, in all the earth and air within its domain. It has the last word as to whether its mountains shall be stripped of their forests and its inhabitants shall breathe pure air."[8]

Second, the Court held that the CAA gives the EPA the authority to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases. The CAA provides:

“The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe (and from time to time revise) in accordance with the provisions of this section, standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”[9]

The CAA defines "air pollutant" as "any air pollution agent or combination of such agents, including any physical, chemical, biological, radioactive . . . substance or matter which is emitted into or otherwise enters the ambient air".[10] The majority opinion commented that "greenhouse gases fit well within the CAA’s capacious definition of air pollutant."[11]

Finally, the Court remanded the case to the EPA, requiring the agency to review its contention that it has discretion in regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. The Court found the current rationale for not regulating to be inadequate and required the agency to articulate a reasonable basis in order to avoid regulation.

On remand, EPA found that six greenhouse gases “in the atmosphere may reasonably be anticipated both to endanger public health and to endanger public welfare.” On February 16, 2010, the states of Alabama, Texas, and Virginia and several other parties sought judicial review of EPA's determination in the U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. On June 26, 2012, the court issued an opinion which dismissed the challenges to the EPA's endangerment finding and the related GHG regulations.[14] The three-judge panel unanimously upheld the EPA's central finding that GHG such as carbon dioxide endanger public health and were likely responsible for the global warming experienced over the past half century.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,905
14,433
113
Low Earth Orbit
In advance of President Obama’s speech Tuesday afternoon laying out his three-pronged plan...

Three prongs eh?



 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Using executive order.

Yes- that's his Constitutional prerogative. So that means no new taxes unless he plans on sending it to Congress. The President can't authorize new taxes without approval from Congress first.
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
1
36
Hundreds of businesses including eBay, Nestle and General Mills have issued their support for Barack Obama’s clean power plan, billed as the strongest action ever on climate change by a US president.


The rules, announced on Monday, are designed to cut emissions from power plants and have been strengthened in terms of the long-term ambition as originally proposed by the president last year, but slightly weakened in the short-term in a concession to states reliant on highly-polluting coal.


White House adviser Brian Deese said the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules represented the “biggest step that any single president has made to curb the carbon pollution that is fuelling climate change”. The US is the world’s second biggest carbon emitter after China.


The rules are expected to trigger a “tsunami” of legal opposition from states and utilities who oppose the plans, which will significantly boost wind and solar power generation and force a switch away from coal power. Republican presidential hopefuls moved quickly to voice their opposition, saying they would be economically damaging.


But 365 businesses and investors wrote to 29 state governors to strongly support the rules, which they said would benefit the economy and create jobs.




more




Obama's clean power plan hailed as US's strongest ever climate action | Environment | The Guardian
 

bluebyrd35

Council Member
Aug 9, 2008
2,373
0
36
Ormstown.Chat.Valley
hmmm. So, we are a bit tired of hearing that it is not global weather changes that is the cause of the obvious weather changes but merely a normal occurrence. I hope some people will consider that perhaps it is wise to prepare and try to counteract the results of a "normal" weather pattern? Does it matter if it is human produced or a normal cycle, the weather is becoming more and more outrageous. We are experiencing stronger storms, colder winders and summers that are all over the map.

So do we ignore the obvious and do nothing or at least accept there have been changes and there will be more and do a bit of planning??