The New Speaker of the House is a Climate Retard (Videos)

Paul Ryan is the US rep from Wisconsin, he is also a leading climate denier and now he is speaker of the House. This makes him the third ranking individual in the line of command over the most powerful office in the world.

In 2010 Ryan said, “there is growing disagreement among scientists about climate change and its causes.” This statement was ridiculous in 2010 and even more absurd in 2015.



The Huffington Post quoted Ryan as having said some incredibly stupid things on the subject of climate change as part of his bid for reelection to the House last year. This includes statements like, "The planet has faced climate change forever and humans' pollution might not be to blame." Ryan was not done, in the one hour debate he went on to say that he does not think that "science" knows who or what is responsible for climate change.



In an op-ed, Ryan has suggested that climate change should be a low priority for Wisconsinites because it snows in their state in the winter, writing: “Unilateral economic restraint in the name of fighting global warming has been a tough sell in our communities, where much of the state is buried under snow.”

Ryan also asserted that the EPA’s proposed power plant regulations are "obnoxious" and he went on to say, "I think they’re exceeding their authority and I think they kill jobs."

While Ryan expresses "concern" about the accuracy of climate science, the focus of his opposition is about his disdain for regulation and economic regulation in particular. He constantly asserts that climate regulations would impose an enormous cost on our economy.

Also in last year's debate Ryan also said efforts to combat climate change are costly and unproven. "The benefits do not outweigh the costs," Ryan said.

He could not be more wrong.

A cost benefit analyses shows that merit of climate action over inaction. Studies that have corroborated this view include the Risky Business report, and a report form the IIED. There are also a number of more recent reports from Citibank, LSE, WHO, Tufts University, Skeptical Science and the EPA. All of which make the point that there are a number of benefits from combating climate change. Not the least of which is avoiding the astronomical costs associated with inaction.

Read More»

Climate Realities all but Absent from the Republican CNBC Presidential Debate

Rather than focusing on 21st century economic visions, the third Republican presidential debate seemed to be rooted in the 19th century. There has been some discussion in the press about the fact that even the GOP's presidential candidates accept the veracity of global warming, however there was very little evidence of this during the CNBC Republican presidential debate in Boulder, Colorado.

The debate on on Wednesday, October 28th, was supposed to be about jobs and the economy, however there was no mention of the massive economic and employment opportunities from transitioning to a low carbon economy. There was no talk of how carbon reduction makes good business sense, nor was there any mention of sustainability, the largest business megatrend in the world today.  Except for a comment from Christie, there was no mention of renewable energy, (eg wind, solar), or efficiency. Nor was there any mention of the economic benefits of cleantech or the costs associated with sea level rise, or extreme weather.

Republican candidates completely ignored a number of cost benefit analyses that favor climate action over inaction. This includes the Risky Business report, and a report form the IIED. A number of more recent reports from Citibank, LSE, WHO, Tufts University, Skeptical Science and the EPA.also make the point that there are a host of bottom line benefits from combating climate change and avoiding the astronomical costs associated with inaction.

Tired old ideologies and reiterations of failed conservative policy positions permeated the field of Republican presidential hopefuls that included real estate mogul Donald Trump, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former HP CEO Carly Fiorina, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Ohio Gov. John Kasich. The moderators were CNBC hosts Becky Quick and Carl Quintanilla and Washington Bureau Chief and New York Times columnist John Harwood.

While the candidates avoided anything even remotely green they did venerate outmoded conservative exultation of free markets, the very same free markets that spawned collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) that led to the financial crisis of 2008.

As explained by Paul: "It always seems to be the private marketplace does a better job." While this is the conservative line it is factually accurate. As Bill Gates said recently, government R&D is far more effective and efficient than anything the private sector could do. Gates explained in a U.S. Uncut article:

"Since World War II, U.S.-government R&D has defined the state of the art in almost every area...The private sector is in general inept...DARPA money is very well spent, and the basic-science money is very well spent. The government has these ‘Centers of Excellence.’ They should have twice as many of those things, and those things should get about four times as much money as they do."

The only time that oil subsidies were mentioned in the debate is when Carson recanted:

Dr. Carson, you told The Des Moines Register that you don’t like government subsidies, it interferes with the free market. But you’ve also said that you’re in favor of taking oil subsidies and putting them towards ethanol processing. Isn’t that just swapping one subsidy for another, Doctor?

CARSON: Well, first of all, I was wrong about taking the oil subsidy.

The other time that oil was mentioned is was when Trump said that the reason that Kasich had done well in his state was because of fracking.

Christie did get grilled for believing in climate change but he managed to answer the question without reference to fossil fuels, or renewable energy.

HARWOOD: Governor Christie, you’ve said something that many in your party do not believe, which is that climate change is undeniable, that human activity contributes to it, and you said, quote: “The question is, what do we do to deal with it?”. So what do we do?

CHRISTIE: Well, first off, what we don’t do is do what Hillary Clinton and John Kerry and Barack Obama want us to do, which is their solution for everything, put more taxes on it, give more money to Washington, D.C., and then they will fix it. Well, there is no evidence that they can fix anything in Washington, D.C....What we should do is to be investing in all types of energy, John, all types of energy. I’ve laid out...We’ve laid out a national energy plan that says that we should invest in all types of energy. I will tell you, you could win a bet at a bar tonight, since we’re talking about fantasy football, if you ask who the top three states in America are that produce solar energy: California and Arizona are easy, but number three is New Jersey. Why? Because we work with the private sector to make solar energy affordable and available to businesses and individuals in our state. We need to make sure that we do everything across all kinds of energy: natural gas, oil, absolutely. But also where it’s affordable, solar, wind in Iowa has become very affordable and it makes sense. That is the way we deal with global warming, climate change, or any of those problems, not through government intervention, not through government taxes, and for God’s sake, don’t send Washington another dime until they stop wasting the money they’re already sending there.

Gates flatly disagrees with Christie on this point. Gates believes that the only way we will be able to deal with climate change is through government involvement. "Gates admitted that the private sector is too selfish and inefficient to do the work on its own, and that mitigating climate change would be impossible without the help of government research and development."

Other than the exchange above, the slate of Republican presidential hopefuls stuck to the conservative economic script and promised to reduce taxes (in Trump's case by an astounding 10 trillion) and create jobs. They were all predictably short on specifics and about as authentic as Fiorini's smile and Bush's anger.

Harwood asked, "is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign?" Although the question, was directed at Trump, it could easily apply to all the Republican candidates.

Read More»

Climate Change is Here and Demands Urgent Action

The science of climate change is irrefutable even if some people remain confused and we are rapidly running out of time to deal with this urgent crisis. The threat is extends beyond an economic collapse, its implications are nothing short of civilization altering. 

Between 97 percent, and 99.9 percent of climate scientists say anthropogenic climate change is real. There is a mountains of research supporting the existence of climate change (not the least of which is the comprehensive IPCC AR5 report) while deniers do not publish papers because there is no credible scientific research that could support their claims. The only way that global warming deniers can support their position is by using falsified claims.

If we look at three objective measures, heat records, ice loss and ocean impacts, we already see strong evidence that climate change is happening now and there is every reason to expect that it will get far worse in the future. 

Heat

September was globally the hottest September on record by a substantial margin. With three months to go, seven months in 2015 have broken a record for being the hottest months on record. This year is on track to be by far the hottest year on record beating 2014, which is the second hottest year by a wide margin. The 10 hottest years all since 1998. We are also seeing far more high temperature records broken than lows and the departures from the mean are increasing. 

Ice

Summertime Arctic ice thin by more than 80 percent from 1975 to 2012. Arctic sea ice volume dropping so fast it’s called a death spiral. The percentage of older ice in the Arctic dropping. We losing 450 billion tons of land ice every year. We have lost 5 trillions tons of land ice just since 2002. The vast majority of glaciers across the planet are melting.

Oceans

All this melting ice is contributing to sea level rise. Sea levels are currently rising by more than 3 millimeters per year and the oceans are the oceans getting more acidic producing vast dead zones. The costs of ocean acidification are already around a trillion dollars per year.

Warning

The repercussions of climate disruption are still not being acknowledged fully, warned climatologist Dr. James Hansen. He is formerly NASA’s head climate scientist, and he warned that time is running out. We must quickly transition away from fossil fuels and invest in renewable energy.

Mass species extinction, extreme weather, and larger wildfires are among the impacts we can expect from climate change.  He also pointed to a number of amplifying impacts and feedback loops that will accelerate the changes.

“It will happen faster than you think,” he said. If major coastal cities become “dysfunctional” because of sea level rise, as he believes is possible, the global economy could be in peril of collapse.

Hansen warned of the dangers of unfettered capitalism and said, “We’ve got to make the system work for us...If you properly harness the market, it will work for you.” One example of making capitalism work involves providing incentives and tax breaks for renewables and removing similar subsidies for fossil fuels. 

Read More»

The World is Concerned about Climate Change and Wants Action at COP21

People around the world see climate change as the single greatest threat the world faces and they want governments to do something about it. According to a recent poll, people are more concerned about climate change than they are about global economic instability and the Islamic State militant group.

The survey by Pew Research Center found that climate change was identified as the most serious global threat in almost half (19 of 40) of the countries polled. This was particularly true in Latin America and Africa. A total of 45,000 respondents were asked to identify the most concerning global threats.

Only the US, Israel and Spain singled out Iran’s nuclear programme as the highest threat. Other issues that are of concern for Americans are tensions between Russia and its neighbours and cyber-attacks. The study was conducted from March 25 to May 27, 2015.

As reported in Reuters, another study showed that almost 80 percent of people worldwide are perturbed about global warming and want tough action to fix the problem.

Christiana Figueres, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, said the findings were "important proof" of public support in both rich and poor nations for a U.N. deal to limit climate change due to be agreed in Paris in December. "Action now is necessary," she told a news conference.

Citing a desire to avert extreme weather events, more than 90 percent of those surveyed wanted the upcoming Paris meeting to set some form of legally binding goal of zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2100.

Read More»

Europe ia Cutting GHGa while Refusing to Relinquish Fossil Fuels

European greenhouse gas reductions prove that we can grow the economy and reduce greenhouse gases at the same time. However, these reductions are unambitious and they also exist alongside new fossil fuel projects.

All of Europe has substantially reduced their GHGs emissions. Between 1990 and 2014 Romania recorded GHG reductions of 56 percent while Lithuania saw cuts of 60 percent. During this time the UK slashed its GHG emissions by 30 percent and as a whole the EU has cut emissions by 23 percent.

The EU has already eclipsed its 2020 target by more than 3 percent. What makes this even more noteworthy is that during this time the EU economy grew by 46 percent. The EU now has the lowest levels of emissions ever recorded and this is great news as we ebb ever closer to COP21.

As reported in the Guardian, EU’s climate chief, Miguel Arias Canete said:

"We have shown consistently that climate protection and economic growth go hand-in-hand," he said. "This is a strong signal ahead of the Paris climate conference.:

The European Environment Agency (EEA) projects that EU emissions cuts will be 24 percent in 2020 and 27 percent in 2030. Leaving many asking what happened to the 40 percent commitment by 2030 promised a year ago. Energy is the reasons why the EU is not living up to its promise and insufficient production from renewables.

"To achieve our longer-term goals for 2030 and 2050, a fundamental change is needed in the way we produce and use energy in Europe," said the EEA’s director Hans Bruyninckx .

Under performance in energy efficiency is also preventing the EU from achieving their targets.

It should be noted that some of the emissions reductions are attributable to the economic recession. While Europe has some of the most progressive climate policies in the world it is still not prepared to let go of fossil fuels.

The EU has a number of fossil fuel-friendly policies, as evident in the so-called Juncker plan. According to 350.org up to €69 billion in high-carbon projects over the next two years and €29 billion in the next two years alone. This includes €16 billion towards coal and €26 billion in gas and oil pipeline infrastructure.

Bringing an end to fossil fuel subsidies would be a great start. However, this spring the European commission dropped calls to end fossil fuel subsidies. If Europe wanted to really cut emissions and show true climate leadership, they would phase out fossil fuels.

Read More»

Wrap-up of the Final Round of Climate Talks before COP21

The final round of interim climate talks have wrapped up and it would appear that unlike the preceding talks countries are playing hardball in preparation for the final round. Five days of talks between more than a 190 countries concluded in Bonn concluded on October 24th. They produced a new 55 page draft, 33 pages longer than the draft that was released on October 5. What may appear to be intractable discord may be largely an effort to secure a strong negotiating position going into the final stretch in Paris.

As explained by Dan Reifsnyder, Co-Chair, ADP, UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and previously a member of the US Department of State:

"If I am in a negotiations I am not going to put all my cards on the table when the big talks are in December."

Contrary to the constructive Bonn climate talks that wrapped in September and the trustbuilding that occured at the session in June, some of the old divisions have reappeared in the most recent talks. Trust is being eroded as the old divide between wealthy and developing nations is reemerging as a salient sticking point.

It was previously agreed that wealthy countries will have to contribute at least $100 billion a year for climate finance by 2020. This money would go towards helping developing countries manage climate change. However, there may be some need to revise the list of wealthy countries as this determination was made around 20 years ago and a lot has changed since then.

The 134 nations in the G77 + China want to see the US and Europe contribute the $100 billion, while the later wants to expand the definition of wealthy nations and include contributions from the private sector.

While there a number of issues that remain to be resolved, bridging these divides is not the kind of thing we can expect from negotiators. The precise formula for sharing the burdens of managing climate change require the direct participation of senior decision makers. The delegates present in Bonn do not have the authority, hashing out these details will require the higher level delegations that will descend on Paris for COP21.

One of the interesting and contentious elements of the new draft includes mechanisms to deal with climate refugees comes from the G77 + China.

There was progress on some other fronts including the all important issue of carbon reductions and how these will be reported. As explained by Jennifer Morgan, head of the World Resources Institute climate programme.

"The current state of the draft agreement reflects how close countries are to reaching consensus on [these] key topics."

According to lead Greenpeace climate policy adviser Martin Kaiser, the new draft contains “everything we need to get a good deal.”

One of the eagerly awaited key elements ahead of COP21 are nation's INDCs. On Friday October 30, the UN will announce the results of a review into the 150+ national climate plans delivered so far.

COP21 commences in Paris on November 29th where a global climate deal is expected to be finalized some time in December.

Read More»

The Arctic is still not Safe from Drilling

Although the Obama administration has effectively shut down Arctic drilling the region is far from being protected from the dangers of  fossil fuel extraction. The President has imposed stringent lease conditions on Arctic oil extraction but other Northern nations do not have such restrictive national laws. Countries  including Russia and Norway continue to set their sights on Arctic oil.

Arctic drilling is a source of concern for many reasons including the risks of a spill.  According to Greenpeace there is a 75 percent chance of a serious spill. This would prove catastrophic in this fragile and remote ecosystem.

There is also the overarching issue of emissions contributions at a time when we already have more known oil reserves that can be safely burned. According to the US Geological Society the Arctic holds up to 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil reserves. Ironically, global warming caused largely by fossil fuels makes Arctic drilling even more attractive as there is now less ice to contend with.

Shell withdrew from the Arctic because the project became non-viable due to low oil prices. Citing "current market conditions" the Department of Interior has canceled two future auctions of Arctic offshore oil leases in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. They have also denied requests from Shell and other oil companies to secure more time on their existing leases. They have also indicated that existing leases will not be renewed after their expiration in 2020.

The Obama administration appears to have brought Arctic drilling to an end for the remainder of the President's term. Further, all the leading Democratic contenders for president have indicated that they are against Arctic drilling. However, this does not preclude a return of oil companies to the American Arctic at some future date. If a Republican were to take control of the white house we would almost certainly see such a return.  Republicans in Congress, including Alaska's Lisa Murkowski have already made it clear that they want to extend the life of drilling leases.

While US companies may lead the race to extract Arctic oil, other countries are also looking to exploit the regions fossil fuel reserves. Russia's Arctic drilling operations have been delayed by sanctions over the Ukraine, however early in 2015 cooperation between Russian and Norwegian oil companies suggested that Arctic drilling would proceed despite the sanctions.

For example, the Norwegian company Statoil has increasingly close relations with the Russian oil company Rosneft and together they are planning to drill four wells in Russia. Rosneft has a stake in a license in the Barents Sea operated by Statoil. Russia's second biggest oil producer Lukoil is also working with Norwegian and Swedish firms.

It is only due to tensions over the ownership of the remote Arctic Svalbard islands that we are not seeing even more Arctic drilling cooperation between Norway and Russia.

Related
What Activists can Learn from Shell's Arctic Retreat
Obama Administration Cuts Shell's Arctic Drilling in Half
The Unacceptable Risks of Arctic Drilling
Video - The Arctic is Under Threat from Shell and Gazprom
The Race to Exploit the Arctic's Resources Ignores the Costs
Oil Spills in Arctic Waters (White Paper) 
Shell Pauses its Arctic Drilling for 2013
Video of the Oil Rig Belonging to Shell that Ran aground in Alaska
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
Shell's Game with the Future of the Arctic
Lawsuit Protecting the Arctic from Oil and Gas

Read More»

Predictions about the Costs of Climate Action are Wrong

US Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz recently explained how the costs of environmental sustainability have been consistently wrong. The subtext of his response is that managing climate change through clean energy and efficiency is both achievable and compatible with economic growth.

Secretary Moniz made the point in response to a question he fielded in a tele-town hall with 15,000 EDF members. Moniz addressed a range of topics including clean energy innovation, more efficient infrastructure, distributed energy, smarter grids, and climate pollution reductions.

There was one question that was of particular interest, "Is economic growth possible without environmental degradation?" For many, particularly those in the private sector, this question is the crux of the whole issue. Moniz responded by saying:

"There’s a history of lots of predictions of how expensive it’s going to be to move forward with economic growth while controlling environmental impacts, and historically, I think every time it’s proven to be incorrect."

The cost of moving towards a low carbon economy  is an effective scare tactic that resonates with many, however, as pointed out by Secretary Moniz, they have all proven to be wrong. A cost benefit analysis of acting on climate change reveals that the benefits of acting far outweigh the costs.

Related
Acting on Climate Change: A Cost Benefit Analysis
The Cost of Climate Inaction/Action
Acting on Climate Change Makes Good Economic Sense According to Citibank
An LSE Cost Benefit Analysis of Acting on Climate Change
A Cost Oriented Approach to Climate Change for Conservatives
Risky Business Report Quantifies the Cost of Climate Change
The Cost of Ocean Acidification
Action on Climate Change a Cost Benefit Analysis
The Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change
Climate Change: Frequency, Costs and Mortality (World Meteorological Organisation)
Graphics - Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change
Businesses Feel the Heat from Declining Labor Productivity
Economic Benefits of Combating Climate Change (IIED)
Economic Costs of Combating Climate Change (IPCC)
Reducing Fossil Fuel Use: The Longer We Wait the More it will Cost
Infographic - How Much Would it Cost to Go Green Globally?
Graphic - The Cost of Mitigating Climate Change
The Financial Costs of Biodiversity Loss
Extreme Weather and the Costs of Climate Change
The Costs of Global Warming
The Costs of Climate Change Related Flooding
Graphs - Global Cost of Flooding
The Costs of Flood Damage will Rise Along with Sea Levels
Balken Flooding and the Costs of Climate Change
Tornadoes and Floods Underscore the Costs of Global Warming
Floods in the Philippines Underscore the Deadly Toll from Climate Change
Hurricane Irene and the Staggering Costs of Climate Change

Read More»

September Heat Records Offer More Evidence for Accelerated Warming

September heat records add to the data corroborating the trend of accelerated warming. For hundreds of consecutive months we have been recording above average global temperatures, now that trend is being eclipsed by a string of the hottest months ever recorded. Almost every month this year was the hottest on record beating many records that were set last year. Seven out of the nine months in 2015 broke records including the last five months in a row.

While a powerful El Niño event in the tropical Pacific Ocean is a contributing factor, as demonstrated by the graph (center left) the real culprit is anthropogenic warming.

September saw the highest ever globally averaged sea surface temperature ever recorded. According to NOAA It was 1.46°F (0.81°C) above the 20th century average and the record that it beat occurred in 2014.

September 2015 also set another record as the month with the greatest rise above average since the dawn of record keeping. September broke the record that was set in March of this year.

Six of the ten highest temperature departures from average have occurred in 2015 or six months of 2015 beat out 1,629 monthly records for the ten highest monthly temperature departures.

While it is easy to dismiss a month or even a year of above average temperature, decades of data are contributing to an irrefutable case for man-made warming.

It is not just the heat that we need to worry about, although that in and of itself will cause a cascade of serious impacts from human fatalities to widespread crop failures. We also must appreciate that more heat will increase the intensity and frequency of violent storms. We recently saw the formation of the strongest storm ever recorded in the western hemisphere and the world. Hurricane Patricia generated wind speeds well above 200 mph.

2015 will almost certainly be the hottest year on record beating the record set in 2014 by a significant margin. The trend is clear not only is it getting warmer, but the rate at which that warming is occurring is accelerating with no end in site.

Related
2015 - The Hottest Summer in the Hottest Year on Record
Global Temperature Data Underscores the Urgency of Climate Action
El Niño and Global Warming are Locked in a Feedback Loop
Hottest June Foreshadows the Hottest Year on Record
Extreme Heat in the Western World Marks the Start of Summer 2015
At Least 30 Years of Above Average Temperatures
Heat Records Tell the Story of Climate Change
India's Heat Wave Offers a Glimpse into the Future
2014 is the Hottest Year in Recorded History
3 Charts: Record Breaking Heat August - October 2014
How Much Heat is Required to Spur Global Action?
Record Breaking Heat Suggests Accelerated Warming
June's Record Breaking Heat and the Global Warming Trend
James Hansen's 2012 Research Linking Global Warming and Extreme Weather
In the US 2012 is The Hottest Most Extreme Year in Recorded History
Globally 2012 is One of the Hottest Years on Record

Read More»

Clean Power Plan Facing Lawsuits Despite Raft of Benefits

Last week the Clean Power Plan officially became law and rather than being hailed as one of the greatest climate, environmental, innovation and economic accomplishments in US history, it has been met with a raft of lawsuits from state governors.

The final version of the Clean Power Plan was released on August 3, 2015 and it sets even stricter emissions regulations than the proposal announced last year. The regulation, which aims to cut carbon pollution from power plants, cuts emissions 32 percent by 2030 from levels recorded in 2005. That is 2 percent more than the original draft rule that proposed a 30 percent reduction.

Although larger cuts are mandated by the final plan, this latest version give states even more flexibility to meet its requirements. States must now comply by 2022 instead of 2020 and reductions are to be phased in gradually over 8 years.

Many leading companies are behind the plan including 365 companies and investors that sent a letter of support in August. Those who signed the Ceres letter include General Mills, Mars, Nestle, Staples, Unilever and VF Corporation. 

However, there are dissenters including the National Association of Manufacturers, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity and predictably, Republicans. 

Lawsuits

The EPA published its Clean Power Plan in the federal register on October 25, 2015 and this opened the door to legal challenges. Even though Americans, including Republicans support the plan, almost half of US states are challenging the new law. Of the 24 states that are using the courts to try to stop the law, the vast majority (19 of 24) have Republican governors.

It should come as no surprise that coal rich West Virginia is leading the charge. The states and governors involved in lawsuits to kill the Clean Power Plan are:

West Virginia, Earl Ray Tomblin, Democrat
Texas, Gregory Wayne Abbott, Republican
Alabama, Robert Julian Bentley, Republican
Arkansas, Asa Hutchinson, Republican
Colorado, John Wright Hickenlooper, Democrat
Florida, Richard Lynn Scott, Republican
Georgia, John Nathan Deal, Republican
Indiana, Michael Richard "Mike" Pence, Republican
Kansas, Samuel Dale "Sam" Brownback, Republican
Kentucky, Steven Lynn "Steve" Beshear, Democrat
Louisiana, Piyush "Bobby" Jindal, Republican
Michigan, Richard Dale "Rick" Snyder, Republican
Missouri, Jeremiah Wilson "Jay" Nixon, Democrat
Montana, Stephen Clark "Steve" Bullock, Democrat
Nebraska, John Peter "Pete" Ricketts, Republican
New Jersey, Christopher James "Chris" Christie, Republican
Ohio, John Richard Kasich, Republican
South Carolina, Nimrata Nikki Randhawa Haley, Republican
South Dakota, Dennis Martin Daugaard, Republican
Utah, Gary Richard Herbert, Republican
Wisconsin, Scott K Walker, Republican
Wyoming, Matthew Hansen "Matt" Mead, Republican
Arizona, Douglas Anthony "Doug" Ducey, Republican
North Carolina, Patrick Lloyd "Pat" McCrory, Republican

Economy

The irony is that the clean power plan is not only good for the planet and the health of Americans it is also good for the economy. According to many, and contrary to the spin emanating from its detractors, the plan will lower electric bills. The new law could result in $155 billion in electricity savings between 2020 and 2030. This will help American families save on average $85 a year on power bill.

As reported by EDF, the plan will drive more "investment, incentives and mechanisms that decarbonize our economy and usher in a new generation of industries." Investments in wind and solar are soaring and as these industries grow they are becoming increasingly price competitive with conventional fuel sources.

According to Morgan Stanley, the financing of utility-scale renewables will ramp up considerably once the Clean Power Plan is implemented. Investments in clean energy are also good investments with solid rates of return.

Jobs

The new law will also create jobs. One dollar invested today creates three times as many jobs as a dollar invested in fossil fuels.

The best evidence for this assertion comes from California where the passage of carbon pollution law AB 32 in 2012 has seen a flood of investment and caused clean tech jobs to grow ten time faster than any other sector in the last ten years.

Innovation

The law will also increase innovation. Historically markets respond well to engineering challenges from government. This is a point not lost on President Obama who accused the plan's detractors of historical ignorance.

“Whenever America has set clear rules and smarter standards for our air, our water, our children’s health, we get the same scary stories about killing jobs and businesses and freedom,” Obama said. “The kinds of criticisms that you're going to hear are simply excuses for inaction. They’re not even good business sense. They underestimate American business and American ingenuity.”

As sited in onEarth here are three areas where we have seen innovation arise from government engineering challenges: Catalytic converter, scrubbers and fuel efficient cars.

US power plants are now legally responsible to limit carbon pollution for the first time.As explained by the EPA, "The final Clean Power Plan is fair, flexible and designed to strengthen the fast-growing trend toward cleaner and lower-polluting American energy." Despite the lawsuits and criticisms, history will record this as a momentous occasion.

Related
President Obama Introduces and Explains the Clean Power Plan (Video)
The Health Benefits of Combating Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan
Family Health and the Clean Power Plan (Videos) 
The Clean Power Plan for the Health of Latinos: Congresswomen Sánchez Testimonmy to the EPA
Republicans at Odds with Americans on Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan
Clean Power Plan: Business Opportunities and Economic Benefits
Hundreds of US Companies and Investors Support the Clean Power Plan
Historic Clean Power Plan Includes Three New Additions
The EPA's Efforts to Reign in Climate Pollution from New Power Plants and the Supreme Court
Coal vs EPA: The Benefits of the Clean Power Plan Far Outweigh Costs
The EPA's Clean Power Plan and US Energy Efficiency
Video - The EPA's Clean Power Plan
Infographic - Obama's Clean Power Plan Explained
US GHGs and the EPA's Clean Power Plan (Infographic)
Congresswoman Linda Sanchez in Support of the Clean Power Plan
Support of the EPA's Clean Power Plan

Read More»

Event - Energy Storage Australia 2015

Energy Storage Australia 2015: 'Gold Rush' for Solar PV, Battery Energy Storage and Grid-Connected in Australia, will take place on November 18-19, 2015 in Sydney, NSW, Australia. Over 350 high level professionals from more than 23 countries will be present for this event. There will be more than 30 eminent speakers delivering exquisitely prepared keynote speeches. There will also be more than 39 cutting-edge technology providers exhibition.

For more information or tickets click here. 

Read More»

Event - 2015 Fuel Cell Seminar & Energy Exposition

This seminar and exhibition will take place on November 16-19, 2015 - 19 November 2015, at the Westin Bonaventure in Los Angeles, California. The Fuel Cell Seminar & Energy Exposition is the premier U.S. conference for the fuel cell and hydrogen industry.

Attracting an international audience, the Fuel Cell Seminar features the latest fuel cell and hydrogen products, technical and market research, policy updates and commercialization strategies for all applications and market sectors.

The Fuel Cell Seminar is the foremost event for networking with industry representatives, customers, stakeholders and decision makers interested in the clean, reliable, resilient power potential of fuel cells.

For more information click here. 

Read More»

Event - Sustainable Brands ’15 London

Sustainable Brands ’15 London November 16-18, 2015, UK Beaumont Estate, London, United Kingdom. This event is the pace where brand, sustainability and design leaders find inspiration, tools and partnerships to drive business success and positive impact.

The Sustainable Brands global conference network is ground zero for sustainability, brand, and innovation professionals who gather from around the world. Live events are ideal for collectively aligning the community of brand innovators towards a common vision as well as convening members to share challenges and successes face to face."

Reinvent yourself in response to changing norms. Dive deep into the brand innovation trenches at SB '15 London and find detail-rich case studies, practical know-how and specific implementation tips to accelerate your business success.

Why Attend SB'15 (New Tools, Partners, Research and Thought Leadership)

• Get fresh ideas on leveraging the new UN Sustainable Development Goals in business and brand strategies going forward.
• Discover how advances in cognitive computing are enabling a revolution in real-time market intelligence and smart interaction with all stakeholders.
• Pick up new tools and tactics for making carbon offsets more popular, both internally and externally.
• Get tips on forming innovative partnerships and programs based on the peer-to-peer economy, responsible consumption, healthy lifestyles and other notable sustainability trends.
• Learn how to tackle systemic problems by analyzing and adjusting entire product categories and value chains.

Hundreds of thought leaders, brand innovators, designers, and business leaders from nearly 30 countries will gather to explore various topics and issues pertinent to sustainability and how to tap emerging innovations to successfully scale sustainability.

Click here for the conference program.
Click here to register.

Read More»

Event - 2015 Net Impact Conference

The 23rd Net Impact Conference (NI15) will take place on November 5-7, 2015 at the Washington State Convention Center, in Seattle, Washington. This is the premier gathering for next-generation leaders who want to change the world.

At this conference student and professional leaders will come together to tackle the world’s toughest social and environmental problems. The challenges we face are complex, and it’s time to come together and create innovative solutions.

In addition to the 9 conference tracks, 80 sessions, and 300 speakers, each Net Impact Conference offers a whole host of special events, including networking opportunities, boot camps, off-site business tours, and impact workshops.

At NI15 attendees will:

• Discover a diverse array of program of sessions, workshops, and social events.
• Network with leading organizations that are looking for talent at the Net Impact Expo.
• learn new skills and hear from innovative experts.

True change only happens when everyone is at the table. The weekend is equal parts inspiring and practical, full of skill-building and networking opportunities. Over 100 sessions span 10 fields of interest, and lots of those sessions are interactive.

A Few of the speakers

• Chelsea Clinton
• Sue Desmond-Hellman
• Daniel Lubetzky
• Stephen Ritz
• Lateefah Simon
• Jerry Stritzke

To see the program and schedule click here.
To register click here.

Read More»

Event - 3rd Zing Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Conference

3rd Zing Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Conference will take place November 17-20, 2015 in Cancun, Mexico. The conference will focus on recent work on novel PGM-based and non-platinum based nanomaterials to systems for the portable, stationary and automotive sectors.

The conference will cover modern aspects and new developments in hydrogen, fuel cells and their applications in terms of hydrogen production and materials, renewable hydrogen, materials for hydrogen storage, fuel cell research & development, hydrogen and fuel cell applications, and hydrogen safety engineering.

Carefully selected Plenary and Invited lectures from distinguished researchers from all over the world are the core features of the hydrogen and fuel cell conference. Presentations from contributed abstracts and a poster session for delegates will be available. The chairmen strongly encourage participation in scientific discussions in a relaxed atmosphere as well as the participation of younger engineers and scientists.

Hydrogen and Fuel Cells are an important part of the world Energy portfolio; the deployments in early markets and the consolidation of efforts will help to drive innovations in this growing multi-billion dollar sector.

Plenary Speakers

• Christophe Coutanceau Université de Poitiers Electrochemical Conversion of Biomass for Clean Hydrogen Production
• Vladimir Molkov University of Ulster Hydrogen Safety Engineering For Indoor Systems
• Gregory Jerkiewicz Queen’s University Platinum Electrochemistry and Electrocatalysis: Unraveling the Origins of Its Unique Behavior
• Federico Rosei Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique Multifunctional materials for electronics and photonics
• Søren Linderoth Technical University of Denmark SOFCs on the move from high to low temperature operation
• Steven Holdcroft Simon Fraser University Advances in Polyaromatic Membranes/Ionomers for PEM and AEM fuel cells 

Invited Speakers

• Chris Reid Hydrexia Disrupting The Business Case Around Solid State Hydrogen Storage
• Jensen (Custom)Jens Oluf Jensen DTU, Technical University of Denmark Non-Noble Oxygen Reduction Catalysts by Means of Encapsulated Iron Carbide
• makarovDmitriy Makarov University of Ulster Fire Resistance of Onboard Hydrogen Storage: Recent Developments in Thermal Protection
• herreraEsteban Durán Herrera Universidad de Costa Rica Preliminary evaluation of Co, Cu, Ru and Ni dye-sensitized-TiO2 substrates as photocatalysts for water-splitting hydrogen production
• peppleyBrant A. Peppley Queen’s-RMC Fuel Cell Research Centre Polymer Electrolyte Electrolyser versus Solid Oxide Electrolyser Technology: A Comparison of How to Make Hydrogen
• duShangfeng Du University of Birmingham Direct catalyst electrodes based on PtPd nanodendrites for PEFC applications
• swider-lyons (Custom)Karen Swider-Lyons U.S. Naval Research Laboratory Challenges in the accurate measurement of oxygen reduction electrocatalyst activity in RDE and CCMs
• DuronSergio Miguel Durón Torres Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas The Mexican Hydrogen Society / Mixed Oxides as Catalyst-Supports for Oxygen Evolution Reaction
• Gabriel (Custom)Kamiel Gabriel University of Ontario Institute of Technology A Summary of Canada’s Program on Hydrogen Production using the Thermo-chemical Cu-Cl Cycle
• BurheimOdne Burheim Sor-Trondelag University-College Thermal conductivity of different PEMFC regions and impacts on numerical modelling
• jostinsJohn Jostins Coventry University Hydrogen and fuel cells in the context of closed loop mobility

Contributing Speakers

• Sasan Ebrahimi Simon Fraser University
• Marco A. Rodriguez Binghamton University SUNY
• Torsten Berning Aalborg University
• Patrick Nonjola CSIR, South Africa
• Shouzhong Zou American University
• Quentin Meyer University College London
• Erik Engebretsen University College London
• Vidal Bharath University College London
• Joelle Penniston University of Kwa-Zulu Natal
• Sadegh Hasanpour The University of British Columbia
• Katerina Horakova Institute of Physics AS CR
• Antonio Ricca University of Salerno
• Concetta Ruocco University of Salerno
• Muhammad Imran Din University of the Punjab
• Harby Alexander Martinez Rodriguez Universidad Nacional de Colombia sede Manizales
• Ki Bong Lee Korea University

To see the conference program click here.
To register with accommodation click here.
To register without accommodation click here.

Read More»

Event - CEO & Business Leaders Summit: Creating Future Cities

This Summit is subtitled, Creating Future Cities, it  will take place on November 19-20, 2015 in Sydney, Australia. CEO & Business Leaders Summit, is a gathering of a global alliance of CEOs, senior executives and experts involved in creating advanced and sustainable projects worldwide. CEOs, business leaders and experts interested in the business opportunities associated with creating better future cities are all welcome at this summit.  One of the unique characteristics of this summit is their connections with global political and business leaders plus their involvement with mega projects, sustainable initiatives and technologies.

VIP Speakers

Sein-Way Tan Founder & CEO Green World City & Future Cities Think Tank
Gary Scallan Chief Executive Officer Future Asset Management International
Chris Johnson CEO Urban Taskforce
Ann Sherry AO Chief Executive Officer Carnival Australia
Darren Goodsir Editor in Chief Sydney Morning Herald & The Sun-Herald Dr Ed Blakely Honorary Professor in Urban Policy The United States Studies Centre, Fmr Advisor to US Presidents
Li Haojie Chairman TianRong Investment Limited (China)
Hon. Andrew Stoner Principal Andrew Stoner & Associates, Fmr Deputy Premier of New South Wales
Matthew Tukaki Founder & CEO Sustain Group, EntreHub & Fmr UN Global Compact Representative
Victor Perton Leadership Adviser, Advocate and Counsel Oppeus International, Fmr Senior Advisor to G20
Rachel Argaman CEO TFE Hotels (Toga Far East Hotels)
Mark Burrows AO Managing Director & Vice Chairman, Global Investment Banking Credit Suisse

Day 1: Nov 19th – Parliament House of New South Wales
Day 2: Nov 20th – Australian National Maritime Museum

Benefits of attending

1. Find out how the world is going to change and the business opportunities in the coming years,
2. Establish alliances with international leaders from various industries,
3. Launchpad for Mega Projects, Initiatives and Technologies of global significance,
4. Platform for companies to meet Institutional and High-net-worth investors.

Green World City Consortium is a global alliance of organisations involved in creating sustainable projects in over 120 countries. They have shared our vision and knowledge in building a more sustainable future with hundreds of major political and business decision makers, including many world leaders. They welcome companies with expertise that can add significant value in the creation of better cities to join us as partners.

To register click here.

Read More»

NextGen Energy Challenge for Presidential Candidates (Video)

NextGen is an organization that advocates on behalf of climate action.  The Clean Power Plan is now law in the US, but we will need strong leadership going forward to protect it and do more to combat climate change in America. The transition to a clean energy economy is already underway and to keep driving it forward NextGen is calling on the presidential candidates to develop a clean enery plan. The specific targets put forward by NextGen call for half of the nation's power being supplied by clean energy by 2030.



To see which of the candidates lives up to the NextGen challenge click here. For a concise up to date review of the climate positions of the Democratic presidential candidates click on the following links:

Martin O'Malley, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Lincoln Chaffee, Larry Lessig and Jim Webb.

Click here to go to the NextGen webite.

Related
Climate Change May Give Democrats the Edge in the 2016 Federal Election 
Obama's Clean Energy Budget and Republican Opposition
GOP Denial and President Obama's Climate Legacy
Video - Stop the Republican Environmental Assault
Cromnibus Bill Foreshadows the GOP's Legislative Agenda
Anti-Environmental Tidings in a Bill to Keep Government Running
Republicans Pass Anti-Science Bill in the House
Republicans Declare War on the Environment and Surrender to Climate Change
Republican Ignorance and the Latest IPCC Report
Republican Law to Curtail (Environmental) Regulations
Republicans vs Democrats on Climate Change
Republican Climate Deniers are in Control
Climate Denial will Soon be Political Suicide
Republicans Trying to Kill Power Plant Rules
Video - Rep. Peters Calls out GOP Climate Deniers and States it is Time to Act on Climate Change

Read More»

Corporate Pledges to Increase Renewable Energy

Late this summer some of the world’s most prominent companies pledged to derive all of their energy from renewables. Nine major companies joined RE100, a global coalition of firms intent on converting to renewable energy. The new members include Johnson & Johnson, Nike, Procter & Gamble, Salesforce, Starbucks, Steelcase, Walmart and Goldman Sachs. Some companies have already reached the 100 percent target. There are now 36 companies that have joined RE100 since it was launched at Climate Week in 2014.

Increasing renewable energy capacity reduces a company's use of fossil fuels and minimizes their greenhouse gas emissions.

Renewables are an increasingly attractive to corporations because they save money and get ahead of expected regulatory changes. They also have added public relations advantages associated with reducing emissions and combating climate change.

“Research shows that the most ambitious companies have seen a 27 percent return on their low carbon investments,” said Mark Kenber, CEO of the Climate Group. “Today these companies are signaling loud and clear to COP21 negotiators that forward-thinking businesses back renewables and want to see a strong climate deal in Paris.”

As far back as 2011 surveys indicated that consumers want to see climate action from companies.

A number of factors are coalescing to make environmental concerns a core part of corporate strategy. Transitioning away from fossil fuels towards renewable energy is one of the major keys.

Related
Leading Companies Commit to Renewable Energy (RE100)
Corporations Go 100% Renewable for Climate Week NYC
Why the Corporate World is Embracing Renewable Energy
Leading Companies Commit to Renewable Energy (RE100)

Read More»

Apple's Renewable Energy Investments in China

On October 21, 2015 Apple announced that it is ramping up its renewable energy investments in China. The company is working with its Chinese suppliers to produce 2.2 gigawatts of solar power and other renewable energy. This move will decrease Apple's carbon footprint by an estimated 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gas as more of its suppliers rely on renewable energy between now and 2020.

Apple is but one of a number of technology companies that are increasingly relying on renewables. Google, Facebook and microsoft are also making substantial investments in renewable energy.

Apple will finance 200 megawatts of solar power capacity in regions of China where many of its suppliers are located. Apple and its Chinese suppliers plan to add more than 2 gigawatts of renewable energy from solar, wind and hydroelectric power.

Foxconn, which runs the factory where the most iPhones are assembled will install 400 megawatts of solar power by 2018 in China's Henan Province. This will enable the factory to produce an amount of energy equivalent to the power it uses.

Apple has recently completed solar projects that will generate 40 megawatts of power to offset 24 stores and 19 offices China.

Apple already powers its US data centers, offices and stores with renewables. Apple was one of a number of companies that responded to requests from the White House this summer to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and increase their supply of renewable energy.

Apple's green efforts have contributed to improved reputation which has bottom line benefits. Apple is also among the companies that have supported the US Clean Power Plan 

Related
Apple Makes Sustainability Investments in China

Apple Proves its Never too Late to Go Green
Apple's Sustainability Leadership
Video - Massive Apple and First Solar Deal
Companies with the Best CSR Reputation
Lisa Jackson on the Road to 100% Renewables (Video)
Is Apple's Adoption of Sustainability Too Little Too Late?
Apple's Reversal on EPEAT
Steve Jobs: Apple's Product Recycling Efforts
Under Steve Jobs Leadership Apple Removed Toxic Chemicals from its Products
Video: Steve Jobs 2005 Stanford Commencement Speech
Video: Steve Jobs on Computer Efficiency
Apple's iPhone Green Applications

Read More»

More US Corporate Climate Action in Support of COP21

Ahead of the forthcoming COP21 UN Climate Talks the white house has mobilized 68 companies to join the American Act on Climate Pledge. This is in addition to the July pledge in which 13 companies pledged emissions reductions of as much as 50 percent and a combined total of $140 billion in new low-carbon investments. These companies include Alcoa, Apple, Bank of America, Berkshire Hathaway Energy, Cargill, Coca-Cola, General Motors, Goldman Sachs, Google, Microsoft, PepsiCo, UPS, Walmart.

The 68 new companies include: Autodesk, Best Buy, Bloomberg, CA Technologies, Dell, eBay, EMC, Facebook, GE, General Mills, HP, Ikea, Intel, Ikea, Kellogg’s, Levi Strauss & Co., L’Oreal, Mars, Nestle, Nike, PG&E, Qualcomm, Starbucks, Unilever and The Walt Disney Company.

All together 81 companies have made the pledge. These companies employ 9 million people and represent more than $3 trillion in annual revenue. They have agreed to both reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and increase their use of renewable energy. They will also focus on energy efficiency and low carbon investing.

By signing the pledge signatories agree to support a strong outcome at COP21, reduce emissions, increase low carbon investments, increase clean energy

Fourteen major companies based or with large-scale operations in the US have voiced strong support for a new global climate agreement at COP21. In a statement organized by the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES), the companies — Alcoa, Alstom, BHP Billiton, BP, Calpine, HP, Intel, Lafargeholcim, National Grid, PG&E, Rio Tinto, Schneider Electric, Shell and Siemens — called for “a more balanced and durable multilateral framework guiding and strengthening national efforts to address climate change.”

This is the first time an American administration has engaged the corporate sector to build support for COP21 and garner large scale cuts in emissions, alongside increases in renewable energy and low carbon technologies.

President Obama explained the pledge as follows:

"... I just want everybody to understand that American businesses want this to happen as well," he said. "What they do need is certainty. It’s going to be very hard for them to operate if they don’t know what the rules of the road are. And what we’re trying to do is make sure that everybody is on a fair playing field; everybody is going their part to make sure that we’re saving this planet."

“ We do believe that business and climate change can go hand-in-hand We do believe that business and climate change can go hand-in-hand,” said Todd Brady, Intel's global environmental director.

Brian Deese, senior adviser to President Obama said that climate action, "is increasingly the right business decision.”

“One of the things that is clear is that in both the U.S. and in countries across the world, the support and the backing of the business community is an important ingredient to getting to ambitious but also sustainable actions,” Deese said. “Making sure those voices are prominent as we move into the international talks is absolutely crucial.”

A group of large European energy companies recently signed a declaration of support for a new climate agreement at COP21. This pledge even included oil and gas industry giants BP and Shell.

Related
White House Prompts Corporate Action on Climate Change 
Corporate Efforts to Reduce Greenhouse Gases
More Evidence for the Decoupling of the Economy and Emissions 
Emissions Reductions Efforts at GE, P&G, and Time Warner Cable
Businesses Practicing Sustainability are Leading the Way Forward
Governments are Pledging to Reduce GHGs Ahead of COP21

Read More»

Fossil Fuel Divestment and Reinvestment Resources

There are a plethora of investment guides that help individuals and institutions to divest from fossil fuels.
One of the newest divestment/reinvestment resources is known as FossilFreeFunds.org. This web platform makes it easier for investors to assess the holdings in their portfolios. The project is the brain child of Andrew Behar, who is chief executive of, As You Sow, a 23-year-old nonprofit in Oakland, Calif., which promotes shareholder activism and dialogue with corporations. To create the divestment/reinvestment resource, Behar sifting through federal securities databases to identify all known fossil companies.

Using the tool is easy, simply enter the name or the ticker code of the fund and the tool will pull up a list of the fossil fuel stocks it contains. Investors can also search for companies peripherally related to fossil fuels to the Carbon Underground 200, a list of coal oil and gas companies. Or users can search for the so-called Filthy 15, the largest and dirtiest coal companies in the US.

As You Sow is also planning to provide carbon footprint data for the mutual funds. The information will be displayed on a kilogram of carbon per dollar basis, allowing users to compare the different mutual funds. (Kilogram of carbon per dollar is a measure of a fossil fuel company’s carbon emissions for every dollar invested.). The organization is also planning to expand the tool to include retirement plans in the United Kingdom and Hong Kong.

There are also other fossil-free investor resources, including one by Green America, which partners with 350.org, but they require investors to research their retirement plans and assessing whether it includes fossil fuel company stocks.

Guardian: A Beginners Guide to Fossil Fuel Divestment
Fossil Free: A Divestment Guide for Individuals
Aperio Group: Do the Investment Math: Building a Fossil Free Portfolio
Advisor Partners: Fossil Fuel Divestment: Perspectives After the Oil Bust
MSCI: Responding to the Call for Fossil Free Portfolios'
Trillilum Asset Management & 350.org: Extracting Fossil Fuels from Your Portfolio
Green Century: A Green(er) Portfolio: Carbon Footprint Report
The Green Market Oracle: Eleven Resources for Responsible Investing Including Divestment
Joshua Humphreys: Institutional Pathways to Fossil Fuel Divesting

Read More»

Climate Change May Give Democrats the Edge in the 2016 Federal Election

There are indications that climate change is finally emerging as a critical election issue and this could help the Dems and sink the GOP's presidential ambitions. Almost all of the candidates who participated in the first Democratic Presidential debate have plans to address the climate crisis.

It is not hyperbole to suggest that this may be the most important election in American history. We are rapidly running out of time to get a handle on the climate issue. If we are to succeed in staving off the worst impacts of climate change, we must act and we must act soon.

To keep temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius, we have to slash carbon emissions by 70 percent by 2050. To have a shot at reaching this goal, we must begin to seriously reign in CO2 by 2020. Failure to do so could push us past disastrous tipping points.

In the Democratic leadership debate on October 13th, climate change was a high priority issue for all but one of the contenders for the presidential nomination. In order of the strength of their climate action plans here are the six candidates (click on the links below to get a brief summary of the candidates climate and environment positions):

• Martin O’Malley
• Bernie Sanders
• Hillary Clinton
• Lincoln Chaffee
• Lawrence Lessig
• Jim Webb

Bold climate action from the next US President is crucial. As the world’s largest economy and the leading voice in the international community, American leadership on climate change is essential.

In an article titled “Climate Change Issues May Decide the 2016 US Election,” NextGen makes the case for climate action and asks whether the public will seize the opportunity to vote for a president that is prepared to act boldly to accelerate the transition to clean energy:

“[C]lean energy sources will create jobs, save lives by reducing pollution, and drive the kind of economic growth that benefits all Americans. The global race for climate solutions and clean energy is already underway. The question for the public is whether the United States will seize this opportunity to lead, or be left behind as other nations reap the economic benefits.”

Climate action is also an important issue for Democrats who want to benefit from the deep pockets of NextGen founder Tom Steyer. He spent $74 million on political races in 2014 and to earn his support in 2016, candidates must pledge to generate half of the nation’s electricity from clean sources by 2030, and 100 percent by 2050 (so far only O’Malley meets these criteria).

It is easy to be cynical. Many have hoped that American voters would wake up to the urgency of climate change in previous elections only to be disappointed. In the 2012 campaign, climate change was a non-issue, it was also a no-show in the 2014 midterms. However, it is not unrealistic to believe that climate change may finally emerge as an election issue in 2016. This view is buoyed by a New York Times Stanford University poll indicating that two-thirds of voters would support a candidate who pledges policy action on climate change.

“Whether or not candidates make this commitment will be a critical factor for Americans who are deciding what candidates to support at polls,” wrote Steyer.

Climate change is also an important wedge issue for the Democrats, as it exposes Republican policy vulnerability. If climate change emerges as an issue for Republican voters, the GOP’s hopes to win the white house are in serious jeopardy as voters may simply stay away or vote for the Democratic candidate.

The Papal Encyclical has deprived Republicans of their last vestige of legitimacy and they are now are at odds with voters on climate change and clean energy. None of the Republican contenders has unveiled a renewable energy strategy and none of them have suggested that we should abandon fossil fuels.

This is a more serious ballot box issue than it has been in the past. It is widely known that the majority of Democratic supporters accepts anthropogenic climate change and they believe that government has a responsibility to do something about it. This view is becoming increasingly prevalent even among Republican voters. The majority of Republicans now say that they support climate action. Some of the Republican presidential contenders have already realized that denial is political suicide.

“This will be a make-or-break presidency as far as our ability to avert a climate change catastrophe,” says Michael Mann, meteorology professor and director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University.

The choice is clear, if America votes for a Democrat, (other than Jim Webb) we have a chance of staving off the worst impacts of climate change. If America votes for a Republican, the chances of reigning in climate change falls dramatically.

Republicans have painted themselves into a corner as none of their candidates have advanced a climate plan to slow warming. If climate change finally emerges as a pivotal election issue, the Democrats are poised to maintain their hold on the most powerful office in the world.

Source: Global Warming is Real

Read More»