Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts

Obama Administration's Oil and Gas Initiatives

In their final year, the Obama administration has moved forward with some important actions to curtail extraction and reduce pollution from the oil and gas industry. Fossil fuels are responsible for the vast majority of greenhouse gases and deadly air pollution.

To help address these concerns President Obama has previously a raft of fossil fuel related actions. This includes, the Clean Power Plan, stopping the KXL, cuting Shell's Arctic drilling in half and halting the building of the Dakota Access pipeline.  In 2016 President Obama went even further and banned offshore Arctic oil drilling, changed the methane rules for the fossil fuel industry and canceled gas leases on Native lands.

Obama's initiatives are designed to protect the health of Americans, combat climate change, and decrease risks to ecosystems. In the context of a hostile and obstructionist Republican controlled Congress Obama has done what he could to advance climate action. Unsurprisingly, these actions have been vociferously opposed by the fossil fuel industry and their GOP minions in the House and the Senate.

The fossil fuel industry has used its considerable clout to challenge Obama's efforts. A recent Senate report, explained, "state officials, trade associations, front groups, and industry-funded scientists participating in the challenge actually represent the interests of the fossil fuel industry."

Moratorium on Arctic drilling

In 2015 Obama pledged leadership in Alaska and Just ahead of leaving office Obama found a creative way to deliver. Obama's actions ensure that there will be no oil drilling in the Alaskan Arctic until at least 2022. The move kills any hope of extracting fossil fuels from the Beaufort and Chukchi seas. The move also stymies new drilling in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans (New England to the Chesapeake Bay). This means that the Gulf of Mexico is the only place in the US where new offshore extraction will be permitted for the foreseeable future. Obama's action was part of a joint announcement that included Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's decision to prevent new drilling operations in the Canadian Arctic.

In a statement published by the Washington Post, President Obama said: "These actions, and Canada’s parallel actions, protect a sensitive and unique ecosystem that is unlike any other region on earth. They reflect the scientific assessment that, even with the high safety standards that both our countries have put in place, the risks of an oil spill in this region are significant and our ability to clean up from a spill in the region’s harsh conditions is limited...By contrast, it would take decades to fully develop the production infrastructure necessary for any large-scale oil and gas leasing production in the region – at a time when we need to continue to move decisively away from fossil fuels."

While the amount of water being protected is unprecedented, it should not be surprising as it makes both environmental and economic sense. The decision bodes well for animals that make up the Arctic's fragile ecosystem, this includes the bowhead whale, fin whale, Pacific walrus and polar bear. It will also protect what the White House has called biodiversity "hotspots" critical to fisheries.

Obama used Section 12-A of a 1953 law called "Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act" to prevent the sale of new offshore drilling and mining rights. The real genius of invoking this law is that it will take years for the next president to reverse the decision.

These moves bode well for the future of tourism, fishing and other less harmful forms of economic development in the Arctic. According to the White House, the president has protected 125 million acres in the region in the last two years.

Conservation groups hailed the decision. League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski called it "an incredible holiday gift," saying that "an oil spill in these pristine waters would be devastating to the wildlife and people who live in the region."

Rhea Suh, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, called it "a historic victory in our fight to save our Arctic and Atlantic waters, marine life, coastal communities and all they support." Carter Roberts, president and chief executive of the World Wildlife Fund, applauded what he called "a bold decision” that “signals some places are just too important not to protect."

New methane rules

Also in November the Obama administration released the final version of a new oil and gas rule for public and Native lands. Federal lands generate 11 percent of US natural gas production and 5 percent of domestic oil production. The new regulations are intended to capture flared natural gas and so-called "fugitive" emissions of methane from drilling operations. Large amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas are emitted during drilling and fracking operations.

The Interior Department and its Bureau of Land Management, which will implement the rule, says the move will reduce methane emissions by 175,000 to 180,000 tons annually. This translates to enough gas to serve the needs of 6.2 million American homes each year.

"We are proving that we can cut harmful methane emissions that contribute to climate change while putting in place standards that make good economic sense for the nation," said Interior department secretary Sally Jewell in a statement. "Not only will we save more natural gas to power our nation, but we will modernize decades-old standards to keep pace with industry and to ensure a fair return to the American taxpayers for use of a valuable resource that belongs to all of us."

The new rules are part of the president’s goal of reducing US methane emissions from the oil and gas sector 40 to 45 percent below 2012 levels by 2025.

"Natural gas is a valuable American resource, but when wasted into the air it causes dangerous pollution," Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund, said in a statement. "Reducing the amount of gas that oil and gas operators release will conserve an important domestic resource, improve air quality, lower asthma attacks, and slow climate change."

Leases canceled on Native lands

In November, Obama administration cancels oil and gas leases on Blackfeet tribe’s sacred grounds

"This is the right action to take on behalf of current and future generations,” Interior Secretary Sally Jewell said on the department’s Web site. She said it would protect the region’s “rich cultural and natural resources and recognizes the irreparable impacts that oil and gas development would have on them."

Another Washington Post article quotes Harry Barnes, chairman of the Blackfeet Nation Tribal Business Council as follows:

"A lot of our creation stories emanate from this area. It’s a significant area, it always has been for thousands of years...While we’re not opposed to oil and gas exploration, we are opposed to oil and gas exploration in that area." Barnes called the settlement, a "victory for not only the Blackfeet people, but for all of America. It’s such a beautiful area. It’s Mother Earth, and it needs to be enjoyed by everybody."

Related
EPA's Carbon Limits for Power Plants
The US Environmental Protection Agency and Fracking
Too Dirty to Fail: The GOP's Ongoing War with EPA Standards
Taking Stock of President Obama's Environmental Efforts in His First Term
President Obama Climate Action Plan (Full Document)
Obama Striving to Put an End to Oil Subsidies
Environmental Politics: Obama Versus the GOP

Justice Scalia's Death Bodes Well for the Clean Power Plan

The EPA's Clean Power Plan (CPP), the centerpiece of the Obama administration's climate efforts was stayed by the US Supreme Court on February 9, however the death of Conservative justice Antonin Scalia just a few days later breathes new life into the plan.

In total 27 states, the coal industry, and the Republican party want to stop the EPA's efforts to reign in emissions from US power plants. Their efforts to undermine the plan are at odds with American opinions. Polls show that the majority of Americans support the CPP even in states that oppose it.

The unprecedented Supreme Court ruling ignored the merits of the plan which includes health, cost and climate benefits. The implementation of the plan are now on hold until the D.C. Circuit Court reviews the legality of the case. The same court denied a request for a stay of the CPP. For the CPP to be killed by the courts the challengers will have to prove irreparable-harm and such claims are almost impossible to prove.

The EPA and President Obama remains confident that we will see the plan proceed after the hearing scheduled for June. As Obama explained:
"I've heard people say, 'The Supreme Court struck down the clean power plant rule.’ That's not true, so don’t despair people. This is a legal decision that says, 'Hold on until we review the legality.' We are very firm in terms of the legal footing here."
EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy made a statement in which she said that the ruling “is not going to slow us down.”

However, even the most optimistic environmentalists are disappointed by the Supreme Court's actions. At the very least it provides a legal basis for states to refuse to move forward on the implementation of the plan. At its worst it is a major blow to the COP21 climate agreement reached in December of last year in Paris.

As everyone knows global emissions reductions are contingent on US leadership. President Obama was instrumental in getting countries like China, India and Brazil to sign-on to the Paris deal. The failure of the US to substantially reduce its emissions represents a major impediment to global climate action. It significantly increases the likelihood that the world will not ramp up emissions reductions to keep temperatures from rising beyond the 1.5 to 2 degree Celsius upper threshold limit.

The CPP would reduce emissions from US power plants by one third by 2030. If it is not implemented the US will not be able to meet its pledge to cut its carbon emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. The legal case against the CPP is premised on the fifth and tenth amendments to the US Constitution (confiscation of private property and states' rights). The rebuttal to these claims is that coal will continue to be part of the power mix and the US Supreme Court's ruling that the EPA has the right to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Regulators already have the authority to monitor toxic releases as they cross state boundaries.

Even without the CPP there is still hope for emissions reduction from the US energy sector as renewables and gas are replacing coal for economic reasons. Other sectors are also decreasing emissions. The next president could rewrite the CPP, reform fossil fuel leasing programs, and regulate methane. However the stay on the CPP makes an already difficult battle that much more arduous.

The Supreme Court's stay of the CPP speaks to the power of the ideological conservative judicial activists on the Supreme Court. The 5-4 decision had conservative and moderate justices ruling that a “stay” was appropriate while the more liberal judges dissented from the majority decision.

The stay indicated that a majority of the justices foresee a reasonably high likelihood that they would ultimately strike down Obama’s plan. Now that Scalia is gone, getting a majority of justices to strike down the CPP is very unlikely. The D.C. Circuit panel composed of a majority of Democratic appointees will almost certainly uphold the regulations in June.

Although Republican legislators can be counted on to continue their politically motivated campaign of obstructionism, even if they refuse to support a replacement to Scalia it is very unlikely the Supreme Court justices who oppose the CPP will get the support they need to kill the plan.

The Conservative majority in the Supreme Court has died along with Justice Scalia. This turn of events is critical because climate change cannot be stayed by the courts. As the EPA explained in a statement:
"We’re disappointed the rule has been stayed, but you can’t stay climate change and you can’t stay climate action."

air, clean, emissions, reduction, climate action, United States, U.S., Obama Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, pollution,

Related
Clean Power Plan Facing Lawsuits Despite Raft of Benefits
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 for the EPA's Clean Power Plan

Republican Senate Passes Legislation to Kill the Clean Power Plan

The Republican's anti-environment witch hunt continues with yet another piece of legislation that seeks to dismantle the centerpiece of US climate action. On Tuesday November 17th the Republican controlled Senate passed legislation designed to kill the most important climate action ever taken in the US. As he had promised, Mitch McConnell is doing everything he can to stop the EPA from regulating power plants.

As explained by the President, the Clean Power Plan will reign in emissions in a way that is both effective and flexible. In addition to reducing the nation's greenhouse gas emissions, the plan will provide both economic and health benefits.

A comparison of the impacts of unregulated coal power versus the regulatory regime contained in the plan show the benefits far outweigh the costs. Nonetheless, Republicans have pushed forward with yet another attempt to prevent the US from acting on climate change. A similar effort was launched by Republican lawmakers in 2014.

Republican lawmakers are undeterred by the fact that they are at odds with American public opinion. Support for clean energy is at an all time high in the US. A Yale study found that almost two-thirds of Americans want strict carbon limits on existing power plants. Republican Senators are equally unmoved by the nearly 9 million comments that Americans sent into the EPA supporting pollution limits.

Republicans have once again sided with old energy. Although these lawmakers are paid by the public, it would appear that they do not take this to mean that they have to listen.

Although the legislation is expected to be vetoed by the President, it is a tragic reflection of just how disconnected Republicans are from reality.

The White House said:
“ [B]y nullifying the Clean Power Plan, S.J.Res. 24 seeks to block progress towards cleaner energy, eliminating public health and other benefits of up to $54 billion per year by 2030, including thousands fewer premature deaths from air pollution and tens of thousands of fewer childhood asthma attacks each year.”
Here are the two resolutions that were approved by the Senate:

One of the two resolutions was advanced by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.). The resolution of disapproval says that Clean Power Plan “shall have no force or effect.” Although the resolution is sponsored almost entirely by Republicans of the 48 co-sponsors there are a couple of democrats.

The second resolution was sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). This one both disapproves of the Clean Power Plan and repeals it.

These are the same Republicans that the President has to deal with as we head into climate talks at COP21. Democrats voiced their disapproval of the vote and the timing in particular.

"I think they’re trying to create confusion and uncertainty before the international climate agreement is finalized, and it’s not going to work,” said Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii of the votes. “They have had success in the past in muddying the waters, but we are in a different place now in terms of the international participation, in terms of domestic political support for clean energy, and in terms of having a real clean energy program in America.”

Republicans can be expected to continue to do everything in their power to undermine climate action as we head towards a hoped for climate agreement in Paris. As the rest of the world is pledging to reduce their emissions, Republicans are making good on their threats to fight While the world is coming together to find solutions to the climate crisis the Republicans  it.

Related
Clean Power Plan Facing Lawsuits Despite Raft of Benefits
Hundreds of US Companies and Investors Support the Clean Power Plan
The EPA's Clean Power Plan and US Energy Efficiency
GOP Denial and President Obama's Climate Legacy
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
The Arsenal Republicans will use in their War on Climate
GOP Identifies Targets for their War Against Climate Protections
Big Oil's Influence on US Politicians
Environmental Politics: Obama Versus the Republicans
The Ignorant Anti-Environmental Views of the Republicans
Republicans Undermining Climate Legislation
The Stark Partisan Divide on Global Warming
Republican Assault on the Environment
House Republicans' Historic Anti-Environment Efforts in 2011 and 2012

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

Family Health and the Clean Power Plan (Videos)

Not only will the Clean Power Plan help to protect future generations from climate change it will protect the health of families.

Air pollution increases respiratory illness in vulnerable populations. It is projected that the EPA's green power plan could prevent 3,500 deaths, 1,000 hospital admissions from heart and lung disease, 220 heart attacks.



In the video below two families talk about the ways that their health and their lives have been impacted by poor air quality. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy joins the families to discuss how climate change is predicted to negatively impact air quality, which in turn impacts people's health. She explains how the EPA's Clean Power Plan will help to reduce harmful carbon pollution, and why our country must act now on climate change.


The Obama administration and the EPA are combating the sources of pollution that are contributing to climate change and posing serious health risks to the general population. Thanks to the Clean Power Plan millions of kids will have fewer asthma attacks in the future.

Related
The Health Benefits of Combating Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan
The Clean Power Plan for the Health of Latinos: Congresswomen Sánchez Testimonmy to the EPA

President Obama Introduces and Explains the Clean Power Plan
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

President Obama Introduces and Explains the Clean Power Plan (Video)

Early in August US President Barack Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency made history in the fight against climate change. In recent years the US has made more progress decreasing its GHG emissions than any other nation on earth. The Clean Power Plan is the biggest step yet in the effort to curb climate change. It will significantly add to the President's legacy by reigning-in climate change causing carbon pollution from energy plants and coal powered plants in particular. Coal powered plants are among the worst culprits. Together power plants are responsible for almost one third (30%) of America's GHG emissions.

Reducing emissions from power plants will decrease air pollution and diminish the level of GHGs that are causing the seas to rise and increasing the likelihood of extreme weather like the drought we are seeing in California. Big Coal will not go down without a fight they can be expect to spend millions on lobbyists and lawyers in last-ditch desperation to delay or derail the Clean Power Plan.

In this video the President explains why the plan is necessary and what it will do:


Related
The Health Benefits of Combating Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan

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

The Health Benefits of Combating Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan

The Clean Power Plan and other government mitigation efforts are not only about reducing the impacts of one of the worst threats ever faced by humanity, they are also about addressing one of the foremost health issues of our times.  The health impacts from climate change and air pollution have been widely documented. In response to these threats the Clean Power Plan is a government prescription that is in the national interest. It will protect human health by significantly reducing climate change causing greenhouse gases and air pollution.

Climate change and human health

There is a large and growing pool of research showing how climate change makes us both physically and emotionally unwell. Some recent research described those health impacts as "catastrophic." Climate change is already deadly and it will get far worse in the future. Although estimates vary, the 2012 Climate Variability Monitor report estimated that globally, climate change is already killing 400,000 people each year including 1000 children each day. This number could rise to 700,000 by 2030.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made the connection between climate change and human health six years ago. They pointed to a wide range of health impacts attributable to a warmer world. This relationship is being borne out by the clinical experience of doctors. A study by the American Thoracic Society found that seven out of 10 doctors reported climate change is contributing to more health problems among their patients.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy described climate change as “one of the most significant public health challenges of our time. By taking commonsense action to limit carbon pollution from new power plants, we can slow the effects of climate change and fulfill our obligation to ensure a safe and healthy environment for our children.”

Air pollution

Climate change is a killer and the death toll gets far worse when air pollution is added to the equation. As reported by Reuters, the combination of climate change and air pollution will kill up to 100 million globally by 2030.

A 2014 World Health Organization (WHO) report concluded that air pollution causes both climate change and disease. Air pollution is a very real threat causing millions of people to get sick and die. The WHO estimated that in 2012 alone, indoor and outdoor pollutants killed more than 7 million people. This is more than one in eight deaths worldwide. This is a staggering number when you consider that under-nutrition is responsible for 3 million deaths each year.

Fine particulate matter that is spewed into the air by power plants stay in our lungs and bloodstreams and cause us harm. The Clean Power Plan directly addresses pollution by reducing particulate matter in the air. It also helps allergy and asthma sufferers by reducing carbon dioxide levels that boost pollen counts. Rising rates of CO2 have led some allergists to predict higher rates of allergies. One even suggested that allergy rates will double by 2040.

The Clean Power Plan will reduce the health impacts associated with airborne pollutants from the moment it is implemented. The EPA's plan will save between $55-93 billion in health and climate benefits. It will keep people from getting sick and save lives. Each year in the U.S., it is expected to prevent at least 3,500 deaths, 1,000 hospital admissions and 220 heart attacks.

“[T]he EPA and President Obama have taken the first major step towards fulfilling the president’s Climate Action Plan and protecting our children’s future,” said Micheal Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club. “The EPA’s proposed carbon pollution standards will protect Americans from dangerous air pollution, protect our communities from harmful carbon pollution and strengthen our economy with clean energy jobs.”

Reaching deniers

It is startling to realize that almost half of Americans do not believe that global warming is real and attributable to human activities. That number has not changed much for the last couple of years despite a plethora of scientific research as of 2012 and several major research projects last year alone. Given the perniciousness of climate denial, we may need to consider another approach to get through.

While people may be able to distance themselves from the science of climate change, they are far more likely to consider health issues that touch them directly. The health impacts of power plant emissions resonates with those who somehow manage to resist the science connecting greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Consequently, focusing on the health impacts of power plant emissions may be the best way to reach those who appear impervious to the science of climate change.

Focusing on health

There is reason to believe that framing climate change as a health issue may be a fruitful approach. This new approach was part of a round-table discussion held recently at Howard University College of Medicine on the occasion of National Public Health Week. This discussion was joined by President Barack Obama, U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy and EPA chief Gina McCarthy.

"There are a whole host of public health impacts that are going to hit home, so we've got to do better in protecting vulnerable Americans," Obama explained to CNN's Sanjay Gupta earlier this year. "Ultimately, though, all of our families are going to be vulnerable. You can't cordon yourself off from air or climate."

There are a number of health organizations that are champions of climate action. Medical organizations, nurses, doctors, public health officials and schools of medicine that clearly identify climate change and air pollution as health issues. They are demanding that politicians act to improve air quality. A 2013 Time magazine article even suggested that medical professionals may be the best people to deliver the message to the American public.

"It’s imperative: Millions stand to benefit for the millions of kids who will have fewer asthma attacks in the future." EDF President Fred Krupp said. "For all of those who will be protected from the most damaging impacts of climate change. And for our children and grandchildren, who will know that our generation cared enough to leave them a safer, healthier world.”

Climate change is an economic concern, it is also a national security issue, but framing the problem in terms of human health may generate the most traction with American voters. Despite what Republicans and the dirty energy industry are saying, the Clean Power Plan is not only economically sound, it will protect people's health and keep people alive. The health benefits associated with the Clean Power Plan is something that most Americans can get behind.

Related
President Obama Introduces and Explains the Clean Power Plan (Video)
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

Republicans at Odds with Americans on Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan

Republicans including the candidates who are vying for the GOP's presidential nomination have failed to appreciate that voters are concerned about the health impacts of climate change and air pollution and they want governments to do something about it.  This concern extends to support for the Clean Power Plan. While Republicans and dirty energy disregard the evidence on climate change and oppose the Clean Power Plan a number of polls suggest that the GOP's resistance to the Clean Power Plan is at odds with the will of the American people.

A recent survey by Public Policy Polling suggests that this position is at at odds with the views of the American people. According to a public opinion poll in eight battleground states people are concerned about climate change and they support the Clean Power Plan. This same poll showed that Americans do not support Mitch McConnell's suggestion that Republican governors should drag their feet on the implementation of the plan.

The disconnect between the Republican party and the American people was evident in another recent poll conducted by the GOP polling firm American Viewpoint. This survey asked Republican primary voters in the critical early primary states of New Hampshire and South Carolina about their views on energy and the Clean Power Plan in particular. This poll found that there may be a disconnect between many presidential candidates and likely primary voters. Primary voters in both states want their candidates to have a clean energy plan, and favor more investment in wind and solar power than in coal or oil. Though the vast majority of these respondents were conservative, a majority do not want to weaken environmental safeguards. A solid majority of these Republican primary voters believe climate change is underway and want to limit carbon pollution. A majority of them favor the Clean Power Plan.

A poll earlier this year conducted by the New York Times, Standford University and Resources for the Future, showed that the overwhelming majority of the American public, including half of Republicans, support government action on climate change. The poll also found that two-thirds of Americans said they were more likely to vote for political candidates who campaign on fighting climate change. The survey shows that Americans know that failure to address climate change is not an option, 83 percent, including 61 percent of Republicans said that if nothing is done to reduce emissions, global warming will be a very or somewhat serious problem in the future. The survey said that 74 percent of Americans want the federal government to do "a substantial amount to combat climate change." Given their position on climate change the GOP should be concerned about the fact that 71 percent of Republicans said that climate change was caused at least in part by human activities and almost half (48%) of Republicans said they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports fighting climate change.

A more recent Quinnipiac University poll indicates that 58 percent of Americans think that government should limit the release of greenhouse gases from power plants.

The support for climate action and the Clean Power Plan in particular can be attributed to health concerns, as well as the business benefits and economic advantages.

Republicans have painted themselves into a corner. The American public wants action on climate change, and supports the Clean Power Plan, however the GOP's ties to dirty energy and policy partisanship put them in an impossible situation of their own making.

Related
Clean Power Plan: Business Opportunities and Economic Benefits
Hundreds of US Companies and Investors Support the Clean Power Plan
President Obama Introduces and Explains the Clean Power Plan (Video)
The Health Benefits of Combating Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan
The Clean Power Plan for the Health of Latinos: Congresswomen Sánchez Testimonmy to the EPA
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

The Clean Power Plan for the Health of Latinos: Congresswomen Sánchez Testimonmy to the EPA

On July 29th, 2014 by Congresswoman Linda Sánchez gave her testimony to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In this testimony she explained why she is particularly concerned about the impacts of air pollution on the Latino community.

She spoke about the need to reduce pollution and her concern for public health and she explained why she is concerned about the well-being of her Latino constituents. She said that power plant emissions are a health risk of particular significance for Latinos.  With 31 percent of Latinos living within 30 miles of a power plant, they are165 percent more likely to live in counties with unhealthy levels of particulate matter pollution. This translates to high rates of asthma among Latinos. There are currently over 3.6 million Latinos in the US that suffer from asthma, including one in ten Latino children.

"I am here to declare that we can no longer afford to wait to act on climate change." Sánchez said. "I want a safe and secure future for my son, and I think millions of parents across the country would agree with me." She went on to say, "The Clean Power Plan is a serious step toward protecting Americans from the consequences of climate change. It clearly outlines the changes that must be made in order to limit the health and economic costs associated with carbon pollution."

She also waded into the feasibility of the plan citing her own experience in California.  "I know this change is possible. My home state of California has already implemented many of the guidelines proposed by the EPA and the facts speak for themselves—California has the 4th lowest carbon emissions in the nation, and our electric bills are 25% below average."

She added her voice to the number of studies which suggest that there are also a number of benefits associated with the plan. She also made the point that failing to act would be much more costly to the economy.

"The benefits are significant, but the costs of not acting are much greater," Sánchez said. "On behalf of our country, my constituents, and the 28 million Hispanics living in areas with unhealthy levels of ozone, I urge you to fully implement the Clean Power Plan."


Related
The Health Benefits of Combating Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan
Congresswoman Linda Sanchez in Support of the Clean Power Plan 
President Obama Introduces and Explains the Clean Power Plan (Video)
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)
Support of the EPA's Clean Power Plan

Republicans and Dirty Energy Oppose the Clean Power Plan

Although the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan has received widespread support, vociferous resistance has come from the fossil fuel industry and conservatives. This includes sitting members of the GOP in congress and those seeking the Republican nomination for president.

The oil industry does not want to see regulations undermine the booming fossil fuel industry in the US. They have resisted the plan including cuts to methane emissions from the oil and gas sector. The plan would reduce methane levels by 40-45 percent from 2012 levels by 2025. According to the EPA methane emissions account for nearly 10 percent of US GHG emissions or almost one third of the total national methane emissions. Left unchecked methane emissions from the oil and gas industry will increase by 25 percent by 2025.

Several states are also resisting the plan even though they have considerable flexibility and newly extended time frames for compliance. There has already been a lawsuit from nine coal-producing states and Murray Energy Corp, the largest independently owned coal company in the United States. More lawsuits are expected.

After the final plan was released West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, said that his state would be among a group of states "launching an aggressive legal campaign." Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell promised legal action and advised states to ignore the regulations. Republican governors in six states (Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas and Wisconsin) have taken McConnell's advice saying they would not comply with the plan.

Despite the promises to litigate, the Obama administration is confident that these challenges are doomed to fail.

As explained by Phil Radford, executive director of Greenpeace USA, "coal executives will beat their tired old drum about a ‘war on coal,’ but the truth is that as clean energy from wind and solar power continue to grow rapidly and get cheaper by the quarter, today’s rule simply codifies a change that’s already well under way: the age of coal is coming to an end."

Concerns about American business and the economy are at the heart of the criticisms of the new regulations. However these allegations have been shown to be a ruse and based almost entirely upon partisan politics  and dirty energy interests. A number of independent assessments indicate that on balance the plan is good for business and good for the economy.

Related
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)

Clean Power Plan: Business Opportunities and Economic Benefits

The Clean Power Plan will provide a host of opportunities for business and benefits for the economy. The plan can be expected to accelerate clean energy innovation and improve energy efficiency, it will also cost a tiny fraction of the estimated costs of inaction. The EPA estimates that the Clean Power Plan will result in economic benefits of $27 to $50 billion each year in 2020, and $49 to $84 billion in 2030. These savings are attributable to the combination of reducing climate impacts from greenhouse gases along with health savings from cutting particulate emissions in the air.

According to estimates from the Obama administration the cost of the Clean Power Plan will be about $8.4 billion annually by 2030. The annual price tag of climate inaction is more than 17 times the price of the energy emissions reduction plan. A White House report titled, "The Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change." indicates that failing to act on climate change will cost $150 billion annually.

This assessment is corroborated by Lux Research which states, "Negawatts will prove to be the cheapest compliance." A negawatt is a negative megawatt or a megawatt of power saved by increasing efficiency or reducing consumption. Lux cites the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE), which says saving electricity is considerably cheaper for a utility than producing it. The cost can be as little as $0.028 per kWh, or two times as cheap as coal.

In addition to driving efficiency, the Clean Power Plan will drive creative new approaches to energy production. "These standards will also spark the innovation we need to build the next generation of power plants, helping grow a more sustainable clean energy economy," EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said.

According to Lux some of the other technologies that will benefit from the Clean Power Plan are combined cycle gas turbines (CCGTs), commercial and utility scale solar and clean coal. The new rules are also expected to accelerate the development of second and third generation technologies for carbon capture and sequestration.

The LUX report suggests that measures including the Clean Power Plan could drastically reduce the economic cost of climate change later on. For every decade of inaction, the costs to control global warming rise an average of 40 percent.

A 2014 report from the Analysis Group indicates that States are well positioned to implement the EPA’s Clean Power Plan. The report titled, EPA’s Clean Power Plan: States’ Tools for Reducing Costs & Increasing Benefits to Consumers, shows that states that are already regulating carbon pollution have seen net increases in economic output and jobs.

"The bottom line: the economy can handle — and actually benefit from — these rules," said Analysis Group senior advisor Susan Tierney.

The report also suggests that states that work together to form carbon markets or other collaborative initiatives can glean even greater benefits.

A number of studies show that the longer we wait to reduce our use of fossil fuels the more it will cost. A cost benefit analysis makes a powerful case for acting on climate change and a detailed review of the Clean Power Plan shows that the savings far outweigh the costs.

Related Post
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 for the EPA's Clean Power Plan

Hundreds of US Companies and Investors Support the Clean Power Plan

American companies and investors have signed a Ceres letter supporting the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan. A total of 365 companies and investors signed the letter which was sent to 29 US governors, just ahead of the release of the Clean Power Plan on August 3rd.

On July 27th, a number of American companies announced a partnership with the White House through which they revealed their plans to tackle climate change. As part of this initiative a total of 13 companies have pledged to invest more than $140 billion to cut carbon emissions. This includes some of the largest brands in the US. Bank of America, General Motors, Cargill, Google, Microsoft and Apple to name 6 of the 13 companies that are onboard.

The 365 businesses and investors that sent a letter in support of the Clean Power Plan include a wide range of business from small local companies to large enterprises like General Mills, Mars, Nestle, Staples and Unilever who are present in all 50 states.

The fact that so many companies and investors signed the Ceres letter should come as no surprise given the number of companies that are already engaged in sustainability. A 2014 Ceres, Calvert Investments and WWF study revealed that 60 percent of Fortune 100 companies have already set their own clean energy targets. The research further shows that carbon reduction efforts makes good business sense.

Related
President Obama Introduces and Explains the Clean Power Plan (Video)
The Health Benefits of Combating Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan
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
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

Historic Clean Power Plan Includes Three New Additions

On Monday August 3, the Obama administration released its final plan to curb power plant emissions as part of efforts to cut US greenhouse gas emissions by 32 percent. In addition to encouraging less energy from carbon intensive sources like coal, the plan relies on more renewable energy and less natural gas. However, states have a good deal of flexibility as to how they will execute the plan and they have been given more time to implement it. The Clean Power Plan is the first time that the US has set national climate pollution limits on power plants. President Obama called the plan "the single most important step" America has ever taken in the fight against climate change.

Focusing on power plants is a logical step as there were previously no limits on the amount of GHG pollution that these facilities could emit. Power plants are the single largest source of GHGs accounting for more than a third of all US emissions.

He referred to efforts to slash GHGs as a moral obligation, saying that failure to cut emissions threatens future generations. He also warned that we must act quickly before we pass irreversible tipping points. "There is such a thing as being too late when it comes to climate change," Obama said.

There have been three new additions released in the final draft of the plan. The first increases US emissions reductions target, the second gives states more time to enact the plan and the third involves freezes natural gas production at current levels. The plan cuts carbon dioxide emissions 32 percent by 2030, compared with 2005 levels, that is up from 30 percent cuts announced last year. States have been given an additional year to submit their plans and an additional two years to implement the plan. They now have until 2022 to implement the plan rather than 2020 as originally proposed. Once touted as a bridge fuel by the President, natural gas is to be kept at its current levels in the final version of the plan.

The Obama administration estimated the emissions limits will cost $8.4 billion annually by 2030. This is a small percentage of the annual price tag of climate inaction which has been pegged at $150 billion according to a White House report titled, "The Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change."

The plan can be expected to accelerate clean energy innovation and improve energy efficiency. It also sends a powerful signal to the energy industry, the business community, investors, and the wider world that America is committed to climate action.

The final version of the clean power plan comes after hundreds of thousands of people submitted comments to the EPA and almost 2000 people commented during a number of public hearings.

"We know that transition to clean energy is not only possible, it’s affordable. In fact, every time EPA has used the Clean Air Act to limit air pollution, it has ended up boosting our economy. Overall, the benefits have outweighed the costs by thirty to one. And every past rule has saved lives – tens of thousands of them. Hiding from challenges is not what Americans do," EDF President Fredd Krupp said. "And it is certainly the wrong path for us and the generations to come."

Related
President Obama Introduces and Explains the Clean Power Plan (Video)
The Health Benefits of Combating Climate Change and the Clean Power Plan
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
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)