Showing posts with label Obama Administration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama Administration. Show all posts

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

President Obama Set to Nominate Gregoire as Head of EPA

As reported in Seattle PI, President Obama may nominate outgoing Democratic Washington governor Chris Gregoire as the chief of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Gregoire was first elected to the position of Governor of Washington in 2004 and won re-election by a slim margin in 2008.

Gregoire has a mixed record on the environment. Before being elected Attorney General in 1992 she was director of Washington’s Department of Ecology. She served as the director of the Washington Department of Ecology from 1988 until 1992.

One of her greatest achievements concerns the Hanford nuclear waste cleanup agreement. She successfully negotiated a three party agreement in 1989 with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy to clean up waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation.

Although vociferously resisted by the first Bush administration, the three party agreement withstood legal challenges and held up in court. As attorney general she sued several times to try to get a more adequate cleanup job.

She also launched an ambitious Puget Sound cleanup effort early in her first term as governor and she was a leader in the Western Climate Initiative.

However Gregoire's environmental record is not unblemished. She has allied herself with shipping, agricultural and other economic interests against efforts to restore salmon runs to the Columbia River system.

© 2013, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Articles
EPA Chief Forced Out By Dirty Industries and Anti-Environment Republicans
Too Dirty to Fail: The GOP's Ongoing War with EPA Standards
Koch Industries War with the EPA
EPA's New Soot Rule
EPA's New Vehicle Standards
EPA's Carbon Pollution Standard has Strong Support
EPA Limits GHGs from Power Plants
EPA Proposes Standards for the Airline Industry
The EPA Seeks Historic Proposal to Limit Pollution
Supreme Court Recognizes EPA Role in Carbon Pollution Protection
EPA's Carbon Pollution Standard
The EPA's Top Green Powered Organizations
EPA's Energy Winners for 2012 Energy
EPA's Green Power Partnerships
EPA's 2012 Green Power Partnership Winners
EPA's Top Green Powered Organizations
Top Companies in the 2012 Climate Leadership Awards
EPA Green Education Services

Obama Versus Romney on Energy

Here is an excerpt from a September 28, 2012 Climate Progress article titled "Obama Versus Romney: Everything You Need to Know About Where the Candidates Stand on Energy Policy." The article was written by Daniel J. Weiss and and Jackie Weidman

The United States is in the midst of significant changes in our energy outlook. We are producing and burning more natural gas for electricity, while reducing coal use. Domestic oil production is at a 15-year high while oil imports are at a 15-year low. Renewable electricity doubled over the past four years, while worldwide carbon pollution and the impacts of climate change grow. The next president will face these and other serious challenges posed by a changing energy world.

President Barack Obama’s first term featured the adoption of essential toxic and carbon pollution reduction measures to protect public health. In addition, he modernized fuel-economy standards for the first time in two decades, which also helped the auto industry; invested in energy efficiency and renewable electricity; and created tens of thousands of jobs.

Gov. Mitt Romney’s energy agenda couldn’t be more different. He would undo new safeguards from mercury, carcinogens, soot, and smog from industrial sources. He opposes the improved fuel-economy standards, and would continue and expand tax breaks for big oil companies, while openly disparaging clean energy and investments in wind power.

In short, there are stark differences between the two presidential candidates that must be discussed on October 3 so Americans have a clear view of the energy path each candidate would lead us down.

Below is a more detailed direct comparison of their positions on the most visible energy challenges facing the nation. Following this chart is documentation on the candidates’ positions:

Oil and gas production

Obama:

Oil imports lowest since 1997; dropped by 15 percent during term to 42 percent; vowed to cut current oil imports in half by 2020. [[Energy Information Administration, 6/12] Domestic oil production is the highest in 15 years. The United States has more drilling rigs at work than the rest of the world combined. [Center for American Progress Action Fund,9/13/12; Energy Information Administration, 9/11/12] Crude oil production from federal lands and waters was higher in 2009, 2010 and 2011 than in any of the last three years of the Bush administration. [EIA, 3/14/12] Raised worker and environmental safety standards for drilling in the Gulf of Mexico following the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster, strengthening well design, testing, control equipment, and workplace safety. The Gulf Coast region was not hurt economically by a temporary moratorium, which has the same unemployment as two years ago and had rising personal income in 2011. [White House, 3/30/12, NOLA, 4/15/12]

Romney

Would open the Florida portion of the Gulf of Mexico, the Atlantic and Pacific Outer Continental Shelves, public lands, and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to new drilling. Would accelerate drilling permits, short circuiting health and environmental reviews. [MittRomney.com, 2011] Defense Department concerned about Florida and Virginia drilling expansion since it could interfere with military training. [Panama City News Herald, 4/4/12] Called the temporary moratorium on drilling in the Gulf following the Deepwater Horizon disaster “illegal.” [CBS News, 3/9/12] See “Public lands protection”

Big Oil tax breaks

Obama:

Calls on Congress to end $4 billion in oil tax breaks and to invest in clean energy instead. [White House, 3/28/2012] Pledged to cut subsidies for oil, coal, and natural gas internationally, along with G20 nations. [Economist,10/1/09]

Romney:

Romney supports the House Republican budget, authored by his running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), which preserves $40 billion in tax breaks for the oil and gas industry over a decade. [CAP, 3/20/12] Romney’s economic plan would give the big five oil companies–BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, and Shell–an additional $2.3 billion annual tax cut on top of existing tax breaks they currently receive. [CAPAF, 7/26/12] Romney’s plan cuts the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent, but does not make specific mention of oil and gas loopholes which let oil companies pay much lower effective federal rates. [MittRomney.com, 2012] Asked directly in an interview about whether he is for or against subsidizing Big Oil, Romney responded: “I’m not sure precisely what big tax breaks we’re talking about.” [Fox News, 4/3/2012]

Clean energy

Obama:

Federal government invested billions of dollars in renewable energy projects, creating tens of thousands of jobs; doubled generation of (non-hydropower) renewable electricity to 6 percent. [EIA, 7/1/12] Supports extension of the production tax credit for wind generated electricity. [White House, 5/22/12] “Governor Romney calls [renewable sources of energy] ‘imaginary.’ Congressman Ryan calls them a ‘fad.’ I think they’re the future. I think they’re worth fighting for.” [Climate Progress, 8/28/12] “I will not walk away from the promise of clean energy. I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or Germany because we refuse to make the same commitment here.” [State of the Union, 1/24/12] Transforming the Pentagon energy use by reducing the military’s dependence on fossil fuels that cost the Pentagon up to $20 billion annually. [National Journal, 4/11/12]

Romney:

Opposes the extension of the production tax credit for wind energy, which could cost 37,000 jobs in the industry. [Des Moines Register, 7/30/12] “In place of real energy, Obama has focused on an imaginary world where government-subsidized windmills and solar panels could power the economy. This vision has failed.” [Columbus Dispatch op-ed, 8/8/12] “You can’t drive a car with a windmill on it.” [ThinkProgress, 3/6/2012] Endorses the House passed budget authored by Ryan, which gives a 60 percent funding increase to coal, oil, and natural gas, while it decreases funding for research on vehicle batteries and solar projects, and loans to companies to retool to build fuel-efficient cars. [Politico, 4/17/12]

Reduce oil use and imports with efficient vehicles

Obama:

New modern standards require cars and light trucks to achieve an average 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. This, combined with the first round of standards, will save 3.1 million barrels of oil per day in 2030. This is equivalent to the amount of oil we currently import from the Persian Gulf, Colombia, and Venezuela combined. [CAP, 8/28/12] Invested in fuel-efficient vehicle and advanced battery research and development to spur job growth and increase international competitiveness; increased affordability and reliability of electric vehicles. [CAP, 8/28/12] Proposed a “race to the top” for communities to seek federal investment in public electric vehicle recharging infrastructure. [White House, 3/30/11]

Romney:

“Gov. Romney opposes the extreme standards that President Obama has imposed, which will limit the choices available to American families,” said campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul. [LA Times, 8/28/12] Disparaged the first plug-in hybrid electric Chevrolet Volt as “an idea whose time has not come,” and said, “I’m not sure America was ready for the Chevy Volt.” [Michigan Live, 12/23/11, MSNBC 4/5/12]. EPA says the Volt gets at least 94 miles per gallon. Advocates ending the federal loan program helping companies develop and produce efficient cars. [Orange County Register, 10/24/11] Supports House passed budget authored by Ryan that would slash investment in alternatives to gasoline powered cars. [House Budget Committee, FY 2013]

Gasoline prices

Obama:

Commodity Futures Trading Commission should increase market oversight of Wall Street speculators who have driven up oil prices;, increase penalties for illegal activity. Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act includes rules to limit commodities speculation by Wall Street speculators that do not affect commercial end users. [CNN, 4/17/12; Media Matters, 4/18/12] Favors investments in alternatives to gasoline, including electric vehicles and public transportation. [CAP, 8/28/12; American Public Transportation Association, 2/13/12]

Romney

Would repeal Dodd Frank and opposes reining in Wall Street speculators, calling Obama’s move “gimmickry.” [MittRomney.com, 4/17/12] Supports House passed budget authored by Ryan that would cut Commodity Futures Trading Commission funding by nearly $40 million; cuts would hinder the CFTC’s ability to police the oil and other markets that the Commission oversees.. [House Budget Committee FY 2013; White House, 4/17/12]

Green jobs

Obama:

Historic level of investment in green jobs sector now with 3.1 million Americans employed according the Bureau of Labor Statistics. [AP, 3/22/12] Romney:

Repeatedly called green jobs “fake,” such as calling them “illusory” in an op-ed on his energy plan. [Orange County Register, 10/24/11] “[Obama] keeps talking about green jobs, where are they?” [OC Register, 10/24/11; League of Conservation Voters, 9/15/11] The Economic Policy Institute estimates that there were nearly 1 million clean energy jobs created or saved by the Recovery Act. [BlueGreen Alliance, 2/17/11]

Public lands protection

Obama:

Approved 17 major solar energy installation projects on public lands that are generating 6,000 megawatts of power; will expedite permitting process to increase development in Western states. [Department of Energy, 7/24/12] Announced he would “allow the development of clean energy on enough public land to power 3 million homes.” [White House, 1/24/12] Signed a sweeping public lands bill in 2009 that designated 2 million acres of wilderness and created three national parks. [AP, 3/31/09] Used the 1906 Antiquities Act to create three national monuments – Fort Monroe, Virginia; Fort Ord, California; and Chimney Rock, Colorado. These monuments will bring tourists and economic development to these places.. [ClimateProgress, 9/20/12] 

Romney:

Romney’s energy plan would give states the authority to allow drilling in National Park Service units and other public lands within state borders. The New York Times noted that “states, as a rule, tend to be interested mainly in resource development.” [NYT, 8/18/12] The Romney plan significantly increases the likelihood that drilling could take place in 30 National Park units, including the Flight 93 Memorial and Everglades National Park. [Center for American Progress, 9/12/12] Romney said “I haven’t studied […] what the purpose is of” public lands. But he finds it unacceptable when conservation is “designed to satisfy, let’s say, the most extreme environmentalists, from keeping a population from developing their coal, their gold, their other resources for the benefit of the state.” [McClatchy, 2/16/12] Fully embraced the House passed budget, authored by Ryan, which would sell off 3.3 millions of acres of national parks and public lands. [ThinkProgress, 3/21/12]

Climate Change

Obama:

“My plan will continue to reduce the carbon pollution that is heating our planet – because climate change is not a hoax. More droughts and floods and wildfires are not a joke. They’re a threat to our children’s future.” [Climate Progress, 9/6/12] Finalized the first ever carbon pollution reduction rules for motor vehicles, which will cut carbon pollution from vehicles built between 2012 and 2025. The standards will slash billions of tons of carbon pollution. [White House, 8/3/2012] Proposed the first carbon pollution reduction for new coal-fired power plants. [NPR, 3/27/12] State Department is leading a group of countries in a program that cuts global warming pollutants like soot, methane, and hydrofluorocarbons. [NYT, 2/16/2012]

Romney:

Romney made fun of President Obama’s commitment to fighting global warming at the Republican National Convention when he said “I’m not in this race to slow the rise of the oceans or to heal the planet.” [Climate Progress, 9/19/12] “There remains a lack of scientific consensus on the issue — on the extent of the warming, the extent of the human contribution, and the severity of the risk — and I believe we must support continued debate and investigation within the scientific community.” [NYT,9/5/2012] “I oppose steps like a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system.” [Science Debate.org, 9/4/12] Says the Clean Air Act doesn’t apply to carbon emissions: “My view is that the EPA in getting into carbon and regulating carbon has gone beyond the original intent of that legislation, and I would not take it there.” Would overturn Supreme Court decision by blocking EPA from setting carbon pollution reduction standards.[Politico, 7/18/11; MittRomney.com, 2012]

Protect public health from mercury, toxic air pollution

Obama:

Finalized historic standard that limits harmful mercury and air toxic pollution from coal-fired power plants. Proposed rules to reduce mercury and toxic air pollution from industrial boilers, incinerators, and cement manufacturing. Together, these initiatives will result in $187 billion in annual health benefits and would prevent 21,600 premature deaths, 199,000 cases of asthma, and 12,540 hospitalizations annually. [CAPAF, 9/18/12] Proposed Cross-state air pollution rule that would save up to 34,000 lives, and $280 billion in economic benefits, annually; rule was struck down in 2-1 federal appeals court decision, but EPA could appeal. [CAPAF, 9/18/12]

Romney

Would promptly issue an executive order that “directs all agencies to immediately initiate the elimination of Obama-era regulations that unduly burden the economy or job creation.” [MittRomney.com, 2011] “Aggressively” develop all our coal sources. “Coal is America’s most abundant energy source. We have reserves that—at current rates of uses—will last for the next 200 years of electricity production in an industry that directly employs perhaps 200,000 workers.” [MittRomney.com, 2011] Against new EPA regulations of harmful mercury and air pollutants from coal: “I think the EPA has gotten completely out of control for a very simple reason. It is a tool in the hands of the president to crush the private enterprise system, to crush our ability to have energy, whether it’s oil, gas, coal, nuclear.” [The Hill, 12/5/11] Romney’s campaign spokesperson falsely claimed that the mercury pollution-reduction standard “costs more than $1,500 for every one dollar reduction in mercury pollution.” The EPA projects “that for every dollar spent to reduce pollution, Americans get $3 to $9 in health benefits in return.” [Climate Progress, 8/21/12]

Keystone XL pipeline

Obama:

Delayed decision to permit construction of Keystone XL pipeline in November 2011 until a new route was identified and evaluated. The original proposed pathway crossed Nebraska’s Sandhills, the recharge zone for the Ogallala Aquifer that supplies water for nearly one-quarter of American agriculture. Nebraska’s Republican governor Dave Heineman also opposed this route. President Obama noted that the original route could “affect the health and safety of the American people as well as the environment.” [White House, 11/10/11; NRDC, 7/11/11; Nebraska Government, 8/11/11] Congress forced President Obama to decide whether to approve or deny the Keystone XL in January 2012 before a new route was selected. He denied it because a new route had not been identified or analyzed. The president said that “the rushed and arbitrary deadline insisted on by congressional Republicans prevented a full assessment of the pipeline’s impact, especially the health and safety of the American people, as well as our environment.” [White House, 1/18/12] Approved the Cushing, Oklahoma to Gulf of Mexico leg of Keystone XL in March to address the over stock of oil in Cushing due to lack of transportation capacity; promised to ensure that construction and operation will proceed in an environmentally sensible way. [CAP,5/5/2012] Obama will decide whether to approve TransCanada’s new proposed northern pipeline route in 2013, after the Nebraska state government and the State Department assess the environmental impacts of the new route. [U.S. Department of State, 5/4/2012]

Romney:

“If I’m President, we’ll build it if I have to build it myself.” [Huffington Post, 5/4/12] Used his first TV ad of the general election to say he would approve Keystone XL on “day one” if elected. [The Hill, 5/18/12] Daniel J. Weiss is a Senior Fellow with the Center for American Progress; Jackie Weidman is a Special Assistant for energy policy at the Center for American Progress.

Source: Climate Progress

Related Articles
The Obama Administration Has Grown Renewable Energy
American Voters Want More Renewable Energy
The Green Elements of the First 2012 Presidential Debate
Obama's Energy Efficiency Executive Order for Industry
Obama Administration's New Vehicle Standards
Romney's Coal Fired Campaign Versus Obama's Wind Power
Obama Striving to Put an End to Oil Subsidies
Obama's National Goal of One Million EVs by 2020
Obama's Jobs Plan Emphasizes green employment
Obama 2013 Budget Seeks to Make Renewable Tax Credits Permanent
Clean Energy Excerpts of President Obama's 2012 State of the Union Speech
President Obama's 2013 Budget
President Obama's 2013 Environmental Budget
Excerpts of President Obama's American Jobs Act
Energy Efficiency Partnerships: Obama's American Jobs Act
President Obama's American Jobs Act (Video)
Environmental Politics: Obama Versus the GOP
Highlights of Obama's 2011 State of the Union Address
Excerpts of President Obama's 2010 State of the Union Address
Obama Renews His Commitments to Clean Energy and Efficiency
Excerpts from President Obama's 2010 State of the Union Address
President Obama's "HomeStar" Program
Alternative Energy Investments Under Obama
Mitt Romney's Love Affair with Fossil Fuels
Romney's Coal Fired Campaign Versus Obama's Wind Power
What Romney's Energy Policy looks Like on the Ground (Video) 
Mitt Romeny: The Legacy He Will Leave for our Children
Romney Increasingly Uncertain about the Climate Change
Climate Denying Republicans Delay their Convention Due to Extreme Weather
GOP VP Candidate Paul Ryan's Unsustainable Voting Record on Energy and the Environment
Environmental Politics: Obama Versus the Republicans
The Ignorant Anti-Environmental Views of the Republicans
The Koch Brother's Ties to GOP Presidential Candidates
Republicans Vow to Continue Push for Keystone XL
Video: Conservatives Against Republican Denialism
Video: The Republican War on Climate Science
Video: Republicans Anti-Scientific Stance
Republican Obstructionism on the Debt Crisis and Implications for the Environment
Republican Cuts Target Green Jobs
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and Redistricting
Republican's Fail in their Bid to Defund the EPA
Defend Clean Air and Oppose the TRAIN Act
Republican Assault on the Environment
EDF Campaign Opposing US Anti-Environment Bill
Environmental Implications of the Credit Ceiling Agreement
Chu Video: The Worst Anti-Environmental Bill of her Career
Connolly Video: Climate Disasters And GOP Denial
Blumenauer Video: 'The Jihad Against Climate Change Continues'
Republican Obstructionism on the Debt Ceiling Risks Global Environmental Collapse
Republicans Undermining Climate Legislation
Supreme Court Decision Undermines Climate Change Legislation
Protecting the Planet from Corporate Influence
Green Stimulus Spending and Republican Opposition
What is Wrong with the Right
The Business of Climate Change Deception

The Obama Administration Has Grown Renewable Energy

Electrical generation from renewable energy sources such as wind, solar and geothermal has grown dramatically under the Obama administration says Ken Bossong, Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign. Bossong cites two new government studies that show a near doubling of non-hydro renewable energy sources contributing to US electrical generation since president Obama took office.

The latest issue of the Electric Power Monthly from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) analyzes data through June 2012. The report shows that from January 1 to June 30, 2012 non-hydro renewable energy sources (geothermal, biomass, solar, and wind) provided 5.76 percent of net electrical generation, an increase of 10.97 percent for the same period last year. Utility scale solar increased 97.2 percent from one year ago, wind generation grew 16.3 percent and geothermal by 0.2 percent. Biomass declined by 0.8 percent.

Source: Global Warming is Real

Related Articles 
American Voters Want More Renewable Energy
The Promise of Renewable Energy in the US
Renewable Energy Is Our Only Hope
President Clinton on What the American Public Needs to Know about Renewable Energy
China and the Growth of Global Wind Power
Renewable Energy in 2012: The Global Economic and Environmental Climate
How the West can Capitalize on the Growth of Chinese Cleantech in 2012
Outlook for the Chinese Solar Industry in 2012
India is the World Leader in Cleantech Investment Growth
The EU Debt Crisis did Not Curb the Growth of Renewables in 2011
UK Renewable Energy 2011 Overview
UK Wind Energy
Cuts to UK Solar FiTs Could Prove Deadly
Cuts to UK Wind Power ROCs & FiTs
The Implications of the Expiration of US Renewable Energy Subsidies
Obama 2013 Budget Seeks to Make Renewable Tax Credits Permanent
US Wind Energy Market Review and Forecasts for 2012
US Solar Energy Review and 2012 Forecasts
Geothermal Energy Market Review and Forecasts for 2012
British Government to Lead the Green Economy
Market Forces and the UK's Green Deal
UK Government Investments in Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Corporate Sustainability is Driving Green Businesses in the UK
UK Renewable Energy 2011 Overview
Cuts to UK Wind Power ROCs & FiTs
UK Wind Energy
Cuts to UK Solar FiTs Could Prove Deadly
Scottish Wind Energy Can Power Europe
The Growth of London's Green Economy
The EU Debt Crisis did Not Curb the Growth of Renewables in 2011
Sustainability and the European Super Grid

US Fuel Efficiency Standards Surpass Europe

President Obama's new US fuel efficiency standards may catapult America ahead of Europe by lowering vehicular emissions. The burgeoning US electric and hybrid car market will most certainly benefit from Obama's actions. The President first introduced a fuel standard of 35 miles per gallon (mpg) for 2016 and starting in 2025, American cars and light trucks will have to achieve a standard of at least 54.5 mpg.

The International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) suggest that the US target surpasses the EU equivalent. A comparison of Europe and the US reveals that the American standard will result in less CO2 than its European counterpart. A 54.5mpg standard would be roughly equal to a 70 grams of CO2 per km (g/km) measurement, the ICCT believes, with air conditioning credits exemptions potentially taking the figure up to a maximum of 83 g/km. The EU has only set a fuel savings target of 95 g/km for 2020, with the promise of a communication about consultations on a future 2025 targets later this year.

For so many decades the US lagged behind Europe in auto emissions, now the President's bold new standard may very well put them on top of the heap of a very competitive marketplace.

However if Republican nominee Mitt Romney wins this year’s presidential election he will likely scrap Obama's fuel standard and replace it with an anemic 5 percent year-on-year fuel savings.

© 2012, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Posts
New US Vehicle Fuel Efficiency Standards of 54.5 MPG
America's Fuel Efficiency Standards of 35 MPG
Americans Want Cars to get 60 MPG
American Electric Vehicle Strategy
Competition in Green Vehicles
The Top 10 Green Cars of 2011
Global Demand for Hybrid Vehicles
EV Sales Predictions in the US
Factors Determining Adoption Rate of EVs
Electric Vehicles Increasingly Competitive
The US is Positioned to Lead the Global Demand for EVs
ISO Standards and Greener Vehicles
Greening Vehicle Fleets
The Value of Electric Vehicle Subsidies
Assessing the Environmental Impact of Electric and Hybrid Vehicle
Hybrids Could Substantially Reduce US Fossil Fuel Consumption
Electric Vehicles Will Drive Demand for LithiumJaguar F Type a True Hybrid Sports Car
Jaguar C-X75 Electric Hybrid Supercar
Jaguar XJ: A Greener Luxury Car
BMW Investing in EVs
Porsche's Electric e-Boxter Sports Car
Porsche and Audi`s Greener Vehicles
Mercedes-Benz Hybrid and Electric Cars
The Nissan Esflow Debuts
Honda's CR-Z and Second Generation Hybrid Sports Car
8 Greener Cars at the 2011 Detroit Auto Show
BMW Investing in EVs
Porsche's Electric e-Boxter Sports Car

Al Gore Fears a Romney Presidency and Credits Obama

In a sit-down interview with TakePart, former Vice President Al Gore says he “would fear for the future of our environmental policy” if Mitt Romney were elected President in November.

Gore’s comments were taped in San Francisco on Tuesday, August 21, two days before the presumptive GOP presidential nominee unveiled his energy plan, which many environmentalists were quick to criticize, arguing that it would double down on America’s dependence on dirty fossil fuels like oil and gas. The former Massachusetts governor did not mention climate change once in his speech.

Gore was in the Bay Area to give an updated version of his An Inconvenient Truth slideshow presentation to more than 1,000 environmental activists in San Francisco. The Nobel Laureate’s hour-long presentation was part of a three-day Climate Reality Leadership training conference organized by The Climate Reality Project.

Gore also weighed in on President Obama’s environmental record, praising him for the passage of the green stimulus and for the biggest increase ever in auto mileage standards.

To see the video interview click here.

Related Posts
Mitt Romney Funded by Big Oil (Video)
Mitt Romney's Love Affair with Big Oil
GOP VP Candidate Paul Ryan's Unsustainable Voting Record on Energy and the Environment
Romney's Coal Fired Campaign Versus Obama's Wind Power
Mitt Romeny: The Legacy He Will Leave for our Children
Romney Increasingly Uncertain about the Climate Change
Environmental Politics: Obama Versus the Republicans
The Ignorant Anti-Environmental Views of the Republicans
The Koch Brother's Ties to GOP Presidential Candidates
Republicans Vow to Continue Push for Keystone XL
Video: Conservatives Against Republican Denialism
Video: The Republican War on Climate Science
Video: Republicans Anti-Scientific Stance
Republican Obstructionism on the Debt Crisis and Implications for the Environment
Republican Cuts Target Green Jobs
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and Redistricting
Republican's Fail in their Bid to Defund the EPA
Defend Clean Air and Oppose the TRAIN Act
Republican Assault on the Environment
EDF Campaign Opposing US Anti-Environment Bill
Environmental Implications of the Credit Ceiling Agreement
Chu Video: The Worst Anti-Environmental Bill of her Career
Connolly Video: Climate Disasters And GOP Denial
Blumenauer Video: 'The Jihad Against Climate Change Continues'
Republican Obstructionism on the Debt Ceiling Risks Global Environmental Collapse
Republicans Undermining Climate Legislation
Supreme Court Decision Undermines Climate Change Legislation
Protecting the Planet from Corporate Influence
Green Stimulus Spending and Republican Opposition
What is Wrong with the Right
The Business of Climate Change Deception

President Obama's 2013 Environmental Budget

President Obama’s 2013 budget proposal supports efficiency, renewable energy, green jobs, clean air, clean water, and a livable climate. Obama is also tightening the nations belt and helping to forge a cleaner future by proposing $39 billion of subsidy cuts for the fossil fuel industry over the coming 10 years.

“Repealing fossil fuel tax preferences helps eliminate market distortions, strengthening incentives for investments in clean, renewable, and more energy efficient technologies,” the budget plan states.

This is how Energy Secretary Steven Chu explained the choice Americans face:
“The choice we face as a nation is simple: do we want the clean energy technologies of tomorrow to be invented in America by American innovators, made by American workers and sold around the world, or do we want to concede those jobs to our competitors? We can and must compete for those jobs.”
Here is a summary of some of the greener elements of the President’s budget:
  • A clean energy standard for electricity production, so that by 2035, 80 percent will be come from low-carbon sources like wind, solar, natural gas and nuclear
  • $2.33 billion for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, a 29% increase
  • $5 billion for the Office of Science, a 2.4% increase
  • $1.2 billion for energy efficiency, including clean vehicle technologies
  • $310 million for the SunShot Initiative for cost-competitive solar energy
  • $95 million for wind energy
  • $65 million for geothermal
  • $350 million for the Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy (ARPA-E) for transformative energy innovation research
  • $770 million to develop small modular reactors
  • Extended renewable energy tax credits
  • $27.2 billion for the Department of Energy, a 3.2 percent increase over what Congress enacted last year:
  • $2.3 billion would go towards research and development for energy efficiency, advanced vehicles and biofuels.
  • $522 million increase in renewable energy sources and an additional $174 million for a revamped industrial technology-advanced manufacturing program.
  • $12 million would go towards multi-year research investments in safer natural gas infrastructure in order to reduce risks associated with hydraulic fracturing in shale formations.
  • Pipeline safety would receive a 70 percent, or $64 million, increase.
  • Approximately $1 billion for energy conservation efforts in the Department of Defense (DOD), which is the world’s largest energy consumer.
  • DOD is increasing its commitment to renewable energy, which now makes up 8.5 percent of its energy production and procurement.
  • $174 million for sustainable fisheries work by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which supports the science and management needed to support the commercial fishing industry that supports 1 million jobs and yields more than $32 billion in income every year.
  • $28 million for the National Catch Share Program, a critical part of the nation’s strategy to return its fisheries to abundance, the same level adopted by the Congress last year.
The President continues to press for massive investment in public transportation and he is once again calling for $47 billion for high-speed rail which is down $6 billion from last year’s proposal.

There is also some bad news in this budget for those concerned about the environment. Obama has provided no additional funding for the loan guarantee program for clean energy projects.

The EPA faces a budget cutback of 2.1 percent, these cuts will reduce funds for hazardous waste site cleanup, a program to reduce indoor radon exposure, a program to monitor beaches, and a program to help states improve infrastructure and drinking water treatment.

The President's fiscal 2013 budget also makes cuts to the EPA. The proposed EPA budget is $8.3 billion, which is $105 million less than the current level of funding for the EPA. If Congress approves the proposal, it would be the first time since 1994 that the agency’s budget was cut for three consecutive years.

To help offset some of these cuts, Obama has proposed $66 million for air quality programs to help states meet new regulations and $5 million to hire more inspectors for high-risk oil and chemical plants.

Cuts to USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service are equally counterproduction. The fiscal 2013 budget seeks to cut funding for Farm Bill conservation programs by about $600 million. Congress already has cut conservation funding by $2.8 billion over the last five years (FY 2008-2012), representing 81 percent of the nearly $3.5 billion in Farm Bill spending cuts during that time period.

Although the President does propose funding to boost domestic oil and gas production, Obama is also asking for $450 million to preserve public lands and $28 million for new inspectors.

“Despite some flaws, the president’s budget is a big net plus for the environment, and we urge Congress to embrace the positive aspects of it,” said Elgie Holstein, senior director for strategic planning at Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and a former associate director of the Office of Management and Budget for Natural Resources, Energy and Science, after praising the oil and gas company cuts but lamenting EPA and Farm Bill conservation cuts. “Look at it this way: environmental conservation is cheaper than environmental cleanup, just like preventive medicine is cheaper than emergency room treatment. We applaud the President’s support of job-creating, clean energy programs.”

Although we should expect more obstructionism from the GOP, this budget is “a testament to the importance of innovation and clean energy to the country’s economic future,” the budget request says.

Click here for a complete overview of the budget from the White House.

© 2012, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Posts
Clean Energy Excerpts of President Obama's State of the Union Speech
President Obama's Efforts on the Environment and Education
Environmental Politics: Obama Versus the Republican Presidential Hopefuls
Highlights of Obama's 2011 State of the Union Address: Clean Energy, Electric Vehicles and Eliminating Oil Subsidies
Obama's National Goal of One Million EVs by 2015
The Renewable Energy Standard
Excerpts from President Obama's 2010 State of the Union Address
Obama Renews His Commitments to Clean Energy and Small Business
Obama Makes Good on Executive Order to Reduce the Federal Government's GHGs

US Government Incentives for EVs

The US Government is considering EV incentive programs to encourage early adoption and market entry. To help the American automotive sector to meet the new fuel efficiency standards, US government agencies like the EPA are considering a number of incentive programs. These programs would be designed to encourage early adoption and introduction into the marketplace of advanced technologies.

Incentives being considered include those for electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and fuel cells vehicles. The government is considering advanced technology packages for large pickups, such as hybridization and other performance-based strategies and credits for technologies with potential to achieve CO2 reductions and fuel economy improvements.

For more information see the report entitled Driving Efficiency: Cutting Costs for Families at the Pump and Slashing Dependence on Oil (pdf).

The EPA is also planning to propose provisions for credits for improvements in air conditioning systems, treatment of compressed natural gas, continued credit banking and trading.

© 2011, Richard Matthews. All rights reserved.

Related Posts
New Rules for US Trucks and Buses
New Rules for US Cars and Light Trucks
Working Cooperatively to Improve Fuel Efficiency in the US
The Value of Electric Vehicle Subsidies
Growing Demand for Greener Vehicles
The US is Positioned to Lead the Global Competition for EV Supremacy
Germany and the Global Competition for EV Supremacy
Creative Capitalism: Market-Based Social Change
Government Incentives are Growing Renewable Energy
Government Investment Green Jobs and Economic Recovery
US Government Incentives: Red, White, Blue & Green