Friday morning from Copenhagen:
President Obama made his long-awaited speech here in Copenhagen just a few minutes ago and there was nothing encouraging about it. “The time for talk is over,” he said, and then failed to commit the U.S. to any new climate-saving actions.
“After months of talk, and two weeks of negotiations, I believe that the pieces of [an] accord are now clear… Mitigation. Transparency. And financing. It is a clear formula Continue reading
Reposted from Its Getting Hot in Here
Yesterday morning before the Youth Clean Energy forum I awoke at 6AM and couldn’t sleep. The anticipation of our movement’s historic opportunity swirled loudly in my head. This was our chance to talk directly to the Obama administration and let them know what we think. In the dim early morning light I wrote this letter to our President and was encouraged to hear that many of the other leaders at the forum felt the same way.
*****************
Dear President Obama,
I have one question for you: When?
When will you seal your place in American history and announce your bold vision to unite this nation behind an Apollo Project for clean energy or a Green New Deal? When will you launch the “Obama Plan” to defend America from one of the greatest threats to our national security, our nation’s health, and our economy?
Our country’s greatest Presidents have emerged to lead us through times of crisis. Mr. President, the solutions to the energy and climate crisis should be your greatest legacy.
During your inspirational campaign for the presidency hundreds of thousands of young people got involved on an unprecedented scale. We knocked on doors for you, made phone calls, harnessed the power of new media, and we voted in record numbers. We voted because we know our future is at stake and we placed our faith in a leader that gave us hope for a better world. Our generation realized its power and we stand proud and ready to see your visionary leadership.
On election night you told us it was our victory and to hold you to your promises, to keep organizing in our communities and revitalizing our democracy. Mr. President I am proud to say that we have. We have led my making our campuses and communities models of the new sustainable society we want to inherit. We are pouring our hearts and our souls into healing our communities from the ongoing violence of this failing fossil fuel economy. We are doing everything we can, but we cannot do it alone.
When will you launch your bold national plan to re-energize America with a new clean and just energy economy, create millions of jobs for those who need them most, unleash our generation’s innovation, and make us the global leader in clean technologies?
Inspire us with a visionary plan rooted in the American promise of “justice for all” and we will unite behind you. We need you as much as you need us. Time is running out, we know what’s at stake, and we refuse to wait much longer. Let’s work together to launch a national campaign for clean energy and make this generation one of the greatest in American history. Our generation has demonstrated the commitment and ingenuity to do it. When will you lead the charge?
Sincerely,
Ethan Nuss
EPA took a giant leap in the direction of greenhouse gas regulation yesterday. The agency issued a
This past week, on the heels of “Climate Week” and attendant Copenhagen preliminaries in New York, Elizabeth Kolbert wrote a nice article in the New Yorker in which she mused over what it would actually take for the US to show real leadership on climate change.
None of the suggestions Kolbert offered at all resembled the Senate climate bill Senators Barbara Boxer and John Kerry unveiled Wednesday. While an improvement over the Waxman Markey bill, overall the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act falls far short of the high bar of climate leadership the US needs to clear and reminds us that the question we should be asking right now is not what US leadership should really look like. I think we already know the answer to that. No, the question we really have to address is, what is holding US leadership back, and how do we overcome it.
In a word, I think the answer is capital. Oil and coal have deep pockets and they use them well to finance the crippling of federal climate efforts. They’ve been outspending us in the climate fight. And the truth is the only way we’re going to win is by beating them at their own game. Simply put, if we want a stronger climate bill, we’ve got to “buy” it. Continue reading
A few years back climate activists in the US organized hundreds of simultaneous events in cities all across the country for the Step it Up days of action. In so doing they took the US political dialogue about climate change the next level.
Now the same minds behind the Step it Up actions
Cross-Posted from: here
I happened to catch the opening part of President Barack Obama’s health care town hall meeting in Bristol, Virginia. At the beginning of these, local politicians are usually acknowledged by the President. So Obama thanks the Virginia Senators and the Governor, and then mentions that the Congressman of this area is Rick Boucher. Now, Obama could leave it at acknowledging Rick Boucher like the others, but instead he goes on an elaboration of energy, saying Boucher was an early supporter of his campaign, and has worked to ensure an energy policy where clean coal is part of Virginia’s energy future, which will create jobs. Because of this, Obama proclaims “I love Rick Boucher.”
Now, as whole I’m a supporter of Obama’s presidency. After 8 years of Bush I’m infinitely happier with Obama as president. I think Obama understands the critical issues around clean energy and climate change. Although he needs to show much stronger leadership and be more vocal with the media, I have considered the stimulus investment, stronger fuel economy standards, as well as his administration’s aggressive behind the scenes arm-twisting over the Waxman-Markey bill(which I support) to be pretty good. At the same time, I’ve criticized his administration over the EPA ruling on mountaintop removal, as well as his stance on clean coal, which is no secret at this point. The tar sands aren’t looking too good either.
But the notion that Obama can stand there and proclaim such outstanding support for a bought out Congressman is absolutely disgraceful and damaging. Not just because of Boucher’s efforts to drain what should be clean energy funding into longshot carbon capture and sequestration. That you would expect Obama to support. It’s the fact that Boucher was the leader on the Energy and Commerce Committee in weakening Waxman-Markey’s emissions targets and he pushed to weaken them any further. It’s that Boucher took a 25% renewable electricity standard and a 15% efficiency standard and turned them into 20% combined together. These were the two biggest weakening effects. Although permit allocations and EPA authority are not at the top of my complaint list, Boucher had a big hand in those tamperings as well. If you could pick one member of the House that’s done the most damage to our efforts to pass a strong climate bill, it’s Rick Boucher. That’s why back in May, I was present at a direct action protest in the halls of Congress, where some blocked Boucher’s office and were arrested. At that event, one of the organizers Mike Tidwell, the director of CCAN and a friend talked about how Obama had all these goals for a good climate bill, and that Boucher was ruining Obama’s plan. If this really was so, Obama would not have such kind words for Boucher.
These kinds of remarks along with the EPA’s inability to block mountaintop removal mining makes me quite perplexed when I hear activists say we should kill the current bill so EPA can work its magic. I seriously doubt EPA would do better even if it moved in a timely fashion and cleared all the legal hurdles.
So, some general points I’m making to take away…
– I wouldn’t bet the planet on the EPA, and I doubt China or India would either. Let’s do our best to get a bill passed and improved out of the Senate that we can take to Copenhagen.
– I don’t like Rick Boucher.
– President Obama is doing some good things and some bad things. However, if he doesn’t adopt a much stronger public stance to pass a Senate bill and get a treaty in Copenhagen, his Presidency will go down in history as a colossal failure despite some of the good things he does.
– You can’t take a stronger public approach if you’re holding hands adoringly with Rick Boucher.
Below is an email I received from Matt Wasson from http://www.ilovemountains.org
The pressure on the Obama administration to stop mountaintop removal coal mining is building across the country.
Last week, we asked you to call the White House and tell the administration that it was time to reverse the devastating 2002 Bush Administration “fill rule,” which allows coal companies to dump their toxic mining waste into our nation’s streams.
And next week, on June 23rd, climate scientist Dr. James Hansen will join community members and activists from around the country in Coal River Valley, West Virginia to launch a year of activism to end mountaintop removal coal mining.
Hansen and others will gather at Marsh Fork Elementary — the elementary school that is next to a mountaintop removal mine operated by Massey Energy and just 400 yards downslope from a 2.8 billion gallon coal sludge impoundment that threatens the school.
The activists will then march a short distance to Massey Energy’s office of operations and risk arrest in a line crossing civil disobedience, in order to raise awareness of the devastation that mountaintop removal coal mining is causing to the mountains and communities of Appalachia.
Can you take a moment to stand with them, and help put pressure on the Obama administration to take immediate action to end mountaintop removal coal mining today?
We’re asking every member of iLoveMountains.org to take just three minutes to email the White House to ask President Obama to immediately begin the process of overturning the Bush-era “fill rule,” which allows coal companies to dump their toxic mining waste into our nation’s streams.
Please, click here to email President Obama now.
The Obama administration needs to hear that simply enforcing Bush-era rules and laws is not enough. The administration must overturn the Bush-era rules to begin the process of building a sustainable future for Appalachia.
That’s why the activists gathering at Coal River Valley next week are risking arrest — to send the message that impact on the mountains, communities and waterways of central Appalachia have been ignored for too long.
Please, take a moment to make sure President Obama hears that message:
Email President Obama today.
Thank you for taking action.
Matt Wasson
iLoveMountains.org
PS Contact Annie Sartor (annie@ran.org) at Rainforest Action Network if you are interested in coming to Coal River Mountain on June 23rd.
Cross-posted from: here
Typically, the health care industry, the automotive industry, and the energy industry have teamed up with Republicans on major issues in Washington. For many years, these alliances have derailed health care reform, bold fuel economy standards, and significant legislation to combat climate change. It would appear these special interests have done a complete 360.
President Barack Obama gathered at the White House with the health care industry on May 11th announcing a commitment to cut 2 trillion in costs in 10 years. A week after, Obama appeared with the major car companies, announcing an increase of fuel economy standards of passenger cars to 39 mpg by 2016. Days later, a climate change bill passed out of the Energy and Commerce Committee. The bill was supported by energy companies including Duke Energy and Excelon. Well, this is a change. Contrary to what Obama would have us believe, the change is smaller in reality than it’s written on paper.
For some strange reason, the Republicans have decided to stop making sense. Their arguments over health care, fuel efficient cars, and global warming amongst other issues are so blatantly irrational, they’ve reduced their party to an irrelevance. Even worse, they’re attempting to legislate as though the American people have given them control of the entire government. Not surprisingly, big business bolted. Their once reliable and seemingly rational ally lost all sense of reality. Facing the prospect of universal health care, strong fuel economy mandates, and a tough cap on greenhouse gas emissions, they crossed the isle.
This involved making compromises and meeting Democratic lawmakers halfway on major issues. In their eyes, corporations would rather bite the bullet than swallow the grenade. Democrats would prefer easily won battles over hard fought wars. Why expend your political capital on a single issue you might lose on when you can make it appear to the public you’ve won big while holding hands with longtime opponents?
The new 39 mpg fuel economy standards by 2016 may appear bold. Compare them to the rest of the world. China’s average cars had to meet a standard of 35.8 mpg in 2008, nevermind passenger! In Japan and the EU, the standards are even greater right now. Somehow, some way, our automakers will find the “technological innovation” to meet the standards in 2016 that foreign companies are meeting right now. In order to get off foreign oil, we must do better.
Consider the climate change bill. The most effective way to manage a cap and trade bill is to auction off 100% of the pollution permits, as President Obama originally called for. This forces the polluting industries to pay, and then the revenues can be returned to the American people to offset higher energy costs. On the condition that companies such as Excelon and Duke Energy support the bill, the vast majority of the permits are being given away for free to the polluters. Democratic lawmakers on the Energy and Commerce Committee such as Rick Boucher of Virginia have taken hundreds of thousands of dollars from the coal industry. Not surprisingly, he has led the charge on weakening the bill, and will continue to do so in a way that threatens to render it ineffective at preventing catastrophic climate change.
Since the EPA has declared carbon dioxide is a health hazard, the executive branch has the authority to regulate the pollutant if it so chooses. If Obama truly wanted a strong climate bill, he could use this possibility to bully lawmakers and big business into supporting a stronger bill that places American interests above the coal interests. The alternative to a weak climate bill could be the EPA taking matters into its own hands. Obama has been very hands off, fine with allowing the coal industry to write the bill.
The battle over health care will come soon in Congress, and progressive advocates will face their own hardships in achieving meaningful legislation. How $2 trillion dollars in savings would be achieved was left to the imagination of the public. As the AP noted “the specifics, industry officials said, would come later.” When put into context, the specifics of the fuel economy standards and the climate bill are far from welcome.
The small steps President Obama is taking on these issues are far preferable to the backwards thinking of the previous administration. What’s not right is painting the picture to the American public that Washington is taking major steps to confront global warming, energy independence, and health care. This is simply a political game being used to keep the approval ratings steady. It’s working, and Obama along with the Democratic party will likely be reelected in 2010 and 2012. Much to Rush Limbaugh’s dismay, Obama will succeed. But given the monumental challenges we face, and the half-hearted measures being used to confront them, will we?
Cross-Posted from HERE
I’ve been blogging consistently about the climate bill written by Congressmen Markey and Waxman which is being considered by the Energy and Commerce Committee. Right now, the bill is in sub-committee and about to be marked up and negotiated on. Although the short term target of 20% by 2025 is not strong enough, moderate and conservative Democrats on the committee are looking to weaken the bill. Right now the main compromise looks as though it’s going to be on emissions targets and permit allocations. Excerpt below..
“The talks suggest that utilities that distribute electricity from coal-fired plants are making progress in their efforts to get free access to 40 percent of the emissions permits, underscoring the challenge lawmakers face in seeking strict limits on carbon dioxide and other contributors to warming.”
Of course, allocating permits to polluters for free really defeats the purpose, which is to make the polluters pay for polluting. The risk of selling permits for free is that utilities raise prices anyways on consumers, but the government has not sold enough permits to offset this increased cost by spending the revenue on energy relief. In otherwards, people are not going to fare any better under 40% permits sold for free than 100% sold for a price. In fact, they may fare worse. It also means it will be harder to hit reductions targets.
However, Congressman John Dingel has predicted a bill will pass in some form because of the fact that the EPA has deemed greenhouse emissions a health hazard, and can exercise the authority to regulate them if Congress does not. In otherwards, if the EPA wanted to right now, they could set their own rules for polluters with their own targets without needing the Congress. Here is what was said regarding this in the article I posted last week…
“EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson cautioned that regulations are not imminent and made clear that the Obama administration would prefer that Congress address the climate issue through a broader “cap-and-trade” program that would limit heat-trapping pollution. But she said it was clear from the EPA analysis “that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations” and steps are needed to curtail the impact. Even if actual regulations are not imminent, the EPA action was seen as likely to encourage action on Capitol Hill. It’s “a wake-up call for Congress”
I will admit that I don’t usually get really angry and pumped up about taking action online. But then I got an update from this organization called “White House 2,” which is basically an exercise in direct democracy, where citizens can post their priorities for Obama, and have other people vote to support or oppose them. Since they’ve gotten a bit of attention and are expanding to share the priorities of Real Americans with Congress, I figured I’d check it out and see how my priorities were doing.
Yay! “Invest in clean energy and create 5 million green jobs” is in the top 10! Woo! Oh wait a minute. So is “Drill for Oil in our own country.” I would encourage you to go and oppose that one.
This was not promising, so I decided to delve deeper. And – horror upon horrors – there are more people OPPOSED to “Joining the International Community on Climate Change” than there are in support of it. And there was NO priority calling for a science-based, industry-wide cap on carbon. Well, until I made one. (vote for it! It’s priority number 1061 or something really ridiculously low right now)
Come on, climateers! We’ve got to make sure that the discussion on climate change is not dominated by special interests and climate deniers. So take a few minutes for strategic clicking, and get our priorities back on the map.