WMO: Global Climate 2001-2010, A Decade of Extremes

SUBSCRIBERS & READERS NOTICE:

WIMS WILL NOT BE PUBLISHING ON JULY 4 & 5, 2013.

WE WILL RESUME PUBLICATION ON MONDAY, JULY 8, 2013.

 

HAVE A SAFE AND ENJOYABLE JULY 4TH HOLIDAY & WEEKEND !

 

Jul 3: A new report by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) indicates that the world experienced "unprecedented high-impact climate extremes" during the 2001-2010 decade, which was the warmest since the start of modern measurements in 1850 and continued an extended period of accelerating global warming. More national temperature records were reported broken than in any previous decade. The report, The Global Climate 2001-2010, A Decade of Extremes, analyzed global and regional temperatures and precipitation, as well as extreme events such as the heat waves in Europe and Russia, Hurricane Katrina in the United States of America, Tropical Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar, droughts in the Amazon Basin, Australia and East Africa and floods in Pakistan.

    According to a release, the decade was the warmest for both hemispheres and for both land and ocean surface temperatures. The record warmth was accompanied by a rapid decline in Arctic sea ice, and accelerating loss of net mass from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets and from the world's glaciers. As a result of this widespread melting and the thermal expansion of sea water, global mean sea levels rose about 3 millimetres (mm) per year, about double the observed 20th century trend of 1.6 mm per year. Global sea level averaged over the decade was about 20 cm higher than that of 1880, according to the report. The WMO report charted rising atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. Global-average concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rose to 389 parts per million in 2010 (an increase of 39% since the start of the industrial era in 1750), methane to 1 808.0 parts per billion (158%) and nitrous oxide to 323.2 parts per billion (20%).

    WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud said, "A decade is the minimum possible timeframe for meaningful assessments of climate change. WMO's report shows that global warming accelerated in the four decades of 1971 to 2010 and that the decadal rate of increase between 1991-2000 and 2001-2010 was unprecedented. Rising concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases are changing our climate, with far reaching implications for our environment and our oceans, which are absorbing both carbon dioxide and heat. Natural climate variability, caused in part by interactions between our atmosphere and oceans -- as evidenced by El Niño and La Niña events -- means that some years are cooler than others. On an annual basis, the global temperature curve is not a smooth one. On a long-term basis the underlying trend is clearly in an upward direction, more so in recent times."

    The 100-page report and an executive summary, incorporating findings from a unique survey of 139 National Meteorological and Hydrological Services and socio-economic data and analysis from several UN agencies and partners, were released to coincide with the first session of the Intergovernmental Board on Climate Services. This Board is overseeing the implementation of the Global Framework for Climate Services -- an international initiative to improve and expand scientifically-based climate information to help society cope with the natural variability of our climate and human induced climate change.

    Jarraud said, "A decadal perspective makes it possible to assess trends in the climate system and anticipate the future. It can also inform efforts to develop operational climate services that provide information and forecasts for decision-making in agriculture, health, disaster risk, water resources and other sectors. These efforts are being coordinated through the WMO-led Global Framework for Climate Services. Climate services are more necessary than ever to help us cope with global changes in our climate, which are accentuated at regional and national scales. Despite the significant decrease in casualties due to severe storms and flooding, the WMO report highlighted an alarming impact on health and mortality rates caused by the European and Russian heat-waves. Given that climate change is expected to lead to more frequent and intense heat-waves, we need to be prepared.''

Temperatures: The average land and ocean-surface temperature for the decade 2001-2010 was estimated to be 14.47°C, or 0.47°C above the 1961 - 1990 global average and +0.21°C above the 1991 - 2000 global average (with a factor of uncertainty of ± 0.1°C). Results from WMO's survey showed that nearly 94% of reporting countries had their warmest decade in 2001-2010 and no country reported a nationwide average decadal temperature anomaly cooler than the long term average.

Precipitation, floods, & droughts: The 2001-2010 decade was the second wettest since 1901. Globally, 2010 was the wettest year since the start of instrumental records. Most parts of the globe had above-normal precipitation during the decade. The eastern USA, northern and eastern Canada, and many parts of Europe and central Asia were particularly wet. Droughts affect more people than any other kind of natural disaster owing to their large scale and long-lasting nature. The decade 2001-2010 saw droughts occur in all parts of the world. Some of the highest-impact and long-term droughts struck Australia (in 2002 and other years), East Africa (2004 and 2005, resulting in widespread loss of life) and the Amazon Basin (2010) with negative environmental impacts.

Tropical cyclones: Between 2001 and 2010, there were 511 tropical cyclone related disaster events which resulted in a total of nearly 170,000 persons reported killed, over 250 million people reported affected and estimated economic damages of US$ 380 billion. According to the U.S. NOAA, 2001-2010 was the most active decade since 1855 in terms of tropical cyclone activity in the North Atlantic Basin. An average of 15 named storms per year was recorded, well above the long-term average of 12. The North Indian Ocean saw the deadliest tropical cyclone recorded during the decade, when Tropical Cyclone Nargis struck Myanmar in early May 2008. More than 138 000 people were reported killed or missing, eight million people were affected and thousands of homes were destroyed.

Impacts: During the decade 2001-2010, more than 370,000 people died as a result of extreme weather and climate conditions, including heat, cold, drought, storms and floods, according to the data provided by the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). This was 20% higher than 1991-2000. This increase is due mainly to the 2003 heat wave in Europe and the 2010 in Russia which contributed to an increase of more than 2000% in the global death toll from heat waves (from less than 6000 in 1991-2000 to 136 000 in 2001-2010). On the other hand, there was a 16% decline in deaths due to storms and 43% decline in deaths from floods, thanks mainly to better early warning systems and increased preparedness and despite an increase in populations in disaster-prone areas. According to the 2011 Global Assessment Report, the average population exposed to flooding every year increased by 114% globally between 1970 and 2010, a period in which the world's population increased by 87% from 3.7 billion to 6.9 billion. The number of people exposed to severe storms almost tripled in cyclone-prone areas, increasing by 192%, in the same period.

    Access a release from WMO with charts and link to the more information and a video (click here). Access the complete report (click here). Access a 20-page summary report(click here). Access the WMO website for more information (click here). Access the Global Framework for Climate Services (click here). [#Climate]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

Access subscription information (click here)

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Prioritizing Energy Efficient Renewables (PEER) Act

Jun 27: U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) introduced H.R.2539, the Prioritizing Energy Efficient Renewables (PEER) Act. The legislation would permanently extend the Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind, geothermal, hydro, and marine power and eliminate the tax credit for intangible drilling costs, the domestic manufacturing tax credit for oil and gas, and the percentage depletion credit for oil and gas wells. The legislation is revenue positive, as the approximately $1.6 billion cost of the PTC last year is outweighed by the approximately $3.7 billion in annual costs of the three oil and gas credits.

 

    Rep. Schakowsky was joined by 17 colleagues in introducing the legislation, which is supported by major environmental organizations including Earthjustice, Environment America, the Environmental Law and Policy Center, Greenpeace, the League of Conservation Voters, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and the Wilderness Society. Rep. Schakowsky said, "As the President highlighted this week, global warming is real and its consequences are devastating. The tremendous challenge of climate change also offers an opportunity. We should invest in renewable energy technologies that will help our country reduce hazardous carbon emissions, driving the growth of good American jobs, improving public health, and leaving behind a safe climate for our children and grandchildren. I look forward to moving the PEER Act forward as we discuss our country's energy future."

    Dave Hamilton, Director of Clean Energy at the Sierra Club commented saying, "We thank Representative Schakowsky for introducing the Prioritizing Energy Efficient Renewables Act of 2013. It's high time we provide renewable energy the same certainty of federal support that big oil and gas have enjoyed for decades. The Schakowsky bill would make a commitment to developing clean energy sources while ending unnecessary support for highly profitable and polluting fossil fuels. Wind, solar, and other clean energy innovators should not have to scrap for federal investment every year, while oil and gas fat cats sit back and enjoy unfair tax breaks while racking up billions in profits."

    Without Congressional action, the PTC will again expire at year's end. The tax credit, which provides up to 2.3 cents per kWh of energy produced, has driven clean energy and economic growth nationwide. The PTC has been especially important for wind energy. Last year wind power represented 44 percent of all new electrical generating capacity in the U.S., leading all other sources. Wind also employs about 75,000 Americans, and the American Wind Energy Association believes it could employ 500,000 and supply 20 percent – up from 3.5 percent today -- of U.S. electricity by 2030.

    The bill is timely considering the President's Climate Action Plan [See WIMS 6/25/13 & See WIMS 6/26/13] and developments in the wind energy market. On June 28, Nordex USA, Inc. that it will cease manufacturing wind turbine housings at its factory in Jonesboro, Arkansas, largely because of unpredictable U.S. policies, the U.S. wind energy industry renewed its call for a predictable tax policy to keep U.S. manufacturing jobs. Dr. Jürgen Zeschky, CEO of the German-based, Nordex SE, explained, "This was an extremely difficult decision for Nordex. We are reacting to the weakened demand from the US market, brought on by the unpredictable extensions of the Production Tax Credit (PTC), and the resulting low utilization rate of our US assembly plant. We see great potential in the US and Latin American markets and are committed to serving those markets and increasing our installed base. With this decision we also increase our flexibility to react to US demand for our turbines out of one single plant in Rostock, Germany. We will be maintaining the extensive expertise in sales, engineering, service, project management, training and support which we have built at our Chicago and Jonesboro locations to continue the growth we have achieved through these challenging times."

    Rob Gramlich, Senior Vice President for Public Policy of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) said, "Wind power has been good for Arkansas consumers and businesses, and wind power could do a lot more for the state if we had predictable national policies to create a stable business environment. That starts by keeping the federal Production Tax Credit in place to allow wind energy to scale up as rapidly as it can. Nordex said uncertainty is one of the main reasons for their business decision to cease building wind turbine nacelles in Jonesboro. Arkansas has positioned itself to take advantage of the wind industry's growth in the region, which is providing low-cost electricity in Arkansas and exporting energy east. And consumers are saving, because wind power holds down the overall cost of electricity on fixed-price contracts. But predictable policies to create a stable business environment are critical, especially if we want to maintain this new U.S. manufacturing sector and tens of thousands of good-paying jobs. That will take action by Congress."
 
    Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) responded to the news today by saying, "I've always supported the renewable energy production tax credit. Unfortunately, some in Congress believe we should cut funding for renewable energy. I hope we'll consider a long-term production tax credit as part of comprehensive tax reform. These companies need more certainty than a one-year extension." Senator John Boozman (R-AR) commented, "Promising industries like wind turbine production are particularly sensitive to this uncertainty as Washington has been unable to tell them what their tax burden will be beyond a very short term. You can't make major planning decisions from a business perspective on that timeframe. There must be a longer term extension in place so that companies like Nordex and Mitsubishi can grow and put Arkansans to work. I support the credit, have voted for the extensions, and would like to see the wind tax credit authorized for a longer time period to provide certainty to business owners." Arkansas Governor Mike Beebe (D) said, "I have been saying for years that there must be stable tax policy with this kind of intense capital investment. Congress has totally failed to provide one, wavering year-to-year on the wind energy tax credit. This indecisiveness is costing Arkansas, and America, jobs."

    The Wilderness Society issued a release on Rep. Schakowsky's bill saying, "Without a long-term extension of the PTC, we will see investments in wind energy projects dry up and they will be abandoned across the country. This would be disastrous for the renewable energy industry and the economy as a whole as the wind energy industry is a vital, growing part of the economy. Oil and gas development is a major issue confronting our public lands. But it is important to remember that renewable energy on public lands have large impacts as well. That is why The Wilderness Society has long advocated a "Smart from the Start" policy when it comes to energy development on public lands. While we certainly support a transition from a fossil fuel based economy to one that is focused on clean and renewable energy, as an organization we are continuing to make sure that these renewable energy projects are directed to low impact places that do not spoil our wild lands and important habitats. This bill displays the folly of giving tax breaks to an industry that has claimed over a trillion dollars in profits over the last decade but it also helps a growing industry that is moving our economy away from a fossil fuels based one to a clean energy one."

    Access a release from Rep. Schakowsky (click here). Access legislative details for H.R.2539 (click here). Access a release from Nordex (click here). Access a release from AWEA (click here). Access a release from the Wilderness Society with links to further information (click here). [#Energy/Wind, #Energy/Renewable]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

Access subscription information (click here)

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

NAS Calls For A National Sustainability Policy

Jun 28: A report from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), National Research Council (NRC) indicates that the United States should establish a National Sustainability Policy and take additional steps to encourage federal agencies to collaborate on sustainability challenges that demand the expertise of many agencies, such as improving disaster resilience and managing ecosystems. The report -- Sustainability for the Nation: Resource Connections and Government Linkages -- indicates that currently, the government is generally not organized to deal with the complex, long-term nature of sustainability challenges.  Statutes and government culture encourage agencies to focus on a single area -- energy, water, or health, for example -- with little attention to how areas affect one another. This "stovepipe" or "silo" effect makes it difficult to address issues that cut across agency boundaries.   

     The report says, the Federal government should take steps to help build linkages among agencies and stakeholders outside government to address these challenges. A National Sustainability Policy, developed with input from agencies, NGOs, and the private sector, could help surmount obstructions and enable initiatives that cut across agency jurisdictions.  The policy would establish the principles of promoting the long-term sustainability of the nation's economy, natural resources, and social well-being.  It should set out broad general objectives, management principles, and a framework for addressing complex issues. Several models exist for such a policy, including the National Oceans Policy, which was created in 2010 through an executive order to guide management decisions with the goal of protecting the nation's coasts. Once a National Sustainability Policy is in place, agencies should develop specific plans that define how they expect to implement it. 

    The report offers a decision-making framework that can be applied to sustainability-related projects and programs. The framework can help agencies identify and enlist other agencies and private stakeholders that should be involved.  Given the inherent complexities and uncertainties of many sustainability issues, strategies may need to be altered based on emerging results; the framework builds in an "adaptive management" approach that allows for these adjustments. Although the framework can be applied to many sustainability challenges, the committee that wrote the report identified four challenges of national importance that should be top priorities: 

• Connections among energy, food and water. Producing and using energy often consumes water and can also impact water quality, air quality, land use, and the agricultural sector. For example, intensive production of corn for ethanol requires water for irrigation, and chemical fertilizers that are heavily applied to corn run off into rivers and become a major source of pollution.
• Diverse and healthy ecosystems. Ecosystems, which are affected by the actions of many agencies, provide services to human communities -- such as water supplies, coastal storm buffers, productive fisheries, and pollination of food crops.
• Resilience of communities to natural disasters and other extreme events. Improving the sustainability of communities means identifying their vulnerabilities and enhancing their resilience to catastrophic events -- such as earthquakes or terrorist attacks -- as well as to more gradual processes, such as climate change.
• Human health and well-being. Sustainability efforts may affect human health and well-being in complex, crosscutting ways.  For example, agricultural practices affect the nutritional content and contaminant levels in food, as well as food's availability and price, and land use and transportation decisions affect levels of physical activity, which in turn affect the risk for cardiovascular disease, many cancers, and other conditions.

    The report also recommends that the Federal government offer incentives to its employees to collaborate across agency boundaries. Agencies should nurture "change agents" both in the field and at regional and national offices, an effort that may include revisions to managers' performance plans, rewards, and training. Similarly, agencies should encourage and enable cross-agency management and funding of linked sustainability activities; in some cases, changes in statutory authority may be needed to do so. Because sustainability challenges play out over long time scales, agencies should invest in long-term research projects to provide the scientific understanding needed to inform strategies, the report says. Agencies should collaborate to design and implement cross-agency research portfolios in order to better leverage funding.

 

    Access a release from NAS (click here). Access links to the complete 142-page report and related information (click here). [#Sustain]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

Access subscription information (click here)

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Enviros Outline Case For Reopening Keystone XL Environmental Review

Jun 27: This week (June 24), environmentalists called on the State Department to reopen the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline environmental review process. They said new information from the Department of Energy (DOE), the International Energy Agency (IEA), industry analysts, and refining executives offers new evidence that Keystone XL will, in fact, directly contribute to increased tar sands development, U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and pollution at U.S. refineries, calling into question the original State Department findings. Groups signing the letter include Bold Nebraska, Center for Biological Diversity, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Oil Change International, and the Sierra Club.

    On June 25, one day after the group letter, President Obama said in his speech announcing his Climate Action Plan [See WIMS 6/26/13], "Now, I know there's been, for example, a lot of controversy surrounding the proposal to build a pipeline, the Keystone pipeline, that would carry oil from Canadian tar sands down to refineries in the Gulf. And the State Department is going through the final stages of evaluating the proposal. That's how it's always been done. But I do want to be clear: Allowing the Keystone pipeline to be built requires a finding that doing so would be in our nation's interest. And our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution. The net effects of the pipeline's impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward. It's relevant."

    Doug Hayes, Sierra Club attorney said, "Since the close of the comment period, evidence of inaccuracies and bias in the State Department's review of Keystone XL has been steadily mounting. This new information demonstrates that the review relies on an overly-simplistic, outdated view of a rapidly-changing oil market." The groups said the new data contradicts three primary conclusions by the State Department: that increased rail shipments of crude oil have the potential to completely replace the capacity of Keystone XL if the pipeline were rejected; that increasing domestic production of oil will not affect the demand for heavy Canadian crude oil in Gulf Coast refineries; and that Canadian crude will not be exported from the Gulf Coast if the pipeline is built.

    Lorne Stockman, Research Director at Oil Change International and coauthor of the letter said, "The State Department is alone in its conclusion that the Keystone XL pipeline is not fundamental to the prospects of the dirty tar sands industry. State needs to take a careful look at the new evidence that we've compiled in the past several weeks and they will reach the same conclusion that we do: that the Keystone XL pipeline is crucial to the expansion of the tar sands, and that expansion is not in the public interest."

    The groups cited evidence that Keystone XL is the lynchpin for tar sands development which they detailed in the letter including: A Goldman Sachs report that says that rail shipments of tar sands could not replace the proposed pipeline logistically and economically [See WIMS 6/11/13]; Royal Bank of Canada's estimate that denial of Keystone XL would jeopardize $9.4 billion in tar sand development; and U.S. EPA estimates that Keystone XL will add 18.7 million metric tons of carbon pollution per year. And a new U.S. government report increases the estimated social cost of this pollution -- related to human health, sea level rise and other natural disasters -- by as much as double.

    Anthony Swift, NRDC attorney said, "This recent information paints a clear picture. The Keystone XL tar sands export pipeline would significantly increase climate emissions while providing few benefits to the United States -- it really is an all risk and no reward proposition for the American people." According to the groups, the State Department is obliged by federal law to analyze and respond to this new data.

    The groups' 54-page communication to the State Department resembles a legal brief and includes multiple linked citations to extensive referenced information and documentation. The communication concludes, "The significant new information highlighted in this letter is directly relevant to the environmental impacts of Keystone XL, because it casts further doubt on the DSEIS's  [Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement] conclusion that Keystone XL will have no impact on the rate of tar sands development. The North American oil market is undergoing massive changes at a very rapid pace, and evidence contradicting the analysis contained in the DSEIS is becoming available on near-weekly basis. It is crucial that the Department of State consider this new information if it is to make an accurate assessment Keystone XL's impacts. Therefore, we respectfully request that the Department of State prepare a supplement to its DSEIS based on significant new information pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 1502.9."

    Access a release from the groups (click here). Access the 54-page communication to DOS (click here). [#Energy/KXL]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

Access subscription information (click here)

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

"Gray Wolf Lost A Popularity Contest Among Wildlife Managers"

Jun 27: According to documents obtained by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)  lawsuit, the organization says, the federal government's plan to remove the gray wolf from the protections of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) [See WIMS 6/7/13] was "hammered out through political bargaining with affected states," contrary to requirements of the ESA that listing decisions must be governed by the best available science. PEER says the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS or Service) presided over a process in which "political and economic considerations were at the forefront."

 

    PEER indicates in a release that the 52 documents produced by Fish & Wildlife Service detail how the "National Wolf Strategy" was developed in a series of closed-door Federal-state meetings called "Structured Decision Making" or SDM beginning in August 2010. The meetings involved officials from every region of the Service and representatives from the game and fish agencies of 13 states.

 

    PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch who had been seeking the records since April 2012 said, "These documents confirm our worst suspicions that the fate of the wolf was decided at a political bazaar. The meeting notes certainly explain why no outside scientists were welcome. From what we can see, Structured Decision Making was structured primarily to deal out the lower-48 population of gray wolves. The Obama administration keeps preaching integrity of science and transparency but seems to practice neither on any matter of consequence. In simplest terms, these documents detail how the gray wolf lost a popularity contest among wildlife managers."

 

    In addition to the release, PEER released a number of documents including: View the SDM overview and flowchart; Look at the political matrix for assessing alternatives; See the "New Fantastic Alternative"; Read scientists' critique of de-listing plan; Examine state litigation threats; Scan background on Structured Decision Making for the gray wolf; and Revisit politics pervading Mexican wolf decisions.

 

    A release from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) indicates that the documents show that the Fish and Wildlife Service "constrained the possible geographic scope of wolf recovery based on perceptions of 'what can the public tolerate' and 'where should wolves exist' rather than where suitable habitat for wolves exists or what is scientifically necessary for recovery. The meetings left state agencies in a position to dictate the fate of gray wolves across most of the lower 48 states." Brett Hartl, endangered species policy director at CBD said, "This process made a mockery of the spirit of the Endangered Species Act. These documents show that years ago the Fish and Wildlife Service effectively handed over the reins on wolf recovery to state fish and game agencies, many of which are openly hostile to wolves. In order to ensure this politically contrived outcome, the Fish and Wildlife Service has spent the past three years cherry-picking scientific research that justifies the predetermined outcome that wolves don't need protection anymore."

 

    CBD said, "In August 2010 officials from a select group of state fish and game agencies were invited to a week-long workshop at the Fish and Wildlife training center in West Virginia to effectively decide the future of gray wolf recovery in the United States. The decisions made at the meeting were largely adopted in the agency's June 2013 proposal to end federal protections for gray wolves across most of the lower 48."

 

    Hartl said, "The Fish and Wildlife Service's actions demonstrate a near total lack of transparency and scientific integrity," said Hartl. "If the Service had followed this same logic 20 years ago, there would be no wolves in Yellowstone National Park today -- and no wolves roaming across the northern Rocky Mountains. The Service needs to go back to the drawing board and let the scientific facts guide how to recover wolves across the millions of acres of suitable wolf habitat remaining in the western United States and the Northeast."

 

    A number of scientists sent a joint letter to Department of Interior Secretary Sally Jewell on May 21, in advance of the proposal and said, "As scientists with expertise in carnivore taxonomy and conservation biology, we are writing to express serious concerns with a recent draft rule leaked to the press that proposes to remove Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves across the Lower 48 States, excluding the range of the Mexican gray wolf. Collectively, we represent many of the scientists responsible for the research referenced in the draft rule. Based on a careful review of the rule, we do not believe that the rule reflects the conclusions of our work or the best available science concerning the recovery of wolves, or is in accordance with the fundamental purpose of the Endangered Species Act to conserve endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend.

 

    "The Service's draft rule proposes to: 1) 'remove the gray wolf from the List of Threatened and Endangered Wildlife'; 2) 'maintain endangered status for the Mexican wolf by listing it as a subspecies (Canis lupus baileyi)'; 3) 'recognize a new species of wolf known as Canis lycaon [that] occurs in southeastern Canada and historically occurred in the northeastern United States and portions of the upper Midwest (eastern and western Great Lakes regions)'; and 4) deny protection to wolves in the Pacific Northwest because they do not qualify as a distinct population segment for lack of discreteness from wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains. We find these proposals problematic both in terms of their scientific support and their consistency with the intent of the statute. . ."

 

    On June 7, the Service proposed to remove the gray wolf (Canis lupus) from the list of threatened and endangered species. According to a release, the proposal comes after a comprehensive review confirmed its successful recovery following management actions undertaken by Federal, state and local partners following the wolf's listing under the Endangered Species Act over three decades ago. FWS said, "The proposed rule is based on the best science available and incorporates new information about the gray wolf's current and historical distribution in the contiguous United States and Mexico." FWS Director Dan Ashe said, "From the moment a species requires the protection of the Endangered Species Act, our goal is to work with our partners to address the threats it faces and ensure its recovery. An exhaustive review of the latest scientific and taxonomic information shows that we have accomplished that goal with the gray wolf, allowing us to focus our work under the ESA on recovery of the Mexican wolf subspecies in the Southwest." On June 13, FWS published its proposed rule for the gray wolves in the Federal Register and the proposal is now under a 90-day comment period extending until September 11, 2013.

 

    Access a release from PEER and link to the documents including the letter from scientists (click here). Access a release from CBD and link to related information (click here). Access the FR notice (click here). Access a release from FWS with links to more information on gray and Mexican wolves, supporting comments, including the proposed rules and commenting procedures (click here). [#Wildlife]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

Access subscription information (click here)

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

President's Climate Speech Addresses Keystone XL & Fracking

Jun 25: In yesterday's speech announcing the Climate Action Plan [See WIMS 6/25/13], President Obama briefly addressed the Keystone XL pipeline, and indirectly fracking, even though neither was mentioned directly in the plan itself. Neither the actual Plan or the speech mentioned the controversial subject of natural gas exports.

 

    The President said, "I put forward in the past an all-of-the-above energy strategy, but our energy strategy must be about more than just producing more oil.  And, by the way, it's certainly got to be about more than just building one pipeline. 

    "Now, I know there's been, for example, a lot of controversy surrounding the proposal to build a pipeline, the Keystone pipeline, that would carry oil from Canadian tar sands down to refineries in the Gulf. And the State Department is going through the final stages of evaluating the proposal. That's how it's always been done. But I do want to be clear: Allowing the Keystone pipeline to be built requires a finding that doing so would be in our nation's interest. And our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution. The net effects of the pipeline's impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward. It's relevant."

    The President also addressed the increasing production of natural gas much of which is possible through the highly controversial use of hydraulic fracturing or fracking. Although he did not mention fracking directly he said, "Now, even as we're producing more domestic oil, we're also producing more cleaner-burning natural gas than any other country on Earth. And, again, sometimes there are disputes about natural gas, but let me say this: We should strengthen our position as the top natural gas producer because, in the medium term at least, it not only can provide safe, cheap power, but it can also help reduce our carbon emissions. 

    "Federally supported technology has helped our businesses drill more effectively and extract more gas. And now, we'll keep working with the industry to make drilling safer and cleaner, to make sure that we're not seeing methane emissions, and to put people to work modernizing our natural gas infrastructure so that we can power more homes and businesses with cleaner energy. The bottom line is natural gas is creating jobs. It's lowering many families' heat and power bills. And it's the transition fuel that can power our economy with less carbon pollution even as our businesses work to develop and then deploy more of the technology required for the even cleaner energy economy of the future."

    The actual Climate Action Plan addressed the natural gas issue saying, "Burning natural gas is about one-half as carbon-intensive as coal, which can make it a critical "bridge fuel" for many countries as the world transitions to even cleaner sources of energy. Toward that end, the Obama Administration is partnering with states and private companies to exchange lessons learned with our international partners on responsible development of natural gas resources. We have launched the Unconventional Gas Technical Engagement Program to share best practices on issues such as water management, methane emissions, air quality, permitting, contracting, and pricing to help increase global gas supplies and facilitate development of the associated infrastructure that brings them to market. Going forward, we will promote fuel-switching from coal to gas for electricity production and encourage the development of a global market for gas. Since heavy-duty vehicles are expected to account for 40 percent of increased oil use through 2030, we will encourage the adoption of heavy duty natural gas vehicles as well." (page 19)

    Access the full text of President's climate speech  (click here). Access a video of the President's speech (click here). Access the complete 21-page Climate Action Plan (click here). Access the Presidential Memo on Power Sector Carbon Pollution Standards (click here). Access a fact sheet from the White House (click here). Access a visual presentation of the President's Plan (click here). Access the White House climate change website for additional information (click here). [#Climate]

---

More Comments On The President's Climate Action Plan - Jun 26: The following are some additional comments in reaction to President Obama's Climate Action Plan [See also WIMS 6/25/13]:

 

    The National Academy of Sciences (NAS), National Research Council (NRC) issued a release indicating that, "President Obama unveiled a plan today that aims to cut carbon pollution, prepare the U.S. for the impacts of climate change, and lead international efforts to combat climate change.  The National Research Council has produced a number of consensus reports on these and related issues that may be of use to policymakers, researchers, business owners, and the public as they consider ways to address climate change and develop innovative solutions." The release provides a listing and direct links to various NAS reports related to climate change.

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Executive Secretary, Christiana Figueres said: "President Obama's climate action plan is a necessary next step to meet an immediate, worrying shortfall in action to deal with climate change and can be a critical move forward on the path towards a new, global climate agreement. It remains vital that the United States as the world's largest developed economy is seen to be leading serious action to deal with climate change, both at home and abroad. These new steps will help to meet those goals, if they are implemented to the fullest extent to which they are intended. It is significant that the new plan aims to start up rapidly and covers the full menu of solutions to climate change: clean energy, renewable energy, energy efficiency and the many actions that all countries need to take to adapt to accelerating climate change. This climate action plan should be positive for the US economy and the economies of other countries, as the US shifts faster towards a sustainable, low carbon model, including addressing directly the heaviest sources of emissions from unmodified coal and gas plants.

    "When the United States leads action, it also encourages more rapid international efforts to combat climate change by strengthening political trust, building business momentum and driving new technology solutions. . . I applaud the fact that the US intends to play a leading role by helping to forge a truly global solution to climate change that galvanizes international action to significantly reduce emissions, prepares for climate impacts, and drives progress through the international negotiations. This US climate action plan must also be leveraged into fresh, high-level political consensus among countries that will smooth the way for faster progress in the international climate change negotiations under the United Nations."

    Earthjustice President Trip Van Noppen said: "President Obama's plan to address climate change is welcome news that deserves widespread support. Continuing to fill our atmosphere with carbon pollution is immoral. We have a responsibility to current and future generations to hand down a livable planet. We must begin now to fulfill our obligation. . . Two of the actions in the president's plan are likely to be particularly effective. The first is reducing carbon pollution from our dirtiest power plants, which is long overdue. These plants, some of which date all the way back to the 1940's, are responsible for the lion's share of the nation's carbon pollution and currently operate without any carbon pollution controls. Secondly, the president's plan to increase efficiency of the appliances we use every day will reduce our carbon pollution while saving consumers money by lowering operating costs. . ."

 

    U.S. Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Thomas J. Donohue said: "The president's plan runs a serious risk of punishing Americans with higher energy bills, fewer jobs, and a weaker economy, while delivering negligible benefits to the environment. The administration must fully, transparently, and continually evaluate the impact of its proposed rules on jobs and the economy--just as the law requires. American consumers, workers, and businesses simply cannot afford another smothering layer of new regulations whose benefits are unproven and whose true costs are hidden. It is unfortunate that on a matter of such importance to all Americans that the administration has chosen to bypass our elected representatives in favor of unilateral actions and go-it-alone tactics. . ."

 

    House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) said: "Years after a Democrat-controlled Congress rejected the President's plan to impose a new national energy tax, President Obama is now trying to go at it alone and take unilateral action to push through job-destroying taxes and red tape. This is the latest example of President Obama's long-running war on coal, which a White House advisor now openly admits 'is exactly what's needed.' However, this is not only a war on coal. It's a war on jobs, our economy, affordable energy, American families and small businesses. While the President is calling for new energy taxes and regulations, which will cost jobs and increase energy prices, House Republicans this week will vote to expand American energy production in order to create jobs and lower energy prices. The difference couldn't be starker. The President's plan will cost tens of thousands of American jobs and impede economic growth. The Republican plan will create over a million jobs and generate $1.5 billion in new revenue."

 

    Charles Drevna, president of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) said: "We welcome the fact that President Obama seems to be finally acknowledging the value of the Keystone XL pipeline. However, actions speak louder than words. We hope his statement means the State Department will immediately approve the pipeline, since several environmental reviews have concluded that building Keystone XL will lead to fewer greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than if we did not build it. Moving ahead on this project is critical for creating thousands of jobs, as well as maintaining and strengthening America's national and economic security.

    "Unfortunately, the overall plan is poised to once again pick winners and losers among energy producers, but at the end of the day, the biggest loser will be the U.S. economy. If world action is dependent on the 'United States taking the lead,' as advocates of fossil fuel energy rationing have claimed, then why haven't nations with poor environmental standards followed our lead in reducing GHGs and other emissions over the last twelve years?. . . Ironically, the President's proposal ignores his own regulatory contradictions and also makes claims with little basis in fact. He claims to have a goal of reducing GHG emissions, but is moving forward with Tier 3 gasoline and other stationary source regulations that will increase such emissions. He also expresses support for the RFS, despite data from EPA and the National Academy of Sciences showing that the broken ethanol mandate will increase GHG and other criteria pollutant emissions. . ."

    Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee said: "Today the President has shown he is willing to use the powers granted under existing law to accelerate efforts to contain dangerous carbon pollution. By focusing on the remedies under the Clean Air Act, the potential of using government lands to develop clean energy, and continuing efforts on fuel economy and energy efficiency, the President is using all of the tools in his toolbox, and I applaud him for that. The President's commitment today to only approve the tar sands pipeline if there is no net increase in carbon pollution is promising, but tar sands are one of the dirtiest fuels on the planet and the devil is in the details. We also need a price on carbon pollution, and I intend to work with my colleagues on this issue as part of a comprehensive plan to address climate change."

    Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said: "Today, President Obama has shown he is keeping his word to future generations.  His inspiring call to action is a testament to the vibrancy of the grassroots climate movement and the work of millions of activists to make tackling climate disruption a key part of the President's legacy. The Sierra Club's 2.1 million members and supporters issued a collective cheer as they heard the President declare that the most effective defense against climate disruption will be by tackling the biggest single source of carbon pollution: coal plants. . . The President's strong commitment to using climate pollution as the standard by which Keystone XL will be decided means his decision to reject it should now be easy.  Any fair and unbiased analysis of the tar sands pipeline shows that the climate effects of this disastrous project would be significant. . . There is still more work to be done. The President's climate commitment and his speech today gives us great hope that he will finally address some of the remaining, worst abuses of the fossil fuel industry, including dirty and dangerous fracking, ending the devastating practice of mountaintop removal coal mining in Appalachia, halting destructive oil drilling in the Arctic, and overhauling the sweetheart deal on public lands that pads the bottom line of coal companies at public expense"

 

    Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Ranking Member of the Energy & Natural Resources Committee said: "The central feature of the president's climate agenda is command-and-control regulations that will drive up energy costs for all Americans. This is exactly the opposite of what we should be seeking from our energy and environmental policies. In the past several years, we've already seen substantial decreases in greenhouse gas emissions thanks to low natural gas prices, improved vehicle efficiency and other trends. Unfortunately, economic stagnation contributed to those emission decreases as well, and that is an experience we should avoid repeating. Addressing climate change will require continued American innovation, but the president does not have the power to will technologies into existence through sheer force or scope of regulation. That will require a longer-term commitment to basic, scientific research that enables genuine breakthroughs. Instead, the president is again putting us on a path where government dictates circumvent elected representatives in Congress. . ."

    Access the NAS release (click here). Access the UNFCCC release (click here). Access the Earrthjustice release (click here). Access the U.S. Chamber release (click here). Access a release from Rep. Hastings (click here). Access a release from AFPM (click here). Access a release from Sen. Boxer (click here). Access a release from Sierra Club (click here). Access a release from Sen. Murkowski (click here). [#Climate}

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

Access subscription information (click here)

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

 

 

President Obama Releases Climate Action Plan

Jun 25: President Obama delivered a speech at Georgetown University today outlining his Climate Action Plan. He also released the Plan and issued a Presidential Memorandum on Power Sector Carbon Pollution Standards (see links below).

 

The President's Plan begins by stating, "While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, we have a moral obligation to future generations to leave them a planet that is not polluted and damaged. Through steady, responsible action to cut carbon pollution, we can protect our children's health and begin to slow the effects of climate change so that we leave behind a cleaner, more stable environment. Outlining the progress that has been made to date, the President's Climate Action Plan says:

While this progress is encouraging, climate change is no longer a distant threat – we are already feeling its impacts across the country and the world. Last year was the warmest year ever in the contiguous United States and about one-third of all Americans experienced 10 days or more of 100-degree heat. The 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15 years. Asthma rates have doubled in the past 30 years and our children will suffer more asthma attacks as air pollution gets worse. And increasing floods, heat waves, and droughts have put farmers out of business, which is already raising food prices dramatically.

These changes come with far-reaching consequences and real economic costs. Last year alone, there were 11 different weather and climate disaster events with estimated losses exceeding $1 billion each across the United States. Taken together, these 11 events resulted in over $110 billion in estimated damages, which would make it the second-costliest year on record.

 

In short, America stands at a critical juncture. Today, President Obama is putting forward a broad-based plan to cut the carbon pollution that causes climate change and affects public health. Cutting carbon pollution will help spark business innovation to modernize our power plants, resulting in cleaner forms of American-made energy that will create good jobs and cut our dependence on foreign oil. Combined with the Administration's other actions to increase the efficiency of our cars and household appliances, the President's plan will reduce the amount of energy consumed by American families, cutting down on their gas and utility bills. The plan, which consists of a wide variety of executive actions, has three key pillars:

 

1) Cut Carbon Pollution in America: In 2012, U.S. carbon emissions fell to the lowest level in two decades even as the economy continued to grow. To build on this progress, the Obama Administration is putting in place tough new rules to cut carbon pollution – just like we have for other toxins like mercury and arsenic -- so we protect the health of our children and move our economy toward American-made clean energy sources that will create good jobs and lower home energy bills.

2) Prepare the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change: Even as we take new steps to reduce carbon pollution, we must also prepare for the impacts of a changing climate that are already being felt across the country. Moving forward, the Obama Administration will help state and local governments strengthen our roads, bridges, and shorelines so we can better protect people's homes, businesses and way of life from severe weather.

3) Lead International Efforts to Combat Global Climate Change and Prepare for its Impacts: Just as no country is immune from the impacts of climate change, no country can
meet this challenge alone. That is why it is imperative for the United States to couple action at home with leadership internationally. America must help forge a truly global solution to this global challenge by galvanizing international action to significantly reduce emissions (particularly among the major emitting countries), prepare for climate impacts, and drive progress through the international negotiations.

    At the top of the President's agenda is "Cutting Carbon Pollution from Power Plants." The President is issuing a Presidential Memorandum directing the U.S. EPA to work expeditiously to complete carbon pollution standards for both new and existing power plants. In developing the standards, the President has asked EPA to "build on state
leadership, provide flexibility, and take advantage of a wide range of energy sources and technologies including many actions in this plan."

 

    The Administration is announcing a number of new efforts leading to: Accelerating Clean Energy Permitting; and Expanding and Modernizing the Electric Grid. Additionally, by: Unlocking Long-Term Investment in Clean Energy Innovation; Increasing Fuel Economy Standards; Developing and Deploying Advanced Transportation Technologies; Establishing a New Goal for Energy Efficiency Standards; Reducing Barriers to Investment in Energy Efficiency; Expanding the President's Better Buildings Challenge; Reducing Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions such as Hydrofluorocarbons and Methane; and Preserving the Role of Forests in Mitigating Climate Change.

 

    The Plan calls for the Federal government to be a leader in clean energy and energy efficiency. Under the Obama Administration, federal agencies have reduced greenhouse gas emissions by more than 15 percent. The Plan calls for establishing a new goal: The Federal government will consume 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020 -- more than double the current goal of 7.5 percent. In addition, the Federal government will continue to pursue greater energy efficiency that reduces greenhouse gas
emissions and saves taxpayer dollars.

 

    To prepare the country for the inevitable impacts of climate change the Plan calls for: Directing Agencies to Support Climate-Resilient Investment; Establishing a State, Local, and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate Preparedness; Supporting Communities as they Prepare for Climate Impacts; Boosting the Resilience of Buildings and Infrastructure; Rebuilding and Learning from Hurricane Sandy; Identifying Vulnerabilities of Key Sectors to Climate Change; Promoting Resilience in the Health Sector; Promoting Insurance Leadership for Climate Safety; Conserving Land and Water Resources; Maintaining Agricultural Sustainability; Managing Drought; Reducing Wildfire Risks; Preparing for Future Floods; and Using Sound Science to Manage Climate Impacts.

 

    On the international front, the Plan indicates that major international initiatives focused on spurring concrete action, including bilateral initiatives with China, India, and other major emitting countries will be continued and undertaken. The Plan proposes that the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate (17 countries with 75% of GHG emissions) build on these efforts by launching a major initiative this year focused on further accelerating efficiency gains in the buildings sector; Intensifying bilateral climate cooperation with China, India and Brazil; Combating Short-Lived Climate Pollutant like methane, black carbon, and many HFCs; Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation; Expanding Clean Energy Use and Cut Energy Waste; Negotiating Global Free Trade in Environmental Goods and Services; Phasing Out Subsidies that Encourage Wasteful Consumption of Fossil Fuels; Strengthening Global Resilience to Climate Change; Mobilizing Climate Finance; and Leading Efforts to Address Climate Change through International Negotiations.

 

    Access a link to the President's speech on his climate action plan which should be posted soon (click here). Access a video of the President's speech (click here). Access the complete 21-page Climate Action Plan (click here). Access the Presidential Memo on Power Sector Carbon Pollution Standards (click here). Access a fact sheet from the White House (click here). Access a visual presentation of the President's Plan (click here). Access the White House climate change website for additional information (click here). [#Climate]

---

 

Some Initial Reaction To The President's Climate Plan - Jul 25: The following is some of the initial reaction to President Obama's Climate Change Action Plan:

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said, "At a time when millions of Americans remain out of work and the cost of groceries, gas, and health care continues to rise, it is astonishing that President Obama is unilaterally imposing new regulations that will cost jobs and increase energy prices. The president has always been hostile to affordable sources of American energy that power most of our economy, but this program – which amounts to a National Energy Tax – only escalates his attack.  The president's advisor calls it a 'War on Coal,' but it's even more than that. These policies, rejected even by the last Democratic-controlled Congress, will shutter power plants, destroy good-paying American jobs, and raise electricity bills for families that can scarcely afford it. The last thing our economy needs right now is another layer of government red tape that will make it harder to grow businesses and hire more workers.  America needs more affordable energy options, not fewer.  That's why House Republicans are committed to a true all-of-the-above energy approach that will lower energy prices and create good American jobs.  And it's why we continue to call on the president to approve the Keystone pipeline and the tens of thousands of jobs that will come along with it."

 

U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said, "In advance of the President's big speech today, I read this morning that one of the White House's climate advisors finally admitted something most of us have long suspected anyway. He said 'a War on Coal is exactly what's needed' in this country. Exactly what's needed -- that's really what he said. It's an astonishing bit of honesty from someone that close to the White House. But it really encapsulates the attitude this Administration holds in regard to states like mine, where coal is such an important part of the economic well-being of so many middle-class families. And it captures the attitude it holds in regard to middle-class Americans across the country, where affordable energy is critical to the operation of so many companies and small businesses -- and to those businesses' ability to hire Americans and help build a ladder to the middle class for their families. Declaring a 'War on Coal' is tantamount to declaring a war on jobs. It's tantamount to kicking the ladder out from beneath the feet of many Americans struggling in today's economy. And I will be raising this issue with the President at the White House today. . ."

 

House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman (D-CA), Co-Chair of the Bicameral Task Force on Climate Change said, "The President is absolutely right to act now. We have a moral imperative to protect the environment for our children and future generations. We are at a crossroads.  Every year we delay, the impacts will worsen and the costs will rise.  But if we act now, we can lead the world in developing the clean energy technologies of the future." Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the other Co-Chair of the Bicameral Task Force on Climate Change said, "For too long, the barricade of special interests in Washington has stopped Congress from acting against carbon pollution. President Obama knows that we can't wait to address this issue. We're already paying the costs of climate change.  Our oceans are warmer, more acidic, and rising; our seasons are shifting; and the dice are loaded for more frequent and more severe extreme weather events.  I applaud President Obama for taking action today to protect the planet for future generations."

 

Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC): "The president nailed it: this can't wait. We will cut this carbon pollution today so our children don't inherit climate chaos tomorrow. We owe that to future generations, and we owe it to ourselves. That's the single most important thing we can do, as a nation, to confront this widening scourge. Climate change is the central environmental crisis of our time. It is taking a grievous and growing toll on our country, threatening our people and imperiling our future. The president promised to do something about it. Today he turned that promise into action."

 

Bill Snape, Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) senior counsel, reiterated CBD's call to halt Keystone XL immediately and establish a national pollution cap for carbon dioxide. He said, "We're happy to see the President finally addressing climate change but the plain truth is that what he's proposing isn't big enough, and doesn't move fast enough, to match the terrifying magnitude of the climate crisis. The president, like all of us, needs to be able to look across the dinner table at his children and know he's doing all he can to ensure they inherit a planet that's healthy and livable. This plan is a small step in the right direction but certainly begs for something bigger and bolder. Strong rhetoric and politically comfortable half-measures won't achieve what scientists tell us must be done to address the climate problem. The White House can't punt on hard climate questions, from the carbon cap to Keystone XL, Arctic drilling and fracking on public lands. It's time for strong action and strong leadership."

 

American Petroleum Institute (API) President and CEO Jack Gerard said, "The President recognizes the important role natural gas has played in reducing CO2 levels to near 20 year lows, thanks to private investments in energy exploration, production and refining. Those investments in America's energy potential have led us to the point of being the world's largest producer of natural gas, and flipped plans to import LNG into plans to export it. But by recycling his plans to raise taxes on U.S. oil and natural gas companies, President Obama runs the risk of unwinding the significant environmental benefits from natural gas, threatens our economic recovery and dampens our ability to create millions of jobs for Americans. Ironically, the President's plan to raise taxes by eliminating cost recovery for U.S. oil and natural gas companies would jeopardize his own climate goals by making some of those investments uneconomic. After a handful of years, we would see less domestic energy production -- particularly of natural gas -- more imports, fewer new jobs, and, eventually, depressed tax, royalty and other revenues to governments at all levels."

 

National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) President and CEO Jay Timmons said, "President Obama today revealed his most ambitious regulatory agenda yet, one that would remake the entire U.S. economy. During the campaign, the President regularly touted increasing manufacturing jobs, and he rightly recognized that a strong and vibrant manufacturing sector is key to robust and sustained economic growth and job creation. Unfortunately, under his watch, he seems intent on taking actions that would put manufacturing in the United States out of business. The President's plan puts our country on a path toward the elimination of fossil fuels from our energy mix that is wholly inconsistent with his promotion of an 'all-of-the-above' energy plan just a few months ago. . ." 

 

Eileen Claussen, President, Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES) said, "President Obama is laying out a credible, comprehensive strategy to use the tools at his disposal to strengthen the U.S. response to climate change. His plan recognizes that the costs of climate change are real and rising, and that to minimize them we must both cut our carbon output and strengthen our climate resilience. Putting these critical issues before the American public is itself a step forward. But it will require continued presidential leadership to translate the plan's good intentions into concrete policy. The most cost-effective way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is for Congress to enact an economy-wide price on carbon. As long as Congress is unwilling to act, the president is right to use his powers under the Clean Air Act to curb emissions from power plants, by far the largest unregulated source of U.S. carbon emissions. Many companies are prepared to work with the administration on pragmatic approaches that cut emissions while keeping U.S. electricity affordable and reliable. Companies want regulatory certainty and know that continued inaction exposes them to increasing climate risks. In crafting the power plant rules, EPA should consult widely with utilities and with the states, which ultimately must implement them. We strongly encourage EPA to devise a flexible strategy that allows a variety of state-level policies, including market-based approaches, and allows utilities to cut emissions at the lowest possible cost. . ."

    Access a release from Speaker Boehner (click here). Access a lengthy statement from Sen. McConnell (click here). Access a release from the Bicameral Task Force on Climate Change (click here). Access a release from NRDC (click here). Access a release from CBD (click here). Access a release from API (click here). Access a release from NAM (click here). Access a release from C2ES (click here). [#Climate]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

Access subscription information (click here)

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals