START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
1,364,192 people care about Politics

10 Things Obama Should Address in His Highly-Anticipated Climate Speech

10 Things Obama Should Address in His Highly-Anticipated Climate Speech

Written by Ryan Koronowski

Last Wednesday at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, President Obama said “we have to get to work on” climate change, “the global threat of our time.”

The president has said as much manytimes over the last five years. His remarks on global warming under the surprisingly sweltering German sun were only a few paragraphs in a much longer speech.

Yet the White House could be preparing to back up those words with action. On Wednesday, the same day the president spoke in Germany, his top climate aide Heather Zichal said he would outline “commonsense” climate actions in the next several weeks. “He is serious about making it a second-term priority,” she said. With Congressional action on even uncontroversial energy efficiency legislation an uncertain thing, the White House will likely focus on steps that require only executive action.

The executive branch has already taken action on things like: issuing an endangerment finding on carbon pollution, adopting stronger vehicle fuel economy standards, investing billions in renewable energy grants and research as well as updating efficiency standards and the electricity grid. Earlier this month, Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping announced an agreement to push the world to phase down the super pollutants known as HFCs. But there is much more to do.

Here are some things that should be included in any climate package unveiled by the president this year:

Move forward swiftly to regulate carbon pollution from new power plants. The 2007 Supreme Court decision that the EPA is required to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act led to a 2009 official “Endangerment Finding” that CO2 is a threat to public health. EPA issued draft rules to regulate carbon from new power plants in March of 2012. The already-delayed rules have been delayed since then, following 2.7 million public comments and concerns from critics that the rules treat natural gas and coal too similarly. Obama could announce that EPA is strengthening the rules and moving forward with their implementation ASAP.

Release draft carbon regulations for existing power plants. John Broder reported in the NY Times that senior officials said Obama was “preparing regulations limiting carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants.” Juliet Eilperin noted that the president has yet to decide whether to go forward with this. The rules, like those for new sources, would be complex and existing source rules will be more comprehensive by definition. But 40 percent of U.S. carbon emissions come from electric power plants and Obama could take a serious step toward reducing that carbon pollution by announcing the swift release of draft rules for existing plants. The process takes long enough that he needs to act very soon in order to have them in place by 2016.

Ordering all agencies to incorporate the cost of carbon pollution into NEPA analyses. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires all federal agencies to take into account and make public the total environmental impact of their decisions on projects and actions. There were reports in March that the president would order federal agencies to take greenhouse gases and climate impacts into account when conducting NEPA reviews. This means both how a project would cause more emissions and how it could be impacted by future climate impacts like extreme heat, flooding, and sea level rise. It would not halt a project on its own, but resulting legal actions from affected parties could affect both mitigation and adaptation. As a recent analysis by CAP noted, it is possible that incorporating the cost of carbon pollution and the impact of climate change into these decisions might even streamline the process. The government recently updated the calculations for the actual social cost of carbon pollution, and ideally in any true cost-benefit analysis, that real economic cost would be incorporated into every decision. Obama could start by including the cost of carbon into NEPA analyses.

Telling the Army Corps of Engineers to take carbon emissions into account for planning decisions. On Tuesday, acting regulatory head of the Army Corps of Engineers Jennifer Moyer testified before a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. She told them that the Corps would not review the climate impacts of coal exports. Despite requests from leaders in the Pacific Northwest and environmental organizations, and the fact that coal exported through planned export terminals will mostly be burned in Asia, the Corps said it would limit its focus to activities within the U.S. Representative Henry Waxman told Moyer that “I think the Corps is making a big mistake.” The president could weigh in and work to ensure that the total ramifications of exporting millions of tons of coal are considered by the Corps.

Finalize an international climate protection treaty. The 2011 United Nations climate talks in Durban, South Africa concluded with an agreement to begin negotiating a new international climate treaty, with a deadline in 2015. Obama could actively participate in negotiating this treaty, which would include all countries within the framework, including developing countries. Including all countries in emissions reductions targets removes a central plank of many critics’ arguments against an international treaty.

Pull the trigger on strong appliance efficiency standards. The Obama administration has been moving at a “glacial pace” to enact critical efficiency standards for electric motors, external power supplies, lighting, and commercial refrigerators. These standards are critical because, according to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, delays implementing the standards have so far built in a $4.4 billion cost on consumers and 44 million metric tons of additional CO2 emissions. Much of the cost and emissions have not taken place but are inevitable because for every month of delay, millions more inefficient products are locked into the system, potentially used for many years. The office that has largely been the source of the delay is Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which reviews all rules proposed by agencies. In the last few months, the administration has completed the overdue standards on microwaves and distribution transformers. Still, the remaining overdue appliance standards cost consumers $200 million per month and 3 million metric tons of additional CO2 emissions.

Tell the country that the Keystone XL Pipeline is not in America’s national interest. There are many reasons — the pipeline will only create 35 permanent jobs, judging from the Southern Leg’s track record it will spill, and the oil will be piped to refineries that will likely export a great deal of it. But the most important reason is that tar sands production through the Keystone XL pipeline will emit the equivalent of51 coal plants’ worth of carbon emissions

Use appropriate federal lands and waters to support clean energy deployment.Earlier this year, CAP noted that the president could act to increase the use of public lands for clean energy development and scale back the fossil fuel extraction that currently happens at an alarming rate on lands owned by American taxpayers. “The Department of the Interior already met the president’s goal of authorizing 10,000 megawatts of renewable energy on federally managed waters and lands. The federal government should build on this success by implementing a ‘clean resources standard’ for public lands and waters. This standard would require federal land and water management agencies to ensure that 35 percent of the electricity from resources on public lands is clean and renewable — from wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, and small hydropower.”

Fully commit the federal government to renewable energy and electric vehicles.Executive Order 13514 directs: “Federal agencies to reduce greenhouse gas pollution … and leverage Federal purchasing power to support innovation and entrepreneurship in clean energy technologies.” Obama signed this in 2009, and specifically, it established a 5 percent renewable energy goal for federal agencies. The president could instruct all agencies to meet this goal by 2014. Then he could raise the goal to 10 percent in 2017 an 15 percent in 2017. This would ensure a strong market for renewable energy across the country.

Commit to push for Congressional action on many overdue energy and climate goals. Though Congress has been slow to move on energy objectives, the president could commit to using his second term to achieving some energy accomplishments that require Congressional action. Approving Gina McCarthy, the president’s pick to be the next EPA Administrator. Making the wind Production Tax Credit permanent. Passing the Master Limited Partnerships Parity Act. Passing strong efficiency legislation. Cutting expensive fossil fuel taxs. Putting a price on carbon and establishing a national clean energy standard.

While the president is unlikely to announce all of these items as elements of his climate agenda (especially the last one), this list would be good framework for serious action on climate change if it is the “global threat of our time” that “we have to get to work on.”

This post was originally published at Climate Progress.

 

Read more: , , , ,

Photo from Thinkstock

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

95 comments

+ add your own
6:38AM PDT on Jul 25, 2013

thanks for sharing

5:49AM PDT on Jun 30, 2013

Great article, hope he reads it and takes note. Thank you.

1:12AM PDT on Jun 30, 2013

thanks for sharing

7:22PM PDT on Jun 28, 2013

sounds like a good list

1:58PM PDT on Jun 28, 2013

Chuck W. You went silent on me. I guess calling you out on your fabrication that Global Warming was a concern in the 1970s and your other disputed facts.

4:46AM PDT on Jun 27, 2013

Thanks for sharing.

4:25AM PDT on Jun 27, 2013

Whatever it will be, it won't be enough!

3:35PM PDT on Jun 26, 2013

Chuck W. This is a continuation please read the post below this one.
During all this temp change the CO2 level remained the same. The CO2 level for the past 2 million years has been static but you can't say the same about the temperature.
4.Your stat on gas is of no use. Termites put more Carbon in the air column then humans.
Please let me know when you can rebut my arguments.

3:33PM PDT on Jun 26, 2013

Chuck W. It is an insignificant amount because that's Scientist call the era we live in is CO2 Impoverished. This has only happened once before 250 million years ago after the GREAT DIE OFF. The Permian Triassic is the only other time that CO2 where at the levels they are today. The Triassic starts off with 1700 PPM and an average global temp 3 degrees C over today's average temp.
1.You can't even propose a what if there is NO CO2. You're eliminating 3.5 Billion years of Carbon base life form evolution.
2.There has been no correlation between CO2 or other Carbon forms in the atmosphere and global Temp. There are no planets undergoing any green house effect due to CO2.
3.The CO2 number you refer to 275 PPM was discredit aver the East Anglia scandal. It never was below 320 -340. Lets go with your number of 275 PPM. 8000 years ago before the birth of Civilization the global average temp was 8-10 degrees c higher than today. The entire Earth (except for mountain effected desserts) was very lush. The Sahara Desert was a verdant plain. Then the Earth had a cooling trend that started the desertification of a lot of lush lands of the Earth. This also motivated humans to settle along rivers and alluvial plains. Around the 10th Century another major temp changed occurred. This is what ended many civilizations and cultures around the world at this time. During all this temp change the CO2 level remained the same. The CO2 level for the past 2 million years has be

2:42PM PDT on Jun 26, 2013

Mike all you got is my error on not moving the decimal point two places to the right. My error was Arthemetic not that touchy feely BS called numeracy. My articuation on this topic has nothing to do with this new age manure for teaching self-esteem. I do have to thank me for putting me in August company. Eintsein and I are in the same group. I feel honoured that I am compared to a Nobel Laureate.
Mike you still need to address my question or do you have the facilities to do so.

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Recent Comments from Causes

thanks for cross-posting here to generate more signatures Robin. Research indicates what she wants is…

Excellent! Hopefully this inspires more places to do the same. Interesting article, thank you!

Sad state of America. People don't pay attention to their own best interests.

Story idea? Want to blog? Contact the editors!
ads keep care2 free

more from causes




Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.