If the coal industry is so opposed to these targets, quotas, etc., it ought to counter propose a market based solution of trade-and-cap or a carbon tax.
8
There's nothing like giving the man a chance!
3
I think everyone should to be required to read the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment before going to vote much less run for office. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf
In a nut shell:
"Mitigation involves some level of co-benefits and risks, but these risks do not involve the same possibility of severe, widespread and irreversible impacts as risks from climate change. Inertia in the economic and climate system and the possibility of irreversible impacts from climate change increase the benefits from near-term mitigation efforts (high confidence). Delays in additional mitigation or constraints on technological options increase the longer-term mitigation costs to hold climate change risks at a given level (Table SPM.2). {3.2, 3.4}"
The last sentence in particular is exactly what Mitch McConnell is currently advocating. Pay less now so we can pay more later. I don’t have the exact figure in front of me but the original IPCC report placed average estimates for economic damages for delaying/avoiding mitigation at around 20% of global GDP now and forever. Think about that. That’s 1 out of every 5 dollars anyone will ever earn or spend on this planet gone and that’s not even a worst case scenario. I’ll take my chances with Obama.
In a nut shell:
"Mitigation involves some level of co-benefits and risks, but these risks do not involve the same possibility of severe, widespread and irreversible impacts as risks from climate change. Inertia in the economic and climate system and the possibility of irreversible impacts from climate change increase the benefits from near-term mitigation efforts (high confidence). Delays in additional mitigation or constraints on technological options increase the longer-term mitigation costs to hold climate change risks at a given level (Table SPM.2). {3.2, 3.4}"
The last sentence in particular is exactly what Mitch McConnell is currently advocating. Pay less now so we can pay more later. I don’t have the exact figure in front of me but the original IPCC report placed average estimates for economic damages for delaying/avoiding mitigation at around 20% of global GDP now and forever. Think about that. That’s 1 out of every 5 dollars anyone will ever earn or spend on this planet gone and that’s not even a worst case scenario. I’ll take my chances with Obama.
12
Crippling thousands of jobs for .01 degree Celsius.
Lunacy!
Lunacy!
2
I am not holding my breath waiting to see the Old Gray Lady report on how the EPA involved special interest groups (e.g., The Sierra Club) help them right the rule two years before its unveiling.
2
If this plan goes into effect China and India will be laughing at the US. It will drive up the cost of energy and through that all manufacturing and transportation costs in the US while having an insignificant effect on global warming. It is wishful thinking to say that this would make China want to make any changes towards cleaner energy. This will help increase demand for China's products by making US products more expensive so will actually increase the pollution produced by China. The net effect will be higher prices and increased pollution.
2
Why not an article that presents who these people are and to whom they are responsible? Alluding to the many who are developing the opposition doesn't help at all. We all know there are people who support and people that oppose every legislative initiative. But it would be great for the supporters to know who their champions are and the opponents to know who to avoid.
7
Here's my question for Mr. McConnell: If the coal industry brings so much economic benefit to West Virginia, why isn't it a wealthy state?
24
Let's be fair - there ARE a minority of Wealthy people getting 'blood money/wealth' out of the 'Coal/CSG States' in any country - however they are restricted to those enabling those toxic industries ie the coal/CSG corporations and their lapdog investors/politicians and lawyers.
However the sooner those same investors etc., join the unstoppable Renewable Energy/Energy Storeage juggernaut - the sooner our children, our farms, the agriculture industry, our oceans, our climate, and our population, benefits.
However the sooner those same investors etc., join the unstoppable Renewable Energy/Energy Storeage juggernaut - the sooner our children, our farms, the agriculture industry, our oceans, our climate, and our population, benefits.
11
Whoops, I meant Kentucky! But we can ask the same about West Virginia.
10
We've seen the tactics of the business lobby before. Its always so unbelievable-- after all, they have children and grandchildren too. But their willingness to take the planet out goes on.
Remember CFC Ozone depletion?
DuPont, which made 1/4 of the world's CFCs, spent millions of dollars running full-page newspaper advertisements defending CFCs in 1975, claiming there was no proof that CFCs were harming the ozone layer. The CEO of Pennwalt, the third largest CFC manufacturer in the U.S., talked of "economic chaos" if CFC use was to be phased out. CFC industry companies hired the world's largest public relations firm, Hill & Knowlton, who organized a month-long U.S. speaking tour in 1975 for noted British scientist Richard Scorer, a former editor of the International Journal of Air Pollution and author of several books on pollution. Scorer blasted Molina and Rowland, calling them "doomsayers"Molina's response was, "The gentleman is good at attacking. But he has never published any scientific papers on the subject."
Same song, next verse.
Remember CFC Ozone depletion?
DuPont, which made 1/4 of the world's CFCs, spent millions of dollars running full-page newspaper advertisements defending CFCs in 1975, claiming there was no proof that CFCs were harming the ozone layer. The CEO of Pennwalt, the third largest CFC manufacturer in the U.S., talked of "economic chaos" if CFC use was to be phased out. CFC industry companies hired the world's largest public relations firm, Hill & Knowlton, who organized a month-long U.S. speaking tour in 1975 for noted British scientist Richard Scorer, a former editor of the International Journal of Air Pollution and author of several books on pollution. Scorer blasted Molina and Rowland, calling them "doomsayers"Molina's response was, "The gentleman is good at attacking. But he has never published any scientific papers on the subject."
Same song, next verse.
12
We created and support our government to help and protect our interests. If we believe that American people's health is something that needs to be protected by eliminating those industries that are polluting the air and our lungs, irritating our eyes and making of us allergic sneezing creatures, our government is doing the right thing going against one of the main sources of pollution. Then, why GOP politicians want to fight a good decision? Let's get together and find solutions for the employees that will be affected by thebclosing of these sources of pollution . Let's retrain and prepare them for some other activity. The world is changing and we need to adapt. It takes effort from everybody but let's put our minds together and think positively of ways to help those that will be without a job. By reacting negatively to a positive action we create expenses for everybody involved, waste of tax dollars and time that could be better used in retraining the displaced workers. By the way, those who do not believe in climate change and pollution, they must be blind. Haven't you noticed the grime that forms on your car? Or the dull blue of our skies? Or the dirt accumulated in our window and door screens? Our air is so polluted that on some days it seems you can slice it with a knife. And I live in a coastal area, with daily sea winds that try to clean the mess!
10
They want to fight it because neither they, nor their big money masters, are actually invested in cleaner energy, so none of them can make any money. They make money on COAL, no matter who it hurts.
8
Do the conservative, do-nothings really believe that we can take millions of years worth of carbon formation and throw it into the atmosphere in the span of only 100 years and not have some sort of effect on the environment? Even if there was no effect, do they think that the oil and gas extraction is limitless? This reminds me of the fight over the old-growth forests some years ago when the logging industry would have cut down every last old-growth tree in the name of "jobs". Are they so blind and short-sighted as to not realize that change is coming one way or the other? The only argument is whether we will have disaster prior to the change or not.
14
Abe's Lincoln's words to our nation, like the climate, have been changing.
"Of the people, for the people, and by the people" has been reduced to "buy the people" -- and forget the part "...shall not perish from the Earth."
-- If there's money to be made!
The most dangerous major greenhouse gas is Sulfur-Hexafluoride (CO2 x 22,200) -- it's very stable and keeps accumulating.
The Bush administration declined to ratify the Kyoto protocol (2002) which allows US companies to keep making and selling that gas (10,000 tons/yr). Anyone can buy it. (Two minor uses: fill tennis balls and change the pitch of your voice.)
Money is a means of managing motivation. A way to get things done.
The question, as with political power, is what do you use it for?
We're a sorry state if the only thing we can think of is just making more money. Everyone wants more, but few have a worthwhile idea of what to do with it -- Meanwhile, old sea ice melts, glaciers melt, oceans rise, habitats diminish & disappear, deserts form, water is in short supply, and food crops fail -- not to mention thousands who have died from heat exhaustion.
Still, some don't get the hint. The priority of the super rich is to themselves and they control the votes. In the end, they may be the last left standing, but then they will be alone. Much that has been done can never be undone.
Short term gain will yield long term loss -- for the world.
Read: The Weather Makers (Tim Flannery) and Arming Mother Nature (Jacob Hamblin)
"Of the people, for the people, and by the people" has been reduced to "buy the people" -- and forget the part "...shall not perish from the Earth."
-- If there's money to be made!
The most dangerous major greenhouse gas is Sulfur-Hexafluoride (CO2 x 22,200) -- it's very stable and keeps accumulating.
The Bush administration declined to ratify the Kyoto protocol (2002) which allows US companies to keep making and selling that gas (10,000 tons/yr). Anyone can buy it. (Two minor uses: fill tennis balls and change the pitch of your voice.)
Money is a means of managing motivation. A way to get things done.
The question, as with political power, is what do you use it for?
We're a sorry state if the only thing we can think of is just making more money. Everyone wants more, but few have a worthwhile idea of what to do with it -- Meanwhile, old sea ice melts, glaciers melt, oceans rise, habitats diminish & disappear, deserts form, water is in short supply, and food crops fail -- not to mention thousands who have died from heat exhaustion.
Still, some don't get the hint. The priority of the super rich is to themselves and they control the votes. In the end, they may be the last left standing, but then they will be alone. Much that has been done can never be undone.
Short term gain will yield long term loss -- for the world.
Read: The Weather Makers (Tim Flannery) and Arming Mother Nature (Jacob Hamblin)
10
I note that the republicans provide no arguments concerning the actual damage that global warming is causing. Of course, all they have are fake science shills to claim that climate change is not happening. So, no arguments about how much effort should be put into slowing climate change from the dissenters. They want nothing done. Nothing. Pollution allowed to continue with no abatement.
So, what does the republican argument consist of. Legal mumbo jumbo. Fine. Let the Supreme Court decide. It does have 5 conservative/republican appointee's. Industry hacks...all. But don't tell me that Obama overstepped his authority until and unless the Supreme Court rules against him and the EPA. The plan the republicans have come up with is to just disobey the law. The rule of law means nothing to republicans...they are only interested in the rule of money and the rule of power.
For anyone concerned with the welfare of the environment, the planet and all of it's animals and plants, do not vote republican. Ever.
So, what does the republican argument consist of. Legal mumbo jumbo. Fine. Let the Supreme Court decide. It does have 5 conservative/republican appointee's. Industry hacks...all. But don't tell me that Obama overstepped his authority until and unless the Supreme Court rules against him and the EPA. The plan the republicans have come up with is to just disobey the law. The rule of law means nothing to republicans...they are only interested in the rule of money and the rule of power.
For anyone concerned with the welfare of the environment, the planet and all of it's animals and plants, do not vote republican. Ever.
14
You know how working families complain that they can't afford to send their children to college, or they can't live the life their parents lived or that they can't make ends meet? That is due, in part, to ever increasing government regulation.
When your energy costs spike in the future and we all find that everything costs so much more, will be able to thank this command and control president. No climate change denier here, there are just better ways to go about this.
When your energy costs spike in the future and we all find that everything costs so much more, will be able to thank this command and control president. No climate change denier here, there are just better ways to go about this.
2
These are exactly the same arguments made after passage of the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the banning of DDT, etc. They didn't come true then and they will not come true now.
12
I hope in future we'll be able to thank "this command-and-control president" for taking charge and doing something effective to slow down climate change.
If he doesn't do it, who will? Certainly not the obstructionist Republicans in Congress who have sold themselves to the fossil fuel industries.
If he doesn't do it, who will? Certainly not the obstructionist Republicans in Congress who have sold themselves to the fossil fuel industries.
9
It's not just all the children and others whose health are harmed by the pollution of dirty air, and the planet which cannot recover. These industries are dangerous. The states that produce coal should develop other industries, and provide education for their workforces so that they can have safer and better paying work. My grandfather died in a Kentucky mine.
9
If Obama had started a campaign to pet puppies, these people would be fighting it, just as compulsively. It doesn't matter if it's for or against their own interests - or in this case, against the PLANET'S interests - if Obama's for it, they're agin' it.
19
Republicans hate Obama more than they love their country. Sad and self defeating.
11
"The group — headed in part by Roger R. Martella Jr., a top environmental official in the George W. Bush administration..."
Well, that explains everything. This is just a continuation of the Bush administration's ballyhooed "No Lump of Coal Left Behind" initiative. I suppose we should all breathe a collective sigh of relief that Republicans aren't yet deciding for medical doctors the only course of treatment for all serious illness, too. Does the Republican Party support any of the collective majority consensus findings of the world's most educated and respected scientists and academics on any subject? Even in the highly unlikely event the majority of the world's smartest scientists are wrong about climate change and its man made causes, is breathing cleaner air not worth curbing power plant emissions? While many can appreciate Mitch McConnell's anguish over job loss in the coal industry in the state of Kentucky and anywhere where coal is mined, should the financial well-being of any industry or state trump the health and well-being of our entire country and the planet? While this Republican drive to dismantle President Obama's plan on climate change is hardly surprising, it is highly distressing, unconscionable and reckless, nonetheless. No American should ever vote for any political candidate who is anti-science.
Well, that explains everything. This is just a continuation of the Bush administration's ballyhooed "No Lump of Coal Left Behind" initiative. I suppose we should all breathe a collective sigh of relief that Republicans aren't yet deciding for medical doctors the only course of treatment for all serious illness, too. Does the Republican Party support any of the collective majority consensus findings of the world's most educated and respected scientists and academics on any subject? Even in the highly unlikely event the majority of the world's smartest scientists are wrong about climate change and its man made causes, is breathing cleaner air not worth curbing power plant emissions? While many can appreciate Mitch McConnell's anguish over job loss in the coal industry in the state of Kentucky and anywhere where coal is mined, should the financial well-being of any industry or state trump the health and well-being of our entire country and the planet? While this Republican drive to dismantle President Obama's plan on climate change is hardly surprising, it is highly distressing, unconscionable and reckless, nonetheless. No American should ever vote for any political candidate who is anti-science.
15
Mr. Morrisey and officials from West Virginia should be using their time and effort to make their state more competitive for today's economic environment. Instead they're wasting time defending a product that has a catastrophic effect on everyone's health--especially their own citizens. Coal fueled the industrial revolution and was a big part of creating America. But it is of declining importance today, and is not a part of the country's or the world's future. That's a fact, and they can either waste time with a losing battle, or they can prepare their state for the future. And WV has a lot of work to do. ALEC, their partner in fighting this rearguard action, ranked West Virginia's K-12 education system last in the country in 2012, so I think Morrisey has a lot more pressing work to do if he really cares about his adopted state.
17
It never ceases to amaze that the willful ignorance of so many conservatives trumps the best interests of their constituents.
I am open minded. If there is a solid refutation of the anthropogenic Climate Change model, lets hear it. I will however place one condition, the scientists putting forth this competing model must not be funded by fossil fuel interests.
In the years that I have been following this issue, every single one of the papers, articles and books that have come out denying climate change have all been traced back to funding, either overt or covert, from fossil fuel concerns.
This is a blatant conflict of interest, that elected representatives will seek to upend any legislation which seeks to restrict emissions, while also accepting campaign donations and other considerations from fossil fuel concerns. That it is business as usual in congress (and elsewhere in government) only illustrates the complicity of large parts of government in this corruption.
For a moment lets put aside the whole climate change issue and instead focus solely on pollution. It is without any doubt that fossil fuel consumption produces air pollution. Even 'clean coal' is only clean by comparison to ordinary coal burning. It is still a filthy air polluter. As most of the US population lives in urban centers, the continued refusal to accept any pollution controls dooms all of us to more cases of asthma, lung cancers and an overall poorer quality of life due to poor air quality.
I am open minded. If there is a solid refutation of the anthropogenic Climate Change model, lets hear it. I will however place one condition, the scientists putting forth this competing model must not be funded by fossil fuel interests.
In the years that I have been following this issue, every single one of the papers, articles and books that have come out denying climate change have all been traced back to funding, either overt or covert, from fossil fuel concerns.
This is a blatant conflict of interest, that elected representatives will seek to upend any legislation which seeks to restrict emissions, while also accepting campaign donations and other considerations from fossil fuel concerns. That it is business as usual in congress (and elsewhere in government) only illustrates the complicity of large parts of government in this corruption.
For a moment lets put aside the whole climate change issue and instead focus solely on pollution. It is without any doubt that fossil fuel consumption produces air pollution. Even 'clean coal' is only clean by comparison to ordinary coal burning. It is still a filthy air polluter. As most of the US population lives in urban centers, the continued refusal to accept any pollution controls dooms all of us to more cases of asthma, lung cancers and an overall poorer quality of life due to poor air quality.
11
The irony is that the great advances made by fracking have allowed Obama to target coal fired electric plants. Thanks to fracking, these coal fired plants are being replaced with much cleaner natural gas fired plants.
5
"... corporate lawyers, coal lobbyists and Republican political strategists began meeting regularly in the headquarters of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce...."
Is this the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that fights against the governments of poor countries, like Nepal, as these governments fight against tobacco? Well, we know who they are.
Doesn't Mitch McConnell get most of his campaign money from Peabody Coal? Well, we know who he is.
The coal industry poisons the environment, and they're are better sources of energy of course, but if we don't let them poison us, they will lose money. This theory can be applied just as logically to the illegal cocaine and heroin industry: poor farmers, let alone higher-ups, will suffer true financial hardship.
Coal lobbyists? Our poor broken American system. They already have about 1/4 of our power produced by filthy coal.
Yes, it's important, at least at the level of those who actually do the work, that they be able to earn a livelihood. But if what they produce is poison, like coal, cocaine, tobacco (don't we still subsidize tobacco with our tax money?), we need to remember that all of us suffer the consequences.
Is this the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that fights against the governments of poor countries, like Nepal, as these governments fight against tobacco? Well, we know who they are.
Doesn't Mitch McConnell get most of his campaign money from Peabody Coal? Well, we know who he is.
The coal industry poisons the environment, and they're are better sources of energy of course, but if we don't let them poison us, they will lose money. This theory can be applied just as logically to the illegal cocaine and heroin industry: poor farmers, let alone higher-ups, will suffer true financial hardship.
Coal lobbyists? Our poor broken American system. They already have about 1/4 of our power produced by filthy coal.
Yes, it's important, at least at the level of those who actually do the work, that they be able to earn a livelihood. But if what they produce is poison, like coal, cocaine, tobacco (don't we still subsidize tobacco with our tax money?), we need to remember that all of us suffer the consequences.
9
What coal defenders and champions of renewable energy have in common is that both would like to rewrite the laws of thermodynamics, and both like to think of the world as either a single system or as multiple systems as is convenient for them.
1
I have no doubt that climate change is occurring. However, I believe that this is a natural cycle the earth goes through, just as climate conditions have changed for a millennium. I do not believe however, that pollution is the cause of climate change, as the earth has been able in the past to cleanse itself.
I do not oppose reduction in emissions, but I think that before stating unequivocally that our climate is changing because of emissions,a scientific study has to be done to see what the natural occurrences have been first.
Here is another example of Obama having a belief and then stuffing it down our throats. I think we all know who will absorb the cost of implementing these restrictions - certainly not the companies dealing with emissions,that is for sure. Instead it will be another inflationary burden that we and our children and grandchildren will have to bear along with all the other Socialist-like changes Obama is putting into place.
I do not oppose reduction in emissions, but I think that before stating unequivocally that our climate is changing because of emissions,a scientific study has to be done to see what the natural occurrences have been first.
Here is another example of Obama having a belief and then stuffing it down our throats. I think we all know who will absorb the cost of implementing these restrictions - certainly not the companies dealing with emissions,that is for sure. Instead it will be another inflationary burden that we and our children and grandchildren will have to bear along with all the other Socialist-like changes Obama is putting into place.
2
And if you're wrong then the consequences are we all will die or at the least suffer huge weather related catastrophes! I'm not ready to take that chance and hopefully it never has to come to that. To suggest that a president should not take action now would be the height of irresponsibility!
5
President Obama's actions to slow down climate change are based on a large body of scientific research that has already investigated the good question you ask -- whether the climate change we are witnessing is simply part of a natural climate cycle, or whether it has been caused or worsened by carbon emissions caused by burning fossil fuels.
The vast majority of highly qualified scientists agree that current climate change is man-made, and that if it continues at its current pace, the whole world will face severe consequences from rising oceans, melting icecaps, drought, and other impacts.
President Obama is not cramming some personal belief down our throats. He is taking responsible action based on sound scientific research to prevent an environmental disaster that has already begun from getting much, much worse.
During his presidential campaign, Barack Obama included fighting climate change as one of the things he would do if he was elected President. He is keeping his promise to the majority of American voters who elected him twice.
The vast majority of highly qualified scientists agree that current climate change is man-made, and that if it continues at its current pace, the whole world will face severe consequences from rising oceans, melting icecaps, drought, and other impacts.
President Obama is not cramming some personal belief down our throats. He is taking responsible action based on sound scientific research to prevent an environmental disaster that has already begun from getting much, much worse.
During his presidential campaign, Barack Obama included fighting climate change as one of the things he would do if he was elected President. He is keeping his promise to the majority of American voters who elected him twice.
5
These are the people that oppose a social safety net, yet they want to prop up highly dangerous jobs in a dead industry that is destroying the earth, so it can serve as the most idiotic form of a social safety net.
I can't wrap my head around this contradiction.
I can't wrap my head around this contradiction.
11
It isn't really a contradiction. If you're not one of them, they don't really care if you get sick and die. A safety net for you does not concern them. Why weren't you born into a wealthy family? It's your own fault.
5
Climate change is now happening. The time when it was those who were predicting it verses those who were yet to be convinced by real evidence is long past. Today, it is happening and it's clear to anyone able to reason clearly that it is happening. So why the all the efforts to deny it and to oppose all attempts to address the challenges it presents? Denial. Psychological reaction to an horrible and life altering event. Despite having the best reasoning minds known people very often become inane beings when reality becomes too much to bear.
6
The CEOs of some of the country's largest energy providers, as well as Exxon's Chairman, agree that climate change is happening, and they expressed a desire for a carbon tax. Are these guys lying? Why aren't they issuing press releases today showing their support for Obama's climate change plan? We need to hear from the country's powerful business leaders that they understand the threat of climate change to the future of this country and its inhabitants, and to throw their support behind strong climate change action.
Hey Warren Buffett: do you care about climate change? Let's hear from you.
Hey Warren Buffett: do you care about climate change? Let's hear from you.
5
Govt's solution to save ourselves from ourselves: Tax ourselves.
Sorry if I sound suspicious
The issue is and should be why this President thinks he has the power to do this unilaterally
Sorry if I sound suspicious
The issue is and should be why this President thinks he has the power to do this unilaterally
1
Only because many laws, including the Clean Air Act, include many provisions that place rulemaking authority in officials of the Executive Branch (like the EPA). If implementing authority passed by Congress, those agencies are not acting unilaterally.
1
Without the planet, nothing else matters. At one point in history, large parts of the economy depended on slave labor and child labor. At one point, there were no regulations whatsoever for food safety, for emissions, for anything. Parts of the economy depend on mining and burning coal. So what? Energy costs will go up, jobs will be lost. So what? We need to change because we know better, because we have the science that backs it and the common sense to foresee the consequences of staying on our current path of self-destruction. We need to help and financially support those economies to make the transition to different industries. Energy costs, jobs, profit….none of this matters if the planet becomes uninhabitable. I am no scientist, I am no politician. This is just common sense.
14
Despite Republicans obstinate, obstreperous, obnoxious, obscurant posturing, Obama courageously pushes forward on environmental issues for the betterment of our home, planet Earth. If Republicans get their way on this issue Americans and others will be left gasping for air, with Republicans grasping their wallets...only to realize, too late, that you can't breath money.
16
How would you feel if you disagreed with Obama's view? What specifically gives Obama the power to subvert the will of the American people who elected its Congress to legislate matters?
This President should scare you.
This President should scare you.
2
Sam,
This President won twice in overwhelming fashion. That is what gives him the power.
Didn't you learn this lesson in pre-school?
This President won twice in overwhelming fashion. That is what gives him the power.
Didn't you learn this lesson in pre-school?
11
Sam,
President Obama was elected...twice. President Obama is actually following the will of the American people by taking action against climate change. The group that wants to subvert the will of the American people are the fossil fuel extraction industries and their bought and paid for toadies in Congress. The Legislation under which the EPA was formed gives them the authority to regulate air pollutants. CO2 is a pollutant. I see President Obama and the EPA as doing their jobs to provide for the welfare of the American People. You...on the other hand, appear to be more worried about your pocket book. Maybe you have ownership in coal and oil companies...which haven't been doing so well lately. You do not have my sympathy. People like you who are more interested in their money than the destruction of the planet are the ones that scare me.
President Obama was elected...twice. President Obama is actually following the will of the American people by taking action against climate change. The group that wants to subvert the will of the American people are the fossil fuel extraction industries and their bought and paid for toadies in Congress. The Legislation under which the EPA was formed gives them the authority to regulate air pollutants. CO2 is a pollutant. I see President Obama and the EPA as doing their jobs to provide for the welfare of the American People. You...on the other hand, appear to be more worried about your pocket book. Maybe you have ownership in coal and oil companies...which haven't been doing so well lately. You do not have my sympathy. People like you who are more interested in their money than the destruction of the planet are the ones that scare me.
6
I can't get over this lie about "damaging the economy". If we employ people to add solar to buildings, well, isn't that employment? And once the solar is in place, and you are paying 10 cents per unit when you used to pay a dollar, isn't that helping you as well? And when the majority of the pollution has been taken out of the air you breathe and the water you drink, won't that save everyone on health problems/costs? Could someone please ask the GOP "leaders" these questions? I'd really like to know their answers.
13
Thomas,
The republican answer is they don't care about the health effects of pollution...any pollution. Pollution is money for them. The polluters pay them to fight against any and all regulations. The polluters are currently paying them more "campaign/bribe" money than the clean energy industry. If pollution is damaging your health, then pay more for health care or move away or. If pollution is damaging the whole planet, then leave the planet or die. That is their answer. They have no concern for your welfare...none.
The republican answer is they don't care about the health effects of pollution...any pollution. Pollution is money for them. The polluters pay them to fight against any and all regulations. The polluters are currently paying them more "campaign/bribe" money than the clean energy industry. If pollution is damaging your health, then pay more for health care or move away or. If pollution is damaging the whole planet, then leave the planet or die. That is their answer. They have no concern for your welfare...none.
4
We have wasted years. We have watched as glaciers have disappeared, weird weather patterns either parch or flooded great swaths of the world. We have seen fires burn out of control in Australia, Canada and here. We've had massive hurricanes, tsunamis and forest destroyed by beetles that don't die during winter, because it doesn't get cold enough. We've seen holy hell heat waves in Russia and watched as polar bears starve to death. We've had record breaking snowfalls, and record breaking heat, hundred year floods that happen all the time now...and still, we want to burn coal. The only climate deniers are the Koch brothers, if they actually spent all that money to stop regulation and fix the problem, we'd be much further ahead. Indeed, I heard a climate denier on the radio, suggesting that poor Indians, who currently use cow dung to cook, would welcome clean coal. We are now comparing ourselves to India? Oh great. And by the way, Appalachia, with it's long history of coal mining should hardly be held as an exemplar of a modern economy, and most of their coal has been dug out and they are now lopping off the tops of mountains out west. Thank you Mr. President for looking out for future generations. We're all up in arms about a lion in Africa, there won't be any animals if we people destroy the earth. It's about the science stupid, science doesn't have a PACs, it has facts.
10
Let's see... Coal billionaire profits vs. the likely collapse of society in 3 decades or less, if very big steps are not taken now.... Hmmmn, tough question.
The Times needs to embed references and links to the predictions of the latest, best climate research models and their implications for all life in and alongside EACH AND EVERY article which connects to this issue. It is possible to write in depth on legal and political struggles and do the above. Doing less is a journalistic failure. (A minor detail in the sea of feedback loops: New York City itself may be inundated by rising seas in as little as two decades.)
This article, in the name of depth and objectivity, completely decouples the legal and political issues from the larger issue which gives the parties opposed to the regulations a ring of legitimacy. Science and the future of life on the planet must be present as context. In the name of good coverage I hope my suggestions start making an appearance in legal wonk journalism. This is not regular news. What is at stake compels going to any length to connect the dots.
The Times needs to embed references and links to the predictions of the latest, best climate research models and their implications for all life in and alongside EACH AND EVERY article which connects to this issue. It is possible to write in depth on legal and political struggles and do the above. Doing less is a journalistic failure. (A minor detail in the sea of feedback loops: New York City itself may be inundated by rising seas in as little as two decades.)
This article, in the name of depth and objectivity, completely decouples the legal and political issues from the larger issue which gives the parties opposed to the regulations a ring of legitimacy. Science and the future of life on the planet must be present as context. In the name of good coverage I hope my suggestions start making an appearance in legal wonk journalism. This is not regular news. What is at stake compels going to any length to connect the dots.
10
Cap-and-trade is the most honest form of free market. It proved overwhelmingly successful, from both environmental and cost standpoints, when it came to limiting sulfur-dioxide (acid rain) dumping.
We the people own the commons, which includes the atmospheric commons. Corporations dumping waste byproducts into our commons without paying a free is the same as a sewage company using your swimming pool as a dumping ground without paying you.
Cap-and-trade is a brilliant free market system whereby we grant corporations the privilege of dumping their waste byproducts into our commons at a level that does not exceed the ability of our commons to safely process the waste. The "cap" portion establishes how much waste byproduct our commons can safely process without degrading the system (the environment). The "trade" portion allows corporations themselves to determine the proper free market value for dumping waste byproducts in our commons by their simply bidding against each other for what percentage of the "cap" they want the privilege to use.
Currently we have a socialist market in which corporations exploit the commons -- which we the people own -- as a free dumping ground for their waste byproducts. This is a form of socialism in which corporations dump their costs onto society as a whole rather than capturing them into the cost of their products. Capturing all costs of a product within the selling price is an absolute fundamental requirement of free market economics.
We the people own the commons, which includes the atmospheric commons. Corporations dumping waste byproducts into our commons without paying a free is the same as a sewage company using your swimming pool as a dumping ground without paying you.
Cap-and-trade is a brilliant free market system whereby we grant corporations the privilege of dumping their waste byproducts into our commons at a level that does not exceed the ability of our commons to safely process the waste. The "cap" portion establishes how much waste byproduct our commons can safely process without degrading the system (the environment). The "trade" portion allows corporations themselves to determine the proper free market value for dumping waste byproducts in our commons by their simply bidding against each other for what percentage of the "cap" they want the privilege to use.
Currently we have a socialist market in which corporations exploit the commons -- which we the people own -- as a free dumping ground for their waste byproducts. This is a form of socialism in which corporations dump their costs onto society as a whole rather than capturing them into the cost of their products. Capturing all costs of a product within the selling price is an absolute fundamental requirement of free market economics.
11
Have any of these people defending coal spent a single day working in a mine?
I said it elsewhere in NYT comments today - but if Republicans declare Clean Energy as unconstitutional,
then saving Americans from effects of Climate Change is unconstitutional,
heeding the Pentagon warning of Climate Change as a premier security threat is unconstitutional,
keeping American industry competitive (other countries are not waiting) is unconstitutional,
as is listening to religious leaders.
These people are paid by us to act in our interest. Theoretically.
I said it elsewhere in NYT comments today - but if Republicans declare Clean Energy as unconstitutional,
then saving Americans from effects of Climate Change is unconstitutional,
heeding the Pentagon warning of Climate Change as a premier security threat is unconstitutional,
keeping American industry competitive (other countries are not waiting) is unconstitutional,
as is listening to religious leaders.
These people are paid by us to act in our interest. Theoretically.
9
"“It represents a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion,”
Good Heavens! It has been a long time since I have seen such a blatant act of the criminal accusing the Just, or of the wolf donning sheep's clothing. It is reminiscent of Reagan's accusing "welfare recipients" of being cheats.
If there was ever a statement that more clearly states the serious mental illness that drives the "haves and the have mores" it is that issued by Mitch of the Forked tongue. Just issuing such a remark is indicative of how serious this psychosis is.
We had best start to understand the reality of this kind of environmental pollution. It makes what is happening to the Nature kingdoms pale before what these would be Rulers of the World have in mind for the rest of us.
Good Heavens! It has been a long time since I have seen such a blatant act of the criminal accusing the Just, or of the wolf donning sheep's clothing. It is reminiscent of Reagan's accusing "welfare recipients" of being cheats.
If there was ever a statement that more clearly states the serious mental illness that drives the "haves and the have mores" it is that issued by Mitch of the Forked tongue. Just issuing such a remark is indicative of how serious this psychosis is.
We had best start to understand the reality of this kind of environmental pollution. It makes what is happening to the Nature kingdoms pale before what these would be Rulers of the World have in mind for the rest of us.
13
Climate change deniers lack imagination. They cannot picture a world where desperate people will be fighting over water, food, and energy. It will mean the end of life as we now live it. Joseph Stiglitz reported that at a party where almost all the guests were uber billionaires, the only concern that made them doubt their continued economic privilege and the policies which keep them at the top was a metaphoric fear of people coming for them with pitchforks. Well, they will be coming for all of us, but especially for the uber rich.
12
The cartel trying to bake us all are all composed of old white rich men who know they will likely die before the planet becomes the wasteland their incessant massive carbon pollution delivers. They are sociopaths only interested in their next yacht or buying insipid politicians to help them hoard their gold. The Koch's are public enemy number one no matter how many times the NYSlimes tries to make them into benevolent philanthropists. This geriatric coup also proves how corrupt Bush II was in office, as his "environmentalists" are the ones doing the bidding of the sick pathogens intent on killing us.
10
Pro fossil constituency is a lot smaller today than it was in previous post war eras and the trend is continued shrinkage. The number of Republicans unmoved by climate change is trending downward and it is the GOP network they rely on. If they had an answer for inexpensive natural gas displacing coal we would have heard it already. Not even the Pentagon will help them. Loyal Republican solar and wind business owners are not difficult to find.
Legal battle exhausts resources the coal industry cannot afford denting the GOP brand in the mix.
Legal battle exhausts resources the coal industry cannot afford denting the GOP brand in the mix.
6
Since when do jobs take priority over eventual destruction of the planet ?
9
That is the argument those against doing anything about climate change make. However, it really isn't just about jobs since jobs are created by addressing the climate problem. It is more simply about existing jobs creating dirty energy going away. The administration could soften the resistance by creating jobs to help people who will be displaced if they lose their job in the dirty energy field.
2
since always.
"... people involved in the effort to craft a legal strategy against the climate change rules said the time, labor and coordination of the effort were unusual."
Wow, just imagine if the same amount of time, labor & money were invested in developing renewable and cleaner fuels than coal. We could be a world leader in creative energy transformation.
Alas, change is hard and people are resistant, especially when they have gained wealth, status and control by doing things the same old way. I wonder how many coal miners would be willing to change/train for new jobs with new technology. I wonder how many lobbyists and lawyers are willing to work in the coal mines - maybe they could re-open the Upper Branch mine in West Virginia as a show of their commitment to this way of life.
Wow, just imagine if the same amount of time, labor & money were invested in developing renewable and cleaner fuels than coal. We could be a world leader in creative energy transformation.
Alas, change is hard and people are resistant, especially when they have gained wealth, status and control by doing things the same old way. I wonder how many coal miners would be willing to change/train for new jobs with new technology. I wonder how many lobbyists and lawyers are willing to work in the coal mines - maybe they could re-open the Upper Branch mine in West Virginia as a show of their commitment to this way of life.
16
At various times in history there have been moments where a sufficiently large group of powerful people are so entrenched in the economic and value systems of the past that they are capable of marshaling a large and influential lobby to actually continue policies and systems that harm the nation and our children, acting in their own self interests. While the latter is normal and understandable, we appear to be at a historical tipping point where The President is using the full force of his office to break down this nefarious force. We as a species, have no option but to enhance our environment and stop trashing the earth. We just need people courageous enough to lead us into the good fight. It appears that President Obama and the EPA as well as the Pope have stepped up. We must support them and show up for this existential fight!
24
We're cooked. We should all be working together to fight Climate Change. Instead, it's always about politics, who's up, who's down, how can we damage our opponent (the hated Obama) is the most important to these people. Are they so short-sighted that they don't see the terrible danger bearing down on our species? In fifty years, our world will be one major disaster after another. Two hundred years? We might not be here. The world needs America to lead, not obstruct. And yet, that is the highest priority for Republicans. Do they not have children? Will those children not have children? In seven generations - the way Native Americans think about the future - we may be gone. So sad to be filled with such hate for a President, to let that override their needed leadership in stopping this calamity of Climate Change. That hate could kill us all.
4
The Pentagon released a report in 2014 detailing how drastic weather, rising seas and changing storm patterns could become “threat multipliers” for the United States, vastly complicating security challenges faced by American forces, the Pentagon. Climate change is a global security issue. What Republican-backed corporate interest trumps that fact?
7
Mark,
Republicans don't care about anyone but themselves...and they are very short term focused. So...problems in the future mean nothing, unless they can use it as a stick to scare voters and get more power and money.
Republicans don't care about anyone but themselves...and they are very short term focused. So...problems in the future mean nothing, unless they can use it as a stick to scare voters and get more power and money.
1
The right wing narrative is freighted with misinformation beyond the imagination.
- 'Subsidies' ... The oil & gas industry has received subsidies from day one, when government pretended not to notice the rampant illegality during the robber baron age - after regulations began, hiring lobbyists to make sure most of congress was firmly in their pocket - finally, up to and including war. Yes, clean energy needs to be subsidized but the investment will pay off
- 'Cost' ... Does the cost of our existing energy policy include cleaning up pollution, destroyed habitat, breathing problems from asthma to cancer ... ?
- Economic Benefit ... Everybody is talking about creating more jobs - Any new industry creates jobs from the guy installing the panel to the scientist designing it -
- Transportation ... A comprehensive climate plan should include making mass transit work, especially in crowded urban areas - The Amtrak NE corridor needs to be completely rebuilt - Yes. it costs money but it creates jobs, and perhaps the congestion around LaGuardia airport will be relieved if flights to Boston and Washington are replaced by hi speed rail -
-
- 'Subsidies' ... The oil & gas industry has received subsidies from day one, when government pretended not to notice the rampant illegality during the robber baron age - after regulations began, hiring lobbyists to make sure most of congress was firmly in their pocket - finally, up to and including war. Yes, clean energy needs to be subsidized but the investment will pay off
- 'Cost' ... Does the cost of our existing energy policy include cleaning up pollution, destroyed habitat, breathing problems from asthma to cancer ... ?
- Economic Benefit ... Everybody is talking about creating more jobs - Any new industry creates jobs from the guy installing the panel to the scientist designing it -
- Transportation ... A comprehensive climate plan should include making mass transit work, especially in crowded urban areas - The Amtrak NE corridor needs to be completely rebuilt - Yes. it costs money but it creates jobs, and perhaps the congestion around LaGuardia airport will be relieved if flights to Boston and Washington are replaced by hi speed rail -
-
6
What do these people tell their kids about what they do each day? When these lobbyists and attorneys get visits from their grandchildren - what will they say about their careers - "I fought and delayed any attempts to even acknowledge that GHG are changing our climate? " "So, what if the east coast from Miami to New Jersey is flooding at every high tide, that forest fires have disseminated most of the west, and we do not eat sea food anymore because the ocean has acidified - just take your asthma medicine and be glad I made lots of money." As the President said, we are the first generation to feel the effects of climate change and the last one to be able to do something about it.
10
I too am curious what these people tell themselves and their grandkids. Clearly there are many climate change deniers too obtuse to understand things, a few of whom have written comments here (Sam, Jurgen, I am right), but that is unlikely to be the case with the 30 corporate lawyers and lobbyists described here. Do they think that medical science will soon have a cure for the COPD and asthma their efforts are now bringing on in their grandchildren? At one time I thought such people just didn't care, but the soul searching among tobacco executives is apparently substantial. Its not a case of people with no grandchildren, is it?
1
You will be able to judge the future of this act by examaining how the 130 top political donors will fair with the implementation of the act. Today we have the best politicans money can buy,and they have already been bought and paid for by those 130 donors.
9
The earth is not a political or business issue. It does not care. And it will shake us off like fleas when the time comes, as it tends to do. Our 'leaders' spend too much time in uncomfortable suits in air conditioned rooms, making decisions they really know nothing about. If they got their feet dirty and spent time outside and listened to nature and watched the positive effects on it's visitors, they might understand what's at stake - but the vast majority don't. I think the most significant political move of my lifetime was Jimmy Carter putting solar panels on the White House (and Ronnie immediately taking them down). That was vision and courage based on a basic appreciation for all people and our common home. Let's not make this mistake again.
7
According to the Climate Change alarmists the average temperature of planet earth has risen 0.8C since 1880.
Even if you believe we can measure global averages over 130+ years down to tenths of a degree, and even if all 0.8 degrees is anthropogenic - how much will Obama's starry-eyed plans reduce that??
Or to quote Hillary Clinton "What difference does it make??"
If the alarmists are really that convinced let them switch off the aircon and huddle around their solar panels this winter. They will never do that because they enjoy the advantages of fossil fuels way too much.
Even if you believe we can measure global averages over 130+ years down to tenths of a degree, and even if all 0.8 degrees is anthropogenic - how much will Obama's starry-eyed plans reduce that??
Or to quote Hillary Clinton "What difference does it make??"
If the alarmists are really that convinced let them switch off the aircon and huddle around their solar panels this winter. They will never do that because they enjoy the advantages of fossil fuels way too much.
3
And your comment, regrettably, illustrates the level of dumbed-down public understanding of climate change that enables the demagoguery by fossil-fuel interests to get a hearing.
3
No you are wrong. The problem is not so much that the planets temperature has gone up 0.8 degree Celsius. The problem is that the temperature increases are escalating. The temperature over the next hundred years could go up 2 to 6 degrees Celsius. The consequences of the larger increase would be devastating. Even a smaller increase will result in devastation. If we can slow the rise...much less damage will happen...much fewer species will go extinct.
1
The earth has been cooling for the past decade yet Al Gore retains his credibility in spite of his then sobering, but in reality off the wall predictions.
Climate science as it is practiced today is data management and statistics. This is not science as there is no experimentation phase. In the words of Mark Twain, there are three kinds of lies: Lies, damn lies and statistics.
Climate science in in its simplest terms is world wealth redistribution so when all you progressive (really regressive) liberals complain about deniers, you have no idea that they (we) are rejecting world wealth redistribution. And you should be too.
Climate science as it is practiced today is data management and statistics. This is not science as there is no experimentation phase. In the words of Mark Twain, there are three kinds of lies: Lies, damn lies and statistics.
Climate science in in its simplest terms is world wealth redistribution so when all you progressive (really regressive) liberals complain about deniers, you have no idea that they (we) are rejecting world wealth redistribution. And you should be too.
4
Really ? If the earth is cooling why are all the glaciers melting ? World wealth redistribution ? Give me a break!
4
"The earth has been cooling for the past decade..."
Huh?
The year 2014 ranks as Earth’s warmest since 1880 (the first year on record), according to two separate analyses by NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists. The 10 warmest years in the instrumental record, with the exception of 1998, have now occurred since 2000. Please proved your sources.
Huh?
The year 2014 ranks as Earth’s warmest since 1880 (the first year on record), according to two separate analyses by NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists. The 10 warmest years in the instrumental record, with the exception of 1998, have now occurred since 2000. Please proved your sources.
10
Deny, deny, deny. Meanwhile, the methane wells in the arctic are bubbling up and spewing methane into the atmosphere at arlarmingly increasing rates due to the accelerated melting of sea ice that formerly held the methane down under the water. So, when faced with the facts, you deny it's science? Does denial stop the ice from melting on Greenland? How about those ice shelves in Antartica. Does denial stop that melting? Does denial reduce CO2 in the atmosphere? Just how does that work?
Obviously you aren't reading any scientific papers and studies on this issue. Let me guess, Fox News?
Obviously you aren't reading any scientific papers and studies on this issue. Let me guess, Fox News?
7
Not all Republicans are climate deniers. But some of the key scientist supporting global warming were the same ones that told us in the 70's and 80's we were heading for another ice age. Then they were caught fudging the numbers to make it look warmer. Sure they have an incentive to continue pushing this agenda as it seeds more control over the economy to the government and keeps the grant money flowing their way. While the scientists with another view point are shut out of the research money so naturally they have to get their grants from the other side. Obama and democrats supports the man made climate change theory (and a theory it is) because it gives them more power. Therefore I am skeptical, not of the theory because I believe it to be true, I'm skeptical that with an ever growing population there is nothing we can do about it. The companion article says this will have no effect on climate change unless other countries follow suit. Is Obama prepared to go to war with China to protect the planet? If not when are we going to sanction China and other gross polluters like Mexico to put an end to their dumping?
2
What key scientists? Please name names.
You are spouting foolishness.
You are spouting foolishness.
5
I can't believe that anyone would actually that 97% of all climate scientists are actually involved in such chicanery. We have no choice but to at least try. Otherwise its not the earth that won't survive, its mankind.
2
So, you're saying over 97% of THE WORLD's scientists are colluding to fudge numbers so the US government will gain power and increase grant funding for American scientists?
Does that motive seem more likely than the fossil fuel industry conspiring to fabricate and spread propaganda designed to confuse the issue and keep the profits rolling in?
If your answer is "yes", do you watch FOX News much?
Does that motive seem more likely than the fossil fuel industry conspiring to fabricate and spread propaganda designed to confuse the issue and keep the profits rolling in?
If your answer is "yes", do you watch FOX News much?
7
[The new regulations] "represents the triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion."
Gag! How much of this utter swill from flat-out liars and obstructionists must we endure? The handwriting was on the wall by 1989, with increasing warnings and messages long before that.
There is no way to regain the twenty-five years lost because of fossil-fuel-industry-funded water-muddying, denial, deception, vicious harassment of honest scientists, and rhinoceros-stubborn resistance to change of all their paid or bribed shills.
And now they double-down on this infamous twenty-five year record of treason against the common interest of all humanity! How many more will now have to suffer and die prematurely because of pollution-related disease? How many more will have to be slaughtered by increasingly-intense weather events, as the world climate continues its accelerating descent from instability, to fibrillation, to chaos?
They have lost all sense of the moral aspect of life! For their sake, I hope they come to their spiritual senses while there is still time for them to start ameliorating the damages they have caused.
McConnell accusation is apt but mis-targeted at Obama. This cabal's plan indeed "represents a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion."
With a slight modification, Loge's words in Wagner's "Das Rheingold" are suitable:
"Ihre Schmach zu decken, schmaehen ihn Dumme."
"To cover their shame, stupid people revile him."
Gag! How much of this utter swill from flat-out liars and obstructionists must we endure? The handwriting was on the wall by 1989, with increasing warnings and messages long before that.
There is no way to regain the twenty-five years lost because of fossil-fuel-industry-funded water-muddying, denial, deception, vicious harassment of honest scientists, and rhinoceros-stubborn resistance to change of all their paid or bribed shills.
And now they double-down on this infamous twenty-five year record of treason against the common interest of all humanity! How many more will now have to suffer and die prematurely because of pollution-related disease? How many more will have to be slaughtered by increasingly-intense weather events, as the world climate continues its accelerating descent from instability, to fibrillation, to chaos?
They have lost all sense of the moral aspect of life! For their sake, I hope they come to their spiritual senses while there is still time for them to start ameliorating the damages they have caused.
McConnell accusation is apt but mis-targeted at Obama. This cabal's plan indeed "represents a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion."
With a slight modification, Loge's words in Wagner's "Das Rheingold" are suitable:
"Ihre Schmach zu decken, schmaehen ihn Dumme."
"To cover their shame, stupid people revile him."
28
The article demonstrates a vast rightwing conspiracy really does exist. The right is equally sure of a vast leftwing conspiracy. What we need is an American conspiracy to address climate change similar to the America in WWII. Together we can solve our problems. Divided we will fall. It is time for our country to realize the world has changed and our problems must be solved.
10
Sorry Tom...but there is no vast left wing conspiracy. Conspiracies take money...money that can be distributed in secret, money the fossil fuel industry has. The left wing is not a child of the corporate self interests...so no large pot of secret money to fund any conspiracy on the left.
2
What is best for West Virginia and Kentucky is not what is best for America. What is best for current political partisan media discussion attention and "debate" regarding climate change and energy is a deceitful delusional distraction. Fighting to maintain the domestic status quo ante of inaction with respect to climate change is bad for the climate and the country.
6
These politicians and their cronies should be considered terrorists in their ongoing attack on reigning in Climate Change. Obama has stated correctly in the past that Climate Change is the number one threat to political and economic stability in America. Anyone who attempts to deny this or stop progress in addressing these pressing issues is by default acting against our best interests.
17
Valerie Valerie Valerie
Didn't anyone ever tell you that just because everyone else is jumping off a bridge doesn't mean you should? How do you know Obama is correct? He's been wrong about virtually everything else in his admin.
Didn't anyone ever tell you that just because everyone else is jumping off a bridge doesn't mean you should? How do you know Obama is correct? He's been wrong about virtually everything else in his admin.
Disgusting as usual response from the opposers and wanna be 'deciders'. Not a surprise...but really...do lobbyists and other strategists want to spoil the planet for their offspring and generations to come? make deadly choices for all living things? rhetorical inquiry. One is hard pressed to develop a reasonable response or even dialogue with such stupidity and arrogance.
Reflex response to this topic, along with gun control background measures, reflect pure greed. Good night & good luck.
Reflex response to this topic, along with gun control background measures, reflect pure greed. Good night & good luck.
6
No kidding. A couple of leaked memos from coal companies and our conservative reps out here showed they wrote their response to the rules at least a month before the final rule was even promulgated. They just don't care whether the rules are legal, viable or doable. If it came from this administration since 2008, their knee jerk reaction occurs every time, we are opposed. If you did it slyly enough, you could get a conservative to denounce the sunrise if Obama put out an executive order in favor of the sun rising tomorrow.
17
Clean energy will require innovation and new industrial development. It's hardly a surprise that the obsolete carbon-based industries are against it.
Time to close some of the law schools and redirect their students into more productive careers. And time for some stooge-shaming, of which we don't seem to have nearly enough.
Time to close some of the law schools and redirect their students into more productive careers. And time for some stooge-shaming, of which we don't seem to have nearly enough.
8
Yeah maybe we can put those wannabe lawyers to work digging the holes for windmill foundations, with shovels.
1
"Compassion" - Nice one McConnell. The entrenched, complacent, and arrogant interests of the powerful are running scared, but have plenty of $ to dig in for the long haul. This is why HRC or BS needs to win in 2016.
7
Thank you Mr President Obama the World must take social economic and environmental sustainability measures Happy Sustainability 2015
6
"The [anti-climate change regulations] group — headed in part by Roger R. Martella Jr., a top environmental official in the George W. Bush administration..."
So, on top of a decade of record corporate tax breaks, a decade of bogus wars for corporate profit, and a decade of Wall Street Run Wild, an anti-climate change regulation expert "served" as a top environmental official in the George W Bush administration?
Can anyone wonder why Little Brother Jeb is breaking all previous fund raising records?
So, on top of a decade of record corporate tax breaks, a decade of bogus wars for corporate profit, and a decade of Wall Street Run Wild, an anti-climate change regulation expert "served" as a top environmental official in the George W Bush administration?
Can anyone wonder why Little Brother Jeb is breaking all previous fund raising records?
8
7 years of 'move to fight' Obama.
Imagine a United States where the POTUS had a group that would have worked with, rather than fight him at every step.
Best part, the GOP once again arguing against their own positions. Ridiculous.
Imagine a United States where the POTUS had a group that would have worked with, rather than fight him at every step.
Best part, the GOP once again arguing against their own positions. Ridiculous.
14
The Koch brothers and their brethren, labored hard to pollute public opinion with misinformation about coal deleterious effects on health and lifespan. A big thrust of this misinformation campaign was centered around "clean" coal, which simply means less filthy coal. But at what cost? When China tried to build a less filthy coal power plant, they bulked at cost, which is many times more expensive than nuclear. Of course nuclear electricity is no bargain as it is increasingly becoming more expensive compared with wind power.
Obama will win this one against the dirty energy lobby. Market forces are on the president's side, especially if we factor in what we pay to doctors, pharmacies, and hospitals for bronchitis and asthma. The medical costs should be factored in the cost of electricity in public utility decisions. Soon the Koch brother's and the all fossil fuel industries will experience what the Luddites of the 19th century experienced when they tried to stop progress. The anti-science present day Luddites will vanish too.
Obama will win this one against the dirty energy lobby. Market forces are on the president's side, especially if we factor in what we pay to doctors, pharmacies, and hospitals for bronchitis and asthma. The medical costs should be factored in the cost of electricity in public utility decisions. Soon the Koch brother's and the all fossil fuel industries will experience what the Luddites of the 19th century experienced when they tried to stop progress. The anti-science present day Luddites will vanish too.
9
What happened to the Republic? We have an elected Congress and Senate who need to weigh in on matters that involve us all. Skyrocketing electric bills-on purpose might be an area where we, the governed, need to approve of. We are the government -not the Times editorial board or the Democratic Party Platform!
Obama is using the un-elected and unaccountable subsets of our government (the courts and the appointed ones) to impose far reaching and economically painful controls on our energy supply and the kicker is: it will do NOTHING that Obama says it will do!
How in the world will closing coal fired generators in America-while the 2nd and 3rd world are INCREASING THEIR co2 output- do anyone any good at all? Except, perhaps to cripple our already weak economy further.
And who pays the bill for this junk science? Those who can least afford it.As always.
Not only will this "mandate" do nothing, cost far more than forecast and destroy parts of the country that are already in trouble but Obama has NO authority to do so to begin with! We elected a chief executive; not a Dictator.
Someone, should tell Obama that.
Obama is using the un-elected and unaccountable subsets of our government (the courts and the appointed ones) to impose far reaching and economically painful controls on our energy supply and the kicker is: it will do NOTHING that Obama says it will do!
How in the world will closing coal fired generators in America-while the 2nd and 3rd world are INCREASING THEIR co2 output- do anyone any good at all? Except, perhaps to cripple our already weak economy further.
And who pays the bill for this junk science? Those who can least afford it.As always.
Not only will this "mandate" do nothing, cost far more than forecast and destroy parts of the country that are already in trouble but Obama has NO authority to do so to begin with! We elected a chief executive; not a Dictator.
Someone, should tell Obama that.
1
Pay attention. Your elected leaders are doing nothing. As usual, President Obama, the only adult in the room, is leading on an issue that impacts us all.
6
Nonsense, the Clean Air Act has been passed by Congress and law for decades. It gives the EPA power to promulgate new regulations, as needed.
4
You know, here in New England we saw our lakes turning into acid ponds, killing all fish and life in them. Computer models and measurements pointed to the sulfur from coal and we started working hard on legislation that would reduce sulfur - cap and trade was the name. Many said it was too expensive, unworkable, would destroy the power industry in the Ohio valley, just as you say. Yet a decade later, after the legislation went into effect, the cost was 1/10th the estimated cost, the sulfur reduced, and the lakes came back. See, it is possible.
1
Note to President Obama & Democrats:
You are incapable of making the climate colder or hotter.
That task is left to God
You are incapable of making the climate colder or hotter.
That task is left to God
2
The Man with No Name:
Which commandment is that? I seem to have missed it.
But Genesis 1:28 does say
And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
I don't think that "subdue it" means "wreck it."
Which commandment is that? I seem to have missed it.
But Genesis 1:28 does say
And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
I don't think that "subdue it" means "wreck it."
2
Do you have any evidence to support that assertion?
2
Which god? The God of the Almighty Dollar?
2
America is reaping what we sowed decades ago when we allowed a few ignorant mrons without a lick of chemistry or any knowledge at all to convince the public that nuclear energy was too dangerpous to use. Now, it is obvious that not only was it always dsafer than it's enemies claimed but it is far cleaner, more efficeint and cheaper. The main winners in the end of the boom in reactor building which ended some thirty years ago with the non-disaster at 3 mile island meltdown that didn't leak, have been big coal, big oil and big gas. All the hydrocarbons are the villains in the cooking of the planet and we are like the frog in the science experiment, which sits in a bath, a flame under it warming the water, but apparently isn't aware it is being boiled alive and, as a result, makes no move to escape.
There are no clean hydrocarbons but we could put lots of miners and oil workers on a payroll building nuclear reactors. They might be expensive but they last over 50 years and, hopefully, they can carry the world to a time when solar energy is actually efficient enough to take over with proper infrastructure. It's cheaper than getting cooked to death.
There are no clean hydrocarbons but we could put lots of miners and oil workers on a payroll building nuclear reactors. They might be expensive but they last over 50 years and, hopefully, they can carry the world to a time when solar energy is actually efficient enough to take over with proper infrastructure. It's cheaper than getting cooked to death.
3
Much of the energy we use, is to power cars, trucks, trains, and planes. Unless we replace all of these with electric cars, trucks, trains, and planes, we're only solving part of the global warming problem. Gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel have LOTS of energy per volume and per weight.
Are you kidding? What about Japan?!
There is a better, cleaner, safer, cheaper, more adaptable nuclear technology called the Liquid fluoride thorium reactor - Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor.
Someone, somewhere, please name just one thing that Republicans propose that would help the citizenry at large, and by extension our nation and the world.
Just one thing that is not focused on the 1%.
Anyone?
Just one thing that is not focused on the 1%.
Anyone?
15
Umm, after wracking my brain I can't think of one thing the radical right wing so-called conservative republicans have done for American society in the past 3 decades. However, I can recall the ill they have done to us and the further ill they hope to do to us in the future if they ever get their filthy greedy hands on all three branches of government.
1
No matter what Obama does or proposes, the Republicans are against it. Maybe Obama should use reverse psychology and proclaim that global warming is a myth and that coal is actually good for the climate. He could also come out in favor of giving everybody a government-issued gun and proclaim that if you get sick it's your own damn fault and you can figure out how to pay for care or die.
10
Veblen distinguished "business" from "industry"--one aims at production benefiting society; the other aims at making money and transferring to society its costs and harms--raw material, raw sewage and other pollution.
When "business" controls government, we get the real "tragedy of the commons"--air, water (oceans, rivers, ground water) even soil become its legal cesspool. This is spun as "economic incentive."
When "business" controls government, we get the real "tragedy of the commons"--air, water (oceans, rivers, ground water) even soil become its legal cesspool. This is spun as "economic incentive."
5
I wish President Obama or someone would get on the stage with a bunch of adorable children and talk about things like the acidification of the seas. It's already starting. If the smallest ocean creatures disappear, what happens to the entire food chain? The passenger pigeon didn't disappear gradually. Once a tipping point was reached, they disappeared virtually overnight. Couldn't Tom Steyer or Al Gore put up some commercials with adorable kids (again) asking Mitch McConnell et al some pointed questions about the future.
P.S. Isn't it interesting that Jeb! and Marco Rubio are hanging out with the oil extracting Kochs while Tampa is flooding like it never did before? What if this happens again next year? Don't they think people will notice?
P.P.S. I find Bernie's stump speech is a call to arms that people will keep answering when more people hear it for the first time.
P.S. Isn't it interesting that Jeb! and Marco Rubio are hanging out with the oil extracting Kochs while Tampa is flooding like it never did before? What if this happens again next year? Don't they think people will notice?
P.P.S. I find Bernie's stump speech is a call to arms that people will keep answering when more people hear it for the first time.
34
Obama is assuming China will be compelled to adapt the same measures? The only thing China will do is gladly take all the business that comes its way when our energy costs skyrocket. Its just simple economics.
2
It is amazing how people asume that global warming is a myth and that they will not be affected by it. It does not matter if the pollution comes from the US or China, the whole planet will suffer. So someone, at some point has to start changing. I think it is a bold move by Obama, good for him.
I stand with Pres. Obama as do most of the commenters here on this issue. There are many excellent comments today supporting the president's climate plan strategy.
7
Compel China to take similar steps. China by far and away the biggest polluter.
I wonder what it is like to get up and put on the rose colored glasses.
I wonder what it is like to get up and put on the rose colored glasses.
To tomjoe9:
So when you are in danger, do you just sit there and wait for someone else (i.e., China) to take action on your behalf? Seems to me, the smart thing to do is to try to decrease the danger yourself. By working through the problems of pollution, the US stands to gain in technological advancements and potential income from the design and manufacture of devices that reduce the impacts of dirty forms of energy. Look to Europe, where hotels use room keys to ensure that electricity is off, when the occupant is out of the room. Look at the wind energy that they use in places like France. Don't just sit there and say that it's someone else's job to start working on solutions to climate change.
So when you are in danger, do you just sit there and wait for someone else (i.e., China) to take action on your behalf? Seems to me, the smart thing to do is to try to decrease the danger yourself. By working through the problems of pollution, the US stands to gain in technological advancements and potential income from the design and manufacture of devices that reduce the impacts of dirty forms of energy. Look to Europe, where hotels use room keys to ensure that electricity is off, when the occupant is out of the room. Look at the wind energy that they use in places like France. Don't just sit there and say that it's someone else's job to start working on solutions to climate change.
1
The effect of carbon dioxide does not recognize international borders. Clean up our own house. Stop pointing fingers at others and do something here NOW. Why aren't we building solar equipment factories in coal states to help them replace jobs lost to coal? Let's make these jobs more numerous, better paying, and safer than mining jobs. Let's turn coal promoters into job holders who have a stake in a renewal energy!
4
Obama did. See the November climate change deal.
1
Enlightened, and wealthy, people have been investing in renewable energy generation, storage, transmission (through changes in despatch rules) and distribution for many years. The NYT should note that at least 365 corporates co-signed a petition in favor of the proposed rules, as has the Advanced Energy Economy. Anyone who still defends coal is an ignorant fool who has not been paying attention. Now, States whose leadership has kept them coal dependent have an excuse for finally diversifying their economies. Too bad for the Republicans.
9
The dat will come when man made global warming will be debunked.
2
Obama's action is welcome and will hopefully have longterm consequences. If nothing else, the threatened legal actions by various states should help to clarify the effectiveness of the Clean Air Act and other EPA authority in addressing core issues regarding climate change. The opposition of the coal industry is longstanding. A continuing battle between industrial and environmental concerns is inevitable and needs to be dealt with on by all political and legal means.
3
Obama is right. He pledged when he first ran for office to combat climate change, and he chose his time well. The short-term greed of his opponents on this issue is appalling and transparent. We are well into the anthropocene, the layer in the fossil record that will contain us all (fossil fuel of the future?). As is well documented in Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes, the strategy of the opponents is not to prove anything, but merely to create doubt. It's too late for us to play that game.
6
Also on the NYT "Methane Leaks May Greatly Exceed Estimates, Report Says" - methane, one of the most potent greenhouse gases is common in the extraction of natural gas...which the U.S. is moving more towards from coal.
If you think natural gas is "cleaner" than coal - you need to look at the whole production process, not just the power plants.
Thinking that you'll solve global warming by swapping one out for the other is short-sided and will NOT have the desired results.
If you think natural gas is "cleaner" than coal - you need to look at the whole production process, not just the power plants.
Thinking that you'll solve global warming by swapping one out for the other is short-sided and will NOT have the desired results.
13
When we were growing up we heard Aesop's fable of the "Grasshopper and the Ant." I always thought the ant was the paradigm but it seems like the grasshoppers have prevailed, and have morphed into locusts. It is both sickening and despicable that our political systems around the world will succeed in destroying the only place in which we live. Beware, all you 1%ers busily building your compounds which now shield you from reality - the Earth will not care. We are all equal in its eyes.
34
Republican politicians are badly out of whack with the American people on this. Not just with the average American, but even with conservative Republicans and non-college educated people and other groups you'd assume would match up with the views of Republican politicians pretty well- http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/climate-change-polls
2
Of course the billionaires and Republicans want to continue destroying our world and collecting their fortunes.
6
I honestly find myself unable to understand the views of climate deniers. Have they simply not done any reading to acquaint themselves with the facts? Do they sincerely feel that climate scientists are engaged in an extensive and elaborate deception? Are they aware of the facts but simply taking a cynical self-interested view? Hopefully President Obama's plan with survive the planned challenges. This will make the views of the deniers less relevant. If not we might want to gain some better understanding of their thought process so as to effectively counter it.
6
David
The problem is that Climate Change SKEPTICS... Is that they have done their research
They found that Univ Anglia that collected & distributed data to CC scientists... Had been. 'Fixed' to suit the needs of CC believers.
They also read the papers of scientist who at first were conned by these figures and changed their opinion on the man made effects of CC
It might be said that the jury is still out but without the involvement of China, India & Africa ... It is all a moot point
The problem is that Climate Change SKEPTICS... Is that they have done their research
They found that Univ Anglia that collected & distributed data to CC scientists... Had been. 'Fixed' to suit the needs of CC believers.
They also read the papers of scientist who at first were conned by these figures and changed their opinion on the man made effects of CC
It might be said that the jury is still out but without the involvement of China, India & Africa ... It is all a moot point
Look out. It looks like another in a long line of executive orders is on the way. As usual, Obama will bypass Congress and stick it to American manufacturing and taxpayers with more onerous greenhouse gas restrictions. Meanwhile, by treaty he "negotiated", China will be allowed to increase their own emissions each year until 2026. Just who does Obama work for, anyways?
3
And what will it be worth if you can't breathe or have water to drink? Bravo Obama for standing up for our future!
2
He's working for the world that our grandchildren will inherit.
2
Like all politicians, he works for the voters who elected him into office. In Obama's case, he was elected twice, both times with a sizable majority. He has a mandate to enact the agendas he stumped for on the campaign trail, climate change being one of them. And when faced with a congress who has de-legitimized him from day one, and who has refused to engage in the lawmaking process as designed in the Constitution, I'd expect to see more of this "bypassing" until he is no longer in office.
1
It seems really silly that the power companies and big coal spend all that money on lawyers and lobbyists when they could actually spend that money to upgrade their smokestacks and other things to protect the environment. NO, they spend their money trying to insure that nothing good happens if possible. BTW, on Marketplace the Radio program, I learned that many new technologies for energy have been implemented around the country due to drop in cost of wind and solar.
7
Hey, as long as I get mine, to heck with my children and their children. I want mine, mine, mine, as much as I can get.
10
The overzealous chronic attack mode on Presidential policies, including the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership, Iran Deal and now the Clean Power Plan, makes we wonder if Congress is trying to convince us that they are earning their paychecks -- We The People are seriously wondering why so much dissent -- checks and balances is not the process of registering perpetual nays!
Americans need to be the FIRST people on this planet accepting the realities of our global community in the year 2015, especially on climate change but on many other issues as well. God knows we're educated enough, and well-off enough to have the luxury of leisure time in which to learn beyond what we are taught in school. The main reasons that Americans have a global reputation as being a shameless pit of rapacious, unreasoning galoots are (1) Republican politicians and (2) corporate power over politics.
4
I would love to hear how these clowns address the fact (see Union of Concerned Scientist's "The Climate Deception Dossiers") that a coalition of fossil energy companies knew decades ago about climate change and their products' role in causing it, yet chose to implement a disinformation campaign to protect their profits. This attempt to dismantle regulations that finally begin to address the problem amounts to obstruction of justice. These companies should be held criminally liable for the damages that could have been prevented if not for their disinformation campaigns and purchase of lawmakers.
Even the Pentagon considers climate change an immediate threat to national security. How is it that the department of homeland security isn't all over these people? Oh, yeah... corporations are people, money is speech, and bribery has effectively been legalized. Way to go SCOTUS!
Even the Pentagon considers climate change an immediate threat to national security. How is it that the department of homeland security isn't all over these people? Oh, yeah... corporations are people, money is speech, and bribery has effectively been legalized. Way to go SCOTUS!
7
If coal polluting states think it's ok to pollute the air for everyone else, then maybe it would be fair for the rest of us to send our sewage or our garbage to them. Like everyone else, I have a choice. I can live in denial about climate change and air pollution, or I can accept the reality. The reality is plain to see for anyone who is interested.
4
Obama and his EPA chief are making a crucial error in how they frame the issue and are not fully gathering public support.
It's about climate and our future of course.
And it's about national security - number one threat we face according to the military (true).
But he needs to give big weight to this:
Everything we propose to do to lower carbon emissions is HIGHLY BENEFICIAL for our ECONOMY.
A transition to renewable energy is happening all over the globe and we cannot afford to be the odd man out.
-Fitting nillions of homes and businesses in every community with electricity producing solar panels creates local jobs and reduces utility expenses for people - that's great for local economies.
-Manufacturer of those panels, along with wind turbans, new, energy efficient appliances, cars and cutting edge energy technology creates jobs in America. Technology we can also export to other countries.
-Less energy cost puts spending money in people's hands and makes businesses MORE PROFITABLE. That's a winner.
-The losers are the polluters like coal plants and the oil industry. We'll have to help those dislocated workers, but we need not shed a tear for big oil or OPEC. Good riddance.
Fighting climate change is so good for our economy we'd have to invent it if it wasn't real!
That's the message Obama.
It's real money in American's hands!!
It's about climate and our future of course.
And it's about national security - number one threat we face according to the military (true).
But he needs to give big weight to this:
Everything we propose to do to lower carbon emissions is HIGHLY BENEFICIAL for our ECONOMY.
A transition to renewable energy is happening all over the globe and we cannot afford to be the odd man out.
-Fitting nillions of homes and businesses in every community with electricity producing solar panels creates local jobs and reduces utility expenses for people - that's great for local economies.
-Manufacturer of those panels, along with wind turbans, new, energy efficient appliances, cars and cutting edge energy technology creates jobs in America. Technology we can also export to other countries.
-Less energy cost puts spending money in people's hands and makes businesses MORE PROFITABLE. That's a winner.
-The losers are the polluters like coal plants and the oil industry. We'll have to help those dislocated workers, but we need not shed a tear for big oil or OPEC. Good riddance.
Fighting climate change is so good for our economy we'd have to invent it if it wasn't real!
That's the message Obama.
It's real money in American's hands!!
3
Maybe state attorneys general want to "put a bullet in this thing" but the people want action on climate change. They must be heard if we have any hope of reducing the most devastating effects of climate change.
2
I can't wait until Obama writes his presidential biography. I really hope he is one hundred percent truthful because it will be historic as to the destruction and turmoil the GOP have caused in congress and their racist attitude towards our president. As for the GOP and their greedy, money-hungry bosses fighting all attempts to protect and save our environment, we can just let it ride and see just how bad it can get before they are forced to face reality. It will, of course, be too late when we are facing irreversible destruction to our environment and it won't be very satisfactory to tell them I told you so.
3
THE AIR we breathe is everyone's business. Everybody has the right to breathe clean air. Coal miners included. While the coal industry, whose spokesperson in Congress is Mitch McConnell, believe that they are entitled to strangle others by continuing to impose the use of coal as fuel, we have a right to choose a cleaner option with less environmental impact. McConnell's efforts would be far more productive if he were to earmark federal funds for sustainable energy in Kentucky and elsewhere. But that would not be accepted for the 1% who own the coal industry. Their shill, puppet, courtesan and trollop, McDonnell, must fight for dirty air. Hey, a guy's gotta earn the dirty money that's bought his soul!
2
These companies know they are polluting/threatening the future - and don't care, marketshare is more important than country.
How UNAmerican is that?!
How UNAmerican is that?!
4
Here's a scandal. In New York City the local utility loses 60% of the energy that it generates to transmission inefficiencies. Imagine a car company trashing six of ten cars that it produces. It's unheard of.
Please see 7th paragraph:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/realestate/commercial/25cogen.html?scp...
I would imagine that this goes on all over the country. The people who run the utilities don't care. The utilities are monopolies and their profits are guaranteed by law. Tie utility executive salaries and bonuses to efficiency and watch efficiency go up.
Please see 7th paragraph:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/realestate/commercial/25cogen.html?scp...
I would imagine that this goes on all over the country. The people who run the utilities don't care. The utilities are monopolies and their profits are guaranteed by law. Tie utility executive salaries and bonuses to efficiency and watch efficiency go up.
3
The title makes it sound as if the opposition to the plan is some sort of malign conspiracy, hatched in secret dungeons to ambush the President.
Be realistic (and don't slant your writing): Any major interest group plans, as early as possible, to advance its interests. That means anticipating the future. This plan is a slight stiffening of one proposed and widely discussed more than a year ago. The environmental lobbyists have been pushing in their direction for many years.
That's the way politics works. It's not news.
Be realistic (and don't slant your writing): Any major interest group plans, as early as possible, to advance its interests. That means anticipating the future. This plan is a slight stiffening of one proposed and widely discussed more than a year ago. The environmental lobbyists have been pushing in their direction for many years.
That's the way politics works. It's not news.
Pro pollution? No wonder they are anti-healthcare!
4
"...devising a strategy for dismantling President Obama’s climate change regulations before he had even put forth a draft proposal."
Isn't that typical of all those groups? They have not even seen a draft and they are forming a fight plan. It doesn't matter to this bunch that we and our children and grandchildren are now and will be choking on their air pollution.
All they want is money and more of it and to heck with the health risks. They can't settle for just a medium size pot full of money. They want every last dollar they can get their hands on. Now that's a prime example of "unfettered capitalism."
Isn't that typical of all those groups? They have not even seen a draft and they are forming a fight plan. It doesn't matter to this bunch that we and our children and grandchildren are now and will be choking on their air pollution.
All they want is money and more of it and to heck with the health risks. They can't settle for just a medium size pot full of money. They want every last dollar they can get their hands on. Now that's a prime example of "unfettered capitalism."
5
This group of individuals are simply reprehensible. Their conduct displays a total lack of concern for the American public and the future of our children. They represent the worst in human beings.
4
So when your house floods in Miami or New Orleans or you can't get to work in Manhattan because it is also underwater, when your state is on fire out west, or when it's so hot that you can't go outside for the 5th day in a row, be sure to write a thank you note to the US Chamber of Commerce. Those days are coming and we should all let them know how much we appreciate their service.
7
Why does no one ever mention our out of control global population growth? It's the elephant in the room - if we had a stabilized global population, strain on resources and the impact of pollution would be finite problems with which to contend.
1
It is astonishing how willfully blind and intransigent the Republicans are about global warming. The almighty dollar seems to be so sacred to them that they would sacrifice all of life on this planet in pursuit of it. This is no game. It's very real. Yet these people have shut off their hearts and minds completely.
I cannot understand this position. There is plenty of money to be made and new jobs created in the sustainable energy industry. Why haven't these efforts been wholeheartedly embraced and supported? Two hundred years ago we didn't have an oil and gas industry, but people were still able to become wealthy. It simply makes no sense to kill the planet and ignore the science for some short term gain. The blind selfishness of it is astounding. Those of us who would save our planet must act to counter these people, these corporations.
Meanwhile, we know what motivates Mr. McConnell: racism. He vowed the day after President Obama was elected to thwart and undermine every effort, every work this president would do. In all my long years, I have never heard such blatant destructive talk by a prominent member of Congress. It's one thing to disagree, but quite another to wage such a war on everything a President does, even things initially put forward by Republicans, like voting down their own jobs bill because the POTUS supported it.
It's madness, and these climate deniers are madmen. We must thwart them if their own grandchildren are to have a future.
I cannot understand this position. There is plenty of money to be made and new jobs created in the sustainable energy industry. Why haven't these efforts been wholeheartedly embraced and supported? Two hundred years ago we didn't have an oil and gas industry, but people were still able to become wealthy. It simply makes no sense to kill the planet and ignore the science for some short term gain. The blind selfishness of it is astounding. Those of us who would save our planet must act to counter these people, these corporations.
Meanwhile, we know what motivates Mr. McConnell: racism. He vowed the day after President Obama was elected to thwart and undermine every effort, every work this president would do. In all my long years, I have never heard such blatant destructive talk by a prominent member of Congress. It's one thing to disagree, but quite another to wage such a war on everything a President does, even things initially put forward by Republicans, like voting down their own jobs bill because the POTUS supported it.
It's madness, and these climate deniers are madmen. We must thwart them if their own grandchildren are to have a future.
The captain of the Titanic read the report of icebergs ahead and ordered that full speed be maintained. Apoparently this tragic lesson has not yet been learned by our friends who oppose Obama's actions on climate control.
1
Fascinating, the folks charged with protecting the public trust motivated to do the exact opposite.
Just like ACA their motivations seems so divorced from doing things to actually improve lives.
Absolutely, morally bankrupt.
Just like ACA their motivations seems so divorced from doing things to actually improve lives.
Absolutely, morally bankrupt.
Sick and tired of the never-ending consumption, desire for more and more, political bigotry and finger pointing. There was a slight hope a few years ago that the green initiatives will pick up - but of course not, since it hits the profit targets of the corporate America, China, India - you name it. Yeah, let's just close our eyes and pretend the earth will figure out on its own how to patch the ozone holes. Let me drive to WalMart in the meanwhile and pick another cart full of things I don't really need. And don't you dare tell me I need to change my behavior - we all know it is China that is killing us all.
2
China is only feeding our appetite for cheap consumer goods that fill out backyards, closets, garages, basements, attics and finally landfills.
1
Cocodile tears, Mr. Speaker. "Honest compassion". Compassion for whom? the coal miner or the funders of ALEC? the people that want clean air to breathe of the Koch Brothers? the people that want the earth to survive man's onslaught, or the oil industry?
These people that have put together this legal challenge are lucky. Because they have the Supreme 5 in their corner and they know it.
This is a very important moment. Let's hope they lose. If they don't lose, we all lose.
These people that have put together this legal challenge are lucky. Because they have the Supreme 5 in their corner and they know it.
This is a very important moment. Let's hope they lose. If they don't lose, we all lose.
2
Just came back from Bangladesh, a country the seize of New Jersey and 160 million people. There indeed they have serious water and air quality problems caused by humans. Perhaps the EPA should move to that part of the world and practice their new rules - would be more productive.
“It represents a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion,” McConnell added.
Once could easily say the exact same thing about the representatives from Appalachia's refusal to read the writing on the wall and actually do something to ease the transition for their constituency. I do hope that one day these charlatans will be forced to answer for selling their constituents out and setting an entire region back a generation.
Once could easily say the exact same thing about the representatives from Appalachia's refusal to read the writing on the wall and actually do something to ease the transition for their constituency. I do hope that one day these charlatans will be forced to answer for selling their constituents out and setting an entire region back a generation.
5
Excuse me but Kentucky doesn't "...stand to suffer..." under these new environmental regulations. There will be short term disruptions and the coal industry will be further hard pressed to remain an economically viable source of energy. Over the past decades the TOTAL cost of mining, moving, and burning coal to produce energy has NOT been carried by the coal industry itself. Rather, much of the burden has been shifted to the rest of the state's residents. It will take decades to clean up all of the acid drainage, siltation, erosion, heavy-metal contamination, coal refuse and coal ash disposal sites. As it is now there are limits on the number of fish that can be eaten from many of the state's waters due to Mercury contamination from coal combustion. No one has really assessed the damage done by the dioxin emitted over the decades and how persistent it is in the environment. Due to allowing extended weight coal haul trucks on state highways, major arteries like US 23 need major refurbishment. Residents along such routes have paid higher insurance rates and have had to endure increased maintenance costs on their vehicles. Kentucky has been slow to adopt alternate sources of sustainable energy as a result of over reliance on coal. However, natural gas is providing an interim source of energy that should mitigate the closure of coal fired plants many that are obsolete anyways. Coal is no longer a significant segment of this state's GDP. We will do fine. Politicians will suffer.
3
Scott Walker has already come out against it. He should be personally sued by neighboring states. People near Madison, WI should personally sue him for the huge chimney, belching noxious smoke, right near the State Capitol.
Any state that borders a state which refuses to comply should be likewise sued.
Lawsuits? They like 'em! Turnabout is FairPlay.
Any state that borders a state which refuses to comply should be likewise sued.
Lawsuits? They like 'em! Turnabout is FairPlay.
4
Let's make this about people and drop the conservatives v.s. liberals mentality. We all need to have clean air and water. Let's do what we need to do to make that viable. Forget about the Fox news catch phrases. Educate ourselves. Do pesticides cause illness and destroy the ecosystem? Yes. Do accidents by for profit companies destroy ecosystems? Yes. Do the wealthy travel on private planes and 'spew'? Of course and they feel entitled to. Until we separate money from what is healthy for the earth, a place we all freely use, the earth will suffer absolutely. We must know that this is all about corporate profit and as corporate personhood, in my opinion, is a legal fiction: we must cease and desist and enforce laws that reject further destruction.
2
Why does it so often seem that Republicans love to be on the wrong side of history?
This latest example of their benighted obstinacy causes any sane and moral person to stand in wonderment. How can so many educated, well placed leaders be so wrong?
Are greed and the contempt for government such strong and motivating factors as to bring about the sheer disdain for reason?
This latest example of their benighted obstinacy causes any sane and moral person to stand in wonderment. How can so many educated, well placed leaders be so wrong?
Are greed and the contempt for government such strong and motivating factors as to bring about the sheer disdain for reason?
3
Many are in fact not "well educated" enough to govern.
Yes – greed & the benefits of having power trump reason and empathy for bigots & free marketers.
Yes – greed & the benefits of having power trump reason and empathy for bigots & free marketers.
My advice to small business owners in every corner of this nation:
Tender your resignation from your local Chamber of Commerce and let them know that you don't support their consistently backward political agenda.
Give them a jolt right in your community and the backlash from tens of thousands of local businesses may get a message into their fossil brains at the national offices.
Nothing could be better for local business than their customers having more disposable income because their solar collector is reducing their electric bills.
More people with more money to spend in their local economies should be the first order of business for the Chamber and renewable energy provides that.
Oh, and fights climate change too!
I'm so tired of those Chamber dinosaurs!
Quit that organization!
Tender your resignation from your local Chamber of Commerce and let them know that you don't support their consistently backward political agenda.
Give them a jolt right in your community and the backlash from tens of thousands of local businesses may get a message into their fossil brains at the national offices.
Nothing could be better for local business than their customers having more disposable income because their solar collector is reducing their electric bills.
More people with more money to spend in their local economies should be the first order of business for the Chamber and renewable energy provides that.
Oh, and fights climate change too!
I'm so tired of those Chamber dinosaurs!
Quit that organization!
2
"Climate change" is not the primary reason for needed improvements in our environment. How many people can claim that illnesses and death are directly related to toxins in our air put there by combustion of coal and oil? That cost of fossil fuels is much higher than trying to associate fossil fuel use with "global warming". I wish the president would get off this "global warming" kick and focus on those much more important and immediate health issues.
A key element that is missing is the damage done by extracting coal, oil and natural gas to the land and water resources. The impacts to water alone are felt by all Americans. All US tax payers get to fix up West Virginia or Kentucky damage so far - not the state governments or heaven forbid the energy companies. Mitch McConnell wants something for nothing - on a scale that exceeds any public welfare - but that's so GOP, Koch brothers and corporate America. Cut entitlements but not corporate welfare.
3
Clean coal? The American Coalition for Clean Coal? You can't make this stuff up. Why should we put up with all that filth when we can now produce high tech energy at the same cost? And replace low paying, respiratory illness causing jobs with modern, hi tech employment. Fossil fuel is the past. Time to look to the future.
3
I have been hugely disappointed with Mr. Obama, and I voted for him, twice. There are many things that he could have addressed, but chose not too, proving his continued embrace of neolibralism, policies that have drastically changed the face of America. And this it further proof of his conflicted feeling with these policies and no wonder I am conflicted with his leadership. He wants to enact sweeping environmental restrictions but presses for TPP. But I will admit, that this article further cements that the elected leaders of Congress have NO intention of doing what is right for the American public, the country and the world, something I have felt all along.
1
Could have should have would have. Why are you disappointed when he tries each time and is squished not only by republicans but his own party?
1
We have about as good a chance of effecting climate change on Mars as we do of doing anything to really change our own in 30 or 50 years.
No, indeed. The newest Ice Age is coming, ahead of schedule, and carbon ppms are much too feeble an input to delay that.
Don't the snobby, haughty elites in the Establishment ever get punished or demoted for being just flat-out wrong on so many major issues and policies? Don't seem to. They just use PC bullying and misinformation spread by the drive-by media to frame all debates to suit their own perspectives.
No, indeed. The newest Ice Age is coming, ahead of schedule, and carbon ppms are much too feeble an input to delay that.
Don't the snobby, haughty elites in the Establishment ever get punished or demoted for being just flat-out wrong on so many major issues and policies? Don't seem to. They just use PC bullying and misinformation spread by the drive-by media to frame all debates to suit their own perspectives.
2
This ninth inning whining from the coal industry brings to mind buggy whip makers and all sorts of industries involved with horse travel when the automobile was emerging: they, too, cried the end of days were at hand. No one remembers them now.
Across the globe, investors, institutional and private, have invested more in green energy than fossil fuels. This is a permanent increase. Coal is a buggy whip dinosaur, and like horse tack makers of yore, the auto had sped them by.
Across the globe, investors, institutional and private, have invested more in green energy than fossil fuels. This is a permanent increase. Coal is a buggy whip dinosaur, and like horse tack makers of yore, the auto had sped them by.
6
Not the end of days... just the end of America. It's between Obama and Putin and the push of a button. We will be long gone because of them, way before pollution and climate change gets to us. Foolish, foolish people we are.
When will the sunken mass of BP oil in the Gulf of Mexico be added to the climate change discussion? This blob disrupted and is disrupting the Gulf stream, sending violent storms up the east coast.
3
So much ideological ignorance on display in these comments. Your grandkids will curse you as their coastal cities drown and their farmlands dry up and blow away.
5
Good. His plan is nothing but smoke and mirrors based on false "science", faked data, and more government regulations.
1
"Clean Coal"? Is that like "Healthy Cigarettes"?
6
Everything that ever came out of the Obama administration is immediately deemed untouchable by the republicans, mostly because they cannot fathom being governed by a black president. I believe many of these republicans in their heart of hearts know global warming is a true phenomenon but they have been bought off by the oil and coal interest and their source of power Is to keep spreading the misinformation that is the GOP line. Then we look at the real hypocrisy of the folks whose idea was to drown the government in the bath tub (the former tea parties ) now voting for Donald Trump because the government no longer works. Of course, they were the ones that destroyed it.
7
The Times reporting on the serious challenge of global warming has been outstanding. I am a fan of Coral Davenport because she makes a super effort to keep the readers informed on everyone's views.
Taking on the coal industry is probably as difficult as it was ito take on slavery. It is a huge industry & has generational wealth connected to it.
My feelings are that President Obama's team launched a fight which will last for at least 2 more terms or 16 years.
I believe that successful transformational policy can only be successful if all parties with an economic interests can experience an increase in income. I.e. ratepayers, will pay less, bondholders and investors will get a higher rate of return, and the variety of industries that support existing coal burning utilities will continue & make more money. It can be done but it will require increasing income up front with global warming benefits later. This usually requires the creation of a parallel electricity generating capability, like solar, that will create more & higher income jobs, lower priced electricity, etc.
So the goal is to achieve lower priced electricity as fast as possible & the legal means of allowing lower priced generators to compete in the market. In short, monopoly busters must be created & legally enforced. I would make an effort to develop a low-cost Thorium reactor to put on line & I would also push an international effort to put solar generators in space for beaming power to Earth.
Taking on the coal industry is probably as difficult as it was ito take on slavery. It is a huge industry & has generational wealth connected to it.
My feelings are that President Obama's team launched a fight which will last for at least 2 more terms or 16 years.
I believe that successful transformational policy can only be successful if all parties with an economic interests can experience an increase in income. I.e. ratepayers, will pay less, bondholders and investors will get a higher rate of return, and the variety of industries that support existing coal burning utilities will continue & make more money. It can be done but it will require increasing income up front with global warming benefits later. This usually requires the creation of a parallel electricity generating capability, like solar, that will create more & higher income jobs, lower priced electricity, etc.
So the goal is to achieve lower priced electricity as fast as possible & the legal means of allowing lower priced generators to compete in the market. In short, monopoly busters must be created & legally enforced. I would make an effort to develop a low-cost Thorium reactor to put on line & I would also push an international effort to put solar generators in space for beaming power to Earth.
1
"2 more terms" is 8 years, not 16 years.
"low cost thorium reactors" and "solar generators in space" are fantasies.
On the other hand, hydrofractured natural gas is rapidly putting coal and nuclear out of business. Legislation and regulation are not required.
"low cost thorium reactors" and "solar generators in space" are fantasies.
On the other hand, hydrofractured natural gas is rapidly putting coal and nuclear out of business. Legislation and regulation are not required.
Look at who is against saving our planet--generally it is those with financial profit in mind--Congress is pretty well paid for by these folks. Having a "public" debate in Congress is a waste of time because it just amounts to Repubs spouting the same old same old.
Climate change is happening now before our eyes and will continue getting worse. What a terribly sorrowful legacy for our children!
Climate change is happening now before our eyes and will continue getting worse. What a terribly sorrowful legacy for our children!
7
Of course, the Republicans were organized in their opposition. They are always clever and organized (and opposed). Too bad the Democrats can't get organized.
I'm sure the Republicans have a whole think-tank division in Bethesda or somewhere, hard at work creating ugly rumors and gossip about the Clintons, ready to feed to the press. Maybe they're in the same building with the Republicans doing opposition research on public schools, social security, medicare, and pensions. Remember their great meme that public school teachers are "lazy, greedy and incompetent"? Lots of people fell for that one--big success.
I'm sure the Republicans have a whole think-tank division in Bethesda or somewhere, hard at work creating ugly rumors and gossip about the Clintons, ready to feed to the press. Maybe they're in the same building with the Republicans doing opposition research on public schools, social security, medicare, and pensions. Remember their great meme that public school teachers are "lazy, greedy and incompetent"? Lots of people fell for that one--big success.
4
Many more people than on 9-11 will die or become ill
From the toxic fumes that from those polluting smokestacks continue to spill.
Death will come much more slowly for those with incurable ills
And my pals, the phamaceuticals, will sell many more pills.
From the toxic fumes that from those polluting smokestacks continue to spill.
Death will come much more slowly for those with incurable ills
And my pals, the phamaceuticals, will sell many more pills.
7
Carbon dioxide doesn't make people sick.
This writer is advocating better stack scrubbers. Probably a good idea, but NOT part of the current proposal.
Getting the facts right is the first step to getting people to pay attention to your opinions.
This writer is advocating better stack scrubbers. Probably a good idea, but NOT part of the current proposal.
Getting the facts right is the first step to getting people to pay attention to your opinions.
California is on track to to cut power plant emissions to 33% of 1990 levels, not 32% of 2005 levels, by 2020, not 2030. 33% of retail sales of electricity here will be from renewable sources by 2020. Roofs everywhere here are sprouting solar panels, fueling more and more electric cars that are quietly and cleanly gliding the roads. The best of those electric cars are made right here in California, creating thousands of well paid American jobs. In addition, California has a cap-and-trade carbon market in place, something that hasn't happened in the US as a whole because of Congress.
Obama's rules are nothing radical. He's just trying to get the rest of the country to catch up to California.
Obama's rules are nothing radical. He's just trying to get the rest of the country to catch up to California.
61
Sen. McConnell said the president doesn't want to work with "the Congress the people elected" but didn't note that "the people" also elected President Obama.
13
Many places have utility companies which offer an option of 100% non-fossil power (wind, renewable, nuclear, Solar). Every one who can should sign up for that option and help cut the legs off the coal industry.
3
Why does a corporation's right to make money trump the rest of the people's right to breathe clean air or drink clean water? This is the essential argument isn't it? That coal industry profits should come before breathing clean air. Does the coal industry deny that smog is a thing and it unpleasant for the people who have to live in it? The only clean coal is the coal that stays in the ground and is never mined.
7
How stupid this Republican Governors - the emission from coal generating power plants is a problem and without thinking of a solution to this problem, they are putting all their energy to fight Obama. Why the Chamber is not organizing a team to solve this problem - there are many options - clean coal, increase coal export, find alternative innovative use of coal. Modern mines are highly automatic - the loss of jobs is minimal. It is corporate profit that is the concern for the Republican governors. Human ingenuity has solved many complex problem - why not this one. The whole fight is nothing but these Givernors dislike for Obama.
2
The only fault in the proposed rules is in not giving full credit to safe clean carbon-free nuclear power. The 6% limit is purely arbitrary and unhelpful.
2
When do we get the clean nuclear power you promote? Chernobyl, Fukashima, Three Mile Island and San Onofre to name a few are not clean but contaminated our world with fallout. Oh and how about Hanford, which will take centuries to decontaminate?
It seems to me that no one needs to fight Obama's climate plan, because he's doing a peachy keen job of it himself. TPP, anyone?
1
The population of the earth keeps ballooning, so does the demand for energy.
We can have more efficient ways to harvest energy ( which, as we can see, is more easily said than done, both politically and economically ), but the pollution will only grow.
Shouldn’t we have similar push/awareness to drive down population as well ? I don’t seem to hear any talk about it, certainly not as much.
We can have more efficient ways to harvest energy ( which, as we can see, is more easily said than done, both politically and economically ), but the pollution will only grow.
Shouldn’t we have similar push/awareness to drive down population as well ? I don’t seem to hear any talk about it, certainly not as much.
2
What is the argument in favor of continuing to mess up the planet and deplete it's resources?
4
Unfortunately, the myopic view of Harry Reed and all these coal industry leaches should be viewed as nothing less than treasonous! it is truly beyond belief how these 'citizens' can not grasp the national Security implications of continuing on the path of environmental destruction and lack of energy independence. Yes we need a vibrant and strong multi-supply energy/electrical supply system, but propping up the aging and eco-disatrurous coal industry by fighting environmental clean air regulations and EPA steps is abhorrent, especially for someone in Reed's position and responsibility to the Federal Government. With new substantial natural gas supplies in this country why can't the coal fired power plants around the country be converted to gas?? Also, does anyone know what the electrical plants do with the coal ash once it is burned?? (Go to the latest 60 Minutes article about the Coke Brothers and Duke Energy!!!) How any individual, citizen, elected representative, and or state environmental regulator can support their conduct is also beyond belief!!! Again, yes we need electric power and through clean sources. Coal is just not how it should be done and the National environmental and security issues should be evident to this lobby; not their own self interests.
1
It's almost comic (perhaps tragicomic) to hear Sen. McConnell complain that President Obama is "tired of having to work with the Congress the people elected." Immediately after President Obama's first election, that same senator vowed to make him a one-term president. While that effort failed dramatically, it certainly showed what Mr. McConnell felt was his responsibility vis-à-vis working with a duly elected official (the senior official of one of the three branches of the federal government).
4
The move to fight ANY plans President Obama might propose started on November 4 2007.
14
Since when was coal mining such great work? You get to spend your work life far underground in a dark, dirty mine, breathing dust that sets you up for lung disease later on. You get to risk being buried alive in a cave-in.
Yes, it's a job with a paycheck, and it's a way of life miners and their families are used to. But it's not the only way of life they can lead.
How about retraining coal miners for less dangerous jobs doing some other things our country desperately needs? Like rebuilding our decaying infrastructure of roads and bridges and schools?
How about retraining miners to install solar panels on every roof in America? That should keep them busy for a while.
Yes, it's a job with a paycheck, and it's a way of life miners and their families are used to. But it's not the only way of life they can lead.
How about retraining coal miners for less dangerous jobs doing some other things our country desperately needs? Like rebuilding our decaying infrastructure of roads and bridges and schools?
How about retraining miners to install solar panels on every roof in America? That should keep them busy for a while.
38
Didn't we have an announcement last week that the Federal Govt. has been called into investigate Kentucky as being the most corrupt State in The Union? Maybe Mitch and all those Coal owners are trying to close the door too late.
1
Just give us a list of who they are, so we can get really aggressive with our consumer boycott. If they don't care about the planet that's feeding them and paying their mortgages, we can starve them and put them out of business. Don't doubt that a group of consumers who don't want to contribute to the demise of their own nest won't STARVE those companies. They won't know what hit them. Watch.
3
In future generations there will be world wars over climate change, pollution, and the environment. These may be known as the Environmental Wars. The wars may be "hot wars" or they might be the new cold war between Europe, the US, Japan, and Canada, on one side. On the other side will be China, maybe Brazil, maybe Russia and North Korea. The great powers will fight over Eastern Europe and the third world -- will the smaller third world countries pollute for their economies or live clean for their health and their children? That will be the battle ground. Future generations will regard opponents of the Obama Climate Change Plan as traitors.
1
We cannot see the forest for the trees here. Please excuse the pun. The instinct to procreate is the real problem. No matter what we do to lower global warming without lowering the real problem, increased populations, the problem will increase that is until Mother Nature takes back total control of this planet and you know what that means, right?
15
As usual, deniers will keep shrieking their paranoia even as they benefit from the hard work the rest of us put in to help maintain clean air and water for ourselves and for them.
Deniers are utterly useless.
Deniers are utterly useless.
4
It's clear by now that President Obama should propose mining more coal, building more coal-fired power plants, scrapping vehicle fuel economy standards, defunding Planned Parenthood, etc. The Republicans will oppose all of it because they're so fixated on making sure that black man in the White House accomplishes nothing.
4
Mr. McConnell said. “It represents a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion,”
When it comes to blind ideology, conservatives are the masters, occupying a fact-free bubble unattached to real world consequences. If Republican governors are anything, it's intellectually dishonest. They pretend climate change is not a problem because their delusional ideology says they must. There is nothing resembling sound policy and honest compassion in the conservative agenda of Republicans.
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
When it comes to blind ideology, conservatives are the masters, occupying a fact-free bubble unattached to real world consequences. If Republican governors are anything, it's intellectually dishonest. They pretend climate change is not a problem because their delusional ideology says they must. There is nothing resembling sound policy and honest compassion in the conservative agenda of Republicans.
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
4
Does anyone discern connection with Citizens United here?
3
I wonder if this group of lobbyists and elite, and their families, realize that if they succeed, their actions will lead to the deaths of thousands of people.
In the not to distant future, we may be looking back at those who denied, and participated in weakening our response, as war criminals.
In the not to distant future, we may be looking back at those who denied, and participated in weakening our response, as war criminals.
3
The glaring hypocrisy about liberals is that they parade around the planet on private jets spewing tons of carbon into the atmosphere. They live in their mansions using major kilowatts of energy to power their extravagant lifestyles. They are ferried to and fro by limos in Beverly Hills, and the Hamptons sending untold amounts of carbon into the environment. Yes, these are people who gave hundreds of millions of dollars to get Obama elected twice, and they are very concerned about the environment !
This is the same you can say about a president who is the most traveled in the history of the presidency, and uses Air Force one to meander all over the known world to play golf. All the time spewing tons of carbon each time he gets a inclination to hit the links.
Obama can act a if he cares about the environment, but like most liberals it's all well and good to give edicts to protect the environment because you are not the one losing your job, and it's not your community going to hell because the coal mine or coal fired plant is closing. You will never hear a liberal willing to give up their lifestyle and sacrifice to make the world a better place, that's always left up to someone else.
This is the same you can say about a president who is the most traveled in the history of the presidency, and uses Air Force one to meander all over the known world to play golf. All the time spewing tons of carbon each time he gets a inclination to hit the links.
Obama can act a if he cares about the environment, but like most liberals it's all well and good to give edicts to protect the environment because you are not the one losing your job, and it's not your community going to hell because the coal mine or coal fired plant is closing. You will never hear a liberal willing to give up their lifestyle and sacrifice to make the world a better place, that's always left up to someone else.
So..do you agree or disagree that the GHG emissions need to be cut? You have produced a lot of text about 'liberals' without stating a basic position on this question. I for one am still waiting on the Republican party to simply acknowledge anthropogenic climate change is a problem. Let's not even get into producing a national plan that conforms to the laws of arithmetic.
1
I am a liberal. I do nots fit the description you share. I am not wealthy. I believe in our democratic-constitutional-republic as the best institute to date given the mandate to manage the commonwealth. If you have a better idea than that crafted by our enlightened framers, please present it. I believe in a liberal helping of our peoples' freely elected republic to choose the leaders whom we see fit to accommodate the changing times and to intelligently manage our shared commonwealth.
Sorry you are having economic problems, so am I. But we need a solution which creates a future - 'If it ain't broke don't fix it' has been the approach here. But it is broke. And the right wing narrative is about pitting different groups of people against each other. Not a solution.
Along with richer people, much of Obama's support comes from a very wide pool of people contributing small amounts of money - It's the republicans who have courted big, really big money.
Along with richer people, much of Obama's support comes from a very wide pool of people contributing small amounts of money - It's the republicans who have courted big, really big money.
1
clearly plenty of 'evil-doers' exist in the good ol' USA. too.
And defeating them is our patriotic duty !
And defeating them is our patriotic duty !
3
Do these people live money so much they would destroy a planet for it? Where will they enjoy it?
4
They are not intelligent enough to ask that question. Maybe they can escape Earth on a spaceship large enough to hold Neiman Marcus.
History is a wheel. Go back to early fights for worker safety and changes in the coal industry from the time of ponies and TNT. Nothing really changes but the date on the calendar; the rich fight hard to get richer on the backs of the poor and disregard our health and safety in so doing.
4
Disgusting , tho' sadly a totally foreseeable response by the detestable others. Stupidity . Arrogance. Selfishness? They and their offspring for generations or forever will reap the sad outcome s. Good night and good luck.
1
How about some follow-on reporting connecting the dots with regard to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, ALEC, producer state (West Virginia, Texas, Oklahoma, etc.) politics, attorney general campaign contributions, and of course, the Koch brothers?
3
Mr. Mcconnell seems adamantly opposed to sensible measures to minimize the damage to planet Earth by human-caused climate warming. Willful ignorance 'at its best', provincial really, unable or unwilling to see beyond his own nose. And clearly an act of spite towards any and all initiatives of Mr. Obama, a president adamant in protecting the rest of us from this well organized idiocy.
5
Mitch is oblivious to environmental considerations. He thrives on political power alone; that derived from the significant campaign contributions provided by the coal related industries and their associated PACs, His average constituents are a inconvenience to him until he needs to con them into voting for him. If he cared about them he would be advocating for them.
Frankly, I am sick and tired of the dead weight ignoramuses of the Republican Party. I am very glad, and proud, that President Obama is moving forward to combat greenhouse gas emissions and also climate change. This is desperately needed. This is leadership.
I also have no compassion for the histrionics of McConnell, Morrisey, Martella, and other Big Carbon puppets. The long term health of the environment and the human race is fundamentally more important than your short term profit and greed. Grow up. Time to evolve.
I also have no compassion for the histrionics of McConnell, Morrisey, Martella, and other Big Carbon puppets. The long term health of the environment and the human race is fundamentally more important than your short term profit and greed. Grow up. Time to evolve.
7
'climate change'; however, I've seen the damage done by solar and wind farms; and, nor, do the studies upon which Mr. Obama and his advisers rely, factor in solar activity and volcanic eruptions. Further to this, China and India emit more in a single day, than the US in a month: how are more draconian US regulations going to change all of that? I'm all for green, but what about 'fair share'?
1
8@8 headline from the great [coal] state of Indiana: "Indiana Balks at Obama's coal cuts." They have to be Obama's coal cuts because if the headline read "Indiana Balks at Coal Cuts", we would all want to know why we have to keep breathing all these toxic emissions when we have a bajillion wind farms running up in the Purdue area.
2
If we are still using coal in a decade, out problems will be much bigger than lobbyists.
2
It is hard to read this and not think Satan is real, unless God's plan is for my grandchildren to suffer and die in a hellish global warming landscape.
5
What boggles my mind are the unchallenged claims that "this will cost jobs". If we build wind or solar "farms" or even nuclear power plants won't that EMPLOY people? And let's not forget that coal mining is a lousy, dangerous job (as is drilling for oil on platforms out at sea). Memo to the Grand Old Polluters: it is the 21st century and many of us are getting tired for your clinging to 19th century technologies that aren't for people or the planet.
47
First, industry denied lead was a problem, mounting a huge PR blitz. Then they denied Tobacco was addictive and causes cancer. Now they deny a pollutant constantly pumped into the air on a staggering scale could cause harm. Onward with the PR Blitz again. For too long, this country has allowed corporations to put their profits ahead of the citizen's well being. It is time for the coal and gas industry to retool. Bring the miners out of the mines, and get them busy upgrading to solar and wind.
5
“There is no lack of state attorneys general who would like to put a bullet in this thing.”
Republicans love those gun analogies...
Republicans love those gun analogies...
3
If the media was on its toes about this story, somewhere this article would have said:
Despite Republican assertions to the contrary, the EPA is following the same process it did when, under President George W. Bush, new, highly successful requirements to regulate the pollutants that cause smog were put into place.
Despite Republican assertions to the contrary, the EPA is following the same process it did when, under President George W. Bush, new, highly successful requirements to regulate the pollutants that cause smog were put into place.
2
"Move to Fight Obama Started Early"
1
Coal is rapidly on its way to obsolescence. No point delaying the inevitable. Just give it up, people!
4
The only truly sound policy is to eliminate coal immediately. It is a HUGE contributor to climate change. Read "The Merchants of Doubt," and this will all make sense. It will likely anger you more than a little as well.
20
Read it and I highly recommend it too!!
The cost of solar panels is plummeting and a widespread shift from centralized power generation and transmission to distributed generation—each solar-equipped dwelling generating its own clean, emission-free energy—is practical and do-able in a way that hasn't previously been possible. BUT ... many people are reluctant to invest in solar even with the lower cost of doing so, because the financing structure that has evolved is one in which utilities install and "own" the panels and power generation, and lease them to home owners—a way for power companies to leverage their massive capital assets to stay relevant even as distributed energy would inevitably lead to a reduced role for power companies as a reliable back up source of energy rather than the primary provider.
2
The only rational explanation is that corporate America is bottling pure air from some mountain top and the CEOs and their lobbyists are planning to breathe it in their old age while their grandkids suffocate to death. What could be more natural than ignorance is as ignorance does.
Corporate America: Bringing Mad Max to your home NOW!
Corporate America: Bringing Mad Max to your home NOW!
3
Is there any law, any policy, any agreement that benefits the nation's overall health that the GOP support?
(PS- so where's that health care plan you've been working on for 6 years?)
(PS- so where's that health care plan you've been working on for 6 years?)
5
Early bird catches the worm... These hired guns are always out there, defending their clients bottom line- and the public interest be damned. The energy companies employ legions of scientists who, knowing full well the science, do what they are told. And all the rotten business, lubricated to a tee by Citizens United money. And once again, a shout out and thanks to Ralph, for the Court that so mightily helped to make this happen.
5
There is "elephant in the room here" that all the edicts, politics and legislation seems to be overlooking. Just where is the necessary renewable energy going to come from when the hydrocarbons are outlawed? Science obeys natural law... not the other way around.
We have a moral obligation to address this. From a moral standpoint, it already is too little, too late.
3
This used to be tedious. Now it is starting to getting dangerous. Dismantle, destroy and subvert may seem to the Republican bases to be some kind of guiding philosophy of governance. But by not offering any alternatives for dealing with a clear threat, these folks on the right have abdicated their responsibility to lead. There are some things more important than personal and political gain...survival being among them.
4
Obama, thank you.
7
The Mafia also has lawyers to flaunt and game the law. Why do you think the Mafioso army testifies against each other? To game the system.
The fact is that we pay lots of money to buy oil, gas, electricity, only to be attacked by those same energy companies we pay. I call it ; "Customer Servitude".
Senator McConnell is an old man with not many years left who apparently doesn't care much about the living, present and future.
The fact is that we pay lots of money to buy oil, gas, electricity, only to be attacked by those same energy companies we pay. I call it ; "Customer Servitude".
Senator McConnell is an old man with not many years left who apparently doesn't care much about the living, present and future.
6
Who the ell in his right mind wants to crawl down a hole hundreds and hundreds of feet under ground to dig for coal. The government should make coal digging illegal. But, the government should guarantee that these lost jobs will be replaced by siting US factories now located in Red China to these coal based communities. I am sure most coal miners would welcome the change.
1
Actually, many of the coal miners today use advanced technology, equipment and skills. These people are professionals at what they do when mining. Most are proud of their profession and ability to mine. However, even in the most safety conscious mines the work can be dangerous. It is unfortunate that the product they produce can have dire consequences for the environment. If this nation continues to use steel we will still need many of these miners to produce the coking coal so vital to steel production. We should not pity miners we should respect them.
It simply is amazing how all these people who benefit greatly by living in the United States can be so unpatriotic and un-American.
Their greed and blind self-interest takes total precedence over any concern for their fellow citizens, and the benefit and common good of our country!
Their greed and blind self-interest takes total precedence over any concern for their fellow citizens, and the benefit and common good of our country!
7
Follow the money. Pollution control and Climate change all depends on how much the Koch's and big energy thinks it will take off their bottom line.
Not to worry, I am sure our grandchildren will be able to buy respirators at a reasonable rate from one of the big energy folks.
Not to worry, I am sure our grandchildren will be able to buy respirators at a reasonable rate from one of the big energy folks.
9
Wouldn't it be more accurate to call Mr Martella an ANTI-environmental official in the GWB administration?
5
From Salon.com, 3/25/14:
As geochemist James Lawrence Powell continues to prove, the only people still debating whether or not climate change is “real,” and caused by human activity, are the ones who aren’t doing the actual research. In an update to his ongoing project of reviewing the literature on global warming, Powell went through every scientific study published in a peer-review journal during the calendar year 2013, finding 10,885 in total.... Of those, a mere two rejected anthropogenic global warming....
Very few of the most vocal global warming deniers, those who write op-eds and blogs and testify to congressional committees, have ever written a peer-reviewed article in which they say explicitly that anthropogenic global warming is false. Why? Because then they would have to provide the evidence and, evidently, they don’t have it.
What can we conclude?
1. There a mountain of scientific evidence in favor of anthropogenic global warming and no convincing evidence against it.
2. Those who deny anthropogenic global warming have no alternative theory to explain the observed rise in atmospheric CO2 and global temperature.
These two facts together mean that the so-called debate over global warming is an illusion, a hoax conjured up by a handful of apostate scientists and a misguided and sometimes colluding media, aided and abetted by funding from fossil fuel companies and right wing foundations.
http://tinyurl.com/k4kd52s
As geochemist James Lawrence Powell continues to prove, the only people still debating whether or not climate change is “real,” and caused by human activity, are the ones who aren’t doing the actual research. In an update to his ongoing project of reviewing the literature on global warming, Powell went through every scientific study published in a peer-review journal during the calendar year 2013, finding 10,885 in total.... Of those, a mere two rejected anthropogenic global warming....
Very few of the most vocal global warming deniers, those who write op-eds and blogs and testify to congressional committees, have ever written a peer-reviewed article in which they say explicitly that anthropogenic global warming is false. Why? Because then they would have to provide the evidence and, evidently, they don’t have it.
What can we conclude?
1. There a mountain of scientific evidence in favor of anthropogenic global warming and no convincing evidence against it.
2. Those who deny anthropogenic global warming have no alternative theory to explain the observed rise in atmospheric CO2 and global temperature.
These two facts together mean that the so-called debate over global warming is an illusion, a hoax conjured up by a handful of apostate scientists and a misguided and sometimes colluding media, aided and abetted by funding from fossil fuel companies and right wing foundations.
http://tinyurl.com/k4kd52s
8
Do these people not drink the water and breathe the air on this earth? Are they hiding their vacation homes on another planet? i know they are not all stupid so they must just be evil.
9
People were pro-slavery 150 years ago for the same reason:disruption of the economy. Where does a correct moral decision fit in when the economy might be disrupted?
34
When you are ignoring reality, and avoiding potentially disastrous certainty, I guess that it is important to start early.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
5
It's time for lawsuits against Mitch McConnell and all the fossil fuel minions. They are the ones most responsible for preventing action to limit dangerous climate change and they have done this damage knowingly. They must be hit by millions of small lawsuits, totalling trillions of dollars in damages, by people the world over. They and their heirs will need to continue paying damages for generations to come.
30
Obama's plans for the electrical utility industry have always had a "cost increasing" effect as the goal. "Under my plan electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NKzVvKIoLI
2
g.e.Taylor, in my neighborhood, many homes are adding solar under an initiative supported by our city and county. What will happen, is happening, is that the energy generated by the solar panels on our roofs more than supplies our home needs, and so the excess energy is then sold back to the utility company. This has worked beautifully in some places in Europe, Denmark for example, where enough energy is generated that there is excess to sell to others. It's a win-win for people, for the environment, and for the utility companies. I'm not young, live alone in little house, and use very little electricity. But if I add solar, my bill will go away, the panels will in the end pay for themselves, and my home will rise in value.
Who do these State Attorney General and members of Congress represent? Is it the best interest of the people or the best interest of coal and oil companies? Denying climate change is irresponsible. Once again the Republican Party is on the wrong side. Of history.
34
the state attorney generals and congress represent the people -- the EPA at this point represents a power mad president intent on leaving a legacy, any legacy, even if it's a nuclear Iran or a bankrupt economy with unreliable power.
The GOP speaks "What do we want done? NOTHING! when do we want NOTHING done? NOW!" the ONLY answer is (if the world can make it that long) is to vote 'em out!
Jerry Willard
NYC
Jerry Willard
NYC
33
I'm really sick of reading that someone is trying to ruin one of Obama's signature accomplishment. Why not, just for a change, doesn't this administration think about what is actually good for our country than what is good for his accomplishments? He is burying so deep in regulations and not allowing new job creation that we are sure to keep the poor poor.
1
It is the press that is writing about Mr. Obama's "signature accomplishments." I've never heard the administration say "this will be one of our signature accomplishments." Every administration has had - or wanted to have - such legacies, bthe difference is that the press now talks about them with this language. Stop blaming Obama for everything!
UH, seems like pollution control is a big one to me....for those of us with asthma, for instance.
Global warming adversely impacts the poor, in this country and abroad. I am sorry that Obama's attempts to make this county a better place to breathe frustrate you so. As to jobs, you might want to check in with the Republican led legislative branch (the ones that are supposed to make the laws) and ask them why NOTHING meaningful has been done.
One day very, very soon they will all have to answer this question from their grandchildren:
"Grandfather why did you work so hard to poison the earth, why did you leave me with a dying world, why did you do this to me and to my brothers and sisters? Grandfather, have you no shame and do you even dare imagine I will ever forgive you or not curse the name you gave me?"
"Grandfather why did you work so hard to poison the earth, why did you leave me with a dying world, why did you do this to me and to my brothers and sisters? Grandfather, have you no shame and do you even dare imagine I will ever forgive you or not curse the name you gave me?"
47
It beggars belief that so many people would organize to harm future generations, just to make a buck today. An army of lawyers and lobbyists - out to harm the planet.
Thank you, Mr. president!
Paging Pope Francis: your visit cannot come soon enough. With your message of love, compassion and care for the earth.
Thank you, Mr. president!
Paging Pope Francis: your visit cannot come soon enough. With your message of love, compassion and care for the earth.
20
Amazing that the Republicans have not voted to excommunicate the Pope who basically called out their morality or lack of. Instead the President is taking one for Team Climate Change.
15
Can't you hear the lawyers say: "Show me the money!"
5
Aborting the Earth's climate for a better tomorrow: GOP 2015.
18
If we don't have clean air to breathe and to sustain our crops, down the road nothing else will matter.
12
The world's burning, so let's defund Planned Parenthood. That'll show 'en.
17
This is just the ongoing temper tantrum Republicans have been having since President Obama's first election; if Obama is for it, Republicans are against it.
20
Yep. The Party of No.
1
Even if he says the same things as the Republicans did a few years ago, the Republicans will oppose it just because Mr Obama is repeating what they suggested in the past. They are like rebelling teens, Mr Obama being the only adult in the room.
2
Have the Republicans developed a plan of their own to reduce coal emissions?
If not does anyone have a quote from a GOP representative as to why not??
If not does anyone have a quote from a GOP representative as to why not??
51
Because the Bible says climate change is a great hoax, Inhofe wrote a book about it. Others buy, read and believe the book. Nuff said.
And the unending greed of the 1% continues unabated as they pump their stream of poisons into our shared atmosphere so they can make more billions and own our politicians. All Americans should know that the Chamber of Commerce=chambers of horrors promoting greed for the few and a dying planet for those of us who will remain long after these old men are buried and gone.
2
The arguments used by those who want to keep coal-burning plants going are using the same arguments that we heard decades ago.
When Germany began implementing cliamte-friendly technology, there was a lot of doom-saying about loss of jobs, expensive energy, blackouts, etc. Well we have not seen any loss of jobs, much to the contrary; certainly, energy has become more expensive by American standards, but you have LED lamps, kitchen appliances, washing machines and freezers that are super-efficient and help you conserve. In fact, I've cut my own expenses by using common sense and not wasting. Blackouts? No...
I say Americans have to realize the Profligate Age is over, and they have to begin thinking of the WORLD, not only of their own landmass for once. How about making saving energy a competition? Ditto cutting emissions? Now that would be competitions that make sense.
When Germany began implementing cliamte-friendly technology, there was a lot of doom-saying about loss of jobs, expensive energy, blackouts, etc. Well we have not seen any loss of jobs, much to the contrary; certainly, energy has become more expensive by American standards, but you have LED lamps, kitchen appliances, washing machines and freezers that are super-efficient and help you conserve. In fact, I've cut my own expenses by using common sense and not wasting. Blackouts? No...
I say Americans have to realize the Profligate Age is over, and they have to begin thinking of the WORLD, not only of their own landmass for once. How about making saving energy a competition? Ditto cutting emissions? Now that would be competitions that make sense.
40
Agreed. Guess what happens in life, change, and we have to change our habits. And guess what it's time for them to change and big business. They're just making it an excuse for being lazy and finding other suitable ways to create energy. I understand they're scared about losing their poorly paid mining slaves that they probably do not pay well. But they have the money to hire scientist to come up with new ways to create energy, but I guess that's just too hard for them.
Alec inspired lobbyists studied Orwell "rules."
Morrisey says the rule "blatantly disregards the rule of law ..." Blatantly is defined as lacking in subtlety; very obvious. As the speaker does. Rules don't disregard laws, people do.
"Rule of law" means ignoring well-defined restrictions to doing whatever you want. As in doing coal, ignoring restrictions.
The rule, he said, was made by "radical bureaucrats..." Alec decided on the word radical by looking in the mirror and thinking "doublespeak."
McKenna said "This rule was more aggressive than any of us could have imagined." Call war peace, call clean energy aggressive.
He says his people would "like to put a bullet in this thing..." What do bullets kill, rules or people? A signal from a sick unconscious.
Rules will "severely harm West Virginia..." Severe harm threatens physical damage. Ripping mountain tops off does severe harm.
McConnell claims it's all "deeply regressive..." Regressing to a less advanced condition - as Congress does. He calls it's a "a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion." McConnell's own reality, condemned.
Climate change? 2+2=5.
Morrisey says the rule "blatantly disregards the rule of law ..." Blatantly is defined as lacking in subtlety; very obvious. As the speaker does. Rules don't disregard laws, people do.
"Rule of law" means ignoring well-defined restrictions to doing whatever you want. As in doing coal, ignoring restrictions.
The rule, he said, was made by "radical bureaucrats..." Alec decided on the word radical by looking in the mirror and thinking "doublespeak."
McKenna said "This rule was more aggressive than any of us could have imagined." Call war peace, call clean energy aggressive.
He says his people would "like to put a bullet in this thing..." What do bullets kill, rules or people? A signal from a sick unconscious.
Rules will "severely harm West Virginia..." Severe harm threatens physical damage. Ripping mountain tops off does severe harm.
McConnell claims it's all "deeply regressive..." Regressing to a less advanced condition - as Congress does. He calls it's a "a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion." McConnell's own reality, condemned.
Climate change? 2+2=5.
4
Global warming / Climate Change still hotly debated in Scientific circles.
If in fact an issue ... How will China, India and Africa contribute to lessening the problem???... They will be the major contributors to the ' problem'
Since most Socislist countries seem to be the main proponents of Climate Change problems that allows them to add additional taxes within their countries
... Makes one wonder if it is not a trumpeted up problem to extort more monies to support their bloated welfare states...
And I include the U.S. As a Welfare State
If in fact an issue ... How will China, India and Africa contribute to lessening the problem???... They will be the major contributors to the ' problem'
Since most Socislist countries seem to be the main proponents of Climate Change problems that allows them to add additional taxes within their countries
... Makes one wonder if it is not a trumpeted up problem to extort more monies to support their bloated welfare states...
And I include the U.S. As a Welfare State
2
Global warming and climate change is NOT hotly debated in scientific circles. It is established fact that we are causing rapid changes in climate due to greenhouse gas emissions. 97% of scientists are completely on board with this. The other 3% might be paid by corporations to question the science. What's discussed in scientific circles at this point is how far into the problem we are. Recent studies are showing it's much worse than we thought in many ways. How can you not be on board with mitigating this problem? How can you look another human being in the eye, especially children and young people, if you would deny the obvious pending death of this planet for a buck?
Mitch McConnell is concerned that the regulations will seriously impact the economic well being of his state...Time for Mitch to go to Kentucky to see what his constituents do for a living.....There are about 12,000 coal miners working at coal mines and related facilities in the state..Coincidently, there are about 12,000 Walmart workers in Kentucky hawking Chinese products..Coal is not the game it once was because natural gas, its rival due to cross elasticity of demand, is cheap, clean and readily available..Mitch doesn't believe in evolution...neither in the science nor in the economics....
10
I have said before (but now I have the proof) that President Obama should come out in favor of *breathing*, and the Republicans would fall all over themselves saying "No!" (beacuse if he says it, whatever "it" is, they are "agin it").
Remind me ... what was that comment (by Hillary in a different context) about "a vast right wing conspiracy"? Hmmm ... They seem to be up to their old (and very tired) tricks.
I guess they do not consider you or me breathing to be as important as their turning a profit. They must think that they will be able to buy themselves and their children and grandchildren clean, breathable air that comes packaged in a bottle.
Remind me ... what was that comment (by Hillary in a different context) about "a vast right wing conspiracy"? Hmmm ... They seem to be up to their old (and very tired) tricks.
I guess they do not consider you or me breathing to be as important as their turning a profit. They must think that they will be able to buy themselves and their children and grandchildren clean, breathable air that comes packaged in a bottle.
14
Not only can you be too late, as the President said, you can also be too uniformed, as he is. The President gets and F on the science of climate change. He made the statement that we are there first generation to experience climate change. I guess those people that were here hunting wooly mammoths while glaciers covered most of the continents of the Northern Hemisphere didn't experience climate change as they melted. It is hard to get on board with the President when he is so wrong on the science.
1
Johne37179, Obama is right on the science, right on the economics, right on the moral obligation to do something about it. Two types of deniers: the ignorant, and the disingenuous. Which are you? If the former, consult the scientific literature before it is filtered through right-wing scramblers. If the latter, maybe listen to the Pope, and consult your conscience. In fighting this Clean Power Plan you are attempting to condemn people to death. Think about it.
And what happened to the wooly mammouth?
Explain his "misinformed" science for me. Because I am conducting my own research of acid rain and the pH balances are scary. As a person who studies science he's right about that. We are the first generation to experience the effects of climate change as polar ice caps are melting before our eyes. I do not think this happened in the 40's or 50's but please I challenge you to show me, please.
Move to Fight Obama;s Climate plan started early.
Move to fight (fill-in) Obama's (Fill-In) started early. How about before inauguration, at election, perhaps before drawing up contingency plans.
Move to fight (fill-in) Obama's (Fill-In) started early. How about before inauguration, at election, perhaps before drawing up contingency plans.
5
Does Bob Jones University now issue a degree in science denial?
If they offer this course in the fall perhaps we all should take it.
Starting 28 April, 2015, the University of Queensland is offering a free Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) aimed at “Making Sense of Climate Science Denial”. from "The Guardian"
If they offer this course in the fall perhaps we all should take it.
Starting 28 April, 2015, the University of Queensland is offering a free Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) aimed at “Making Sense of Climate Science Denial”. from "The Guardian"
1
Welcome to LemmingsWorld! On stage now, "Lemmings! -- the Musical." This fall, "Lemmings -- Mass Suicide on Ice" and in our Chapel, the new hit sermon, "So you thought suicide was a mortal sin? Fuggetaboudit!"
4
Whatever policy announcement the President addresses, it's sure to meet a vitriolic fight with the Republicans, big business and the climate change deniers. It was Pope Francis who captured it well when he said 'We are guardians of the planet".
13
" Mr. McConnell said he would do everything in his power to combat the rules, which he said the president had crafted because he was “tired of having to work with the Congress the people elected.”"
I think it is Mr. McConnell who is tired of having to work with the President the people elected. Twice. By the majority of all the people, not just the citizens of Kentucky.
All of the constant obstruction and plotting and scheming and whining and tantrum throwing, plus Ted Cruz, must be very tiring indeed. I for one, am exhausted by it.
I think it is Mr. McConnell who is tired of having to work with the President the people elected. Twice. By the majority of all the people, not just the citizens of Kentucky.
All of the constant obstruction and plotting and scheming and whining and tantrum throwing, plus Ted Cruz, must be very tiring indeed. I for one, am exhausted by it.
58
What could possibly be the argument for fighting cleaner air? Once again, we see the problem, when it comes to states being on board, and helping to move the country forward, they are disruptive, uncooperative, and for the most part bought. It should be clear why this country is going no where and why "regulation" is a dirty word to profit seekers at all cost to the environment and even the health of its own citizens.
1
Let's put the term "climate change" to the side for a moment and consider; whether or not we are getting warmer or colder depending on where you live;
the critical issue no matter what is: clean air, clean nutrient filled soil and clean water.
I hope once we eventually move forward on the needed new energies to clean up the environment that gem trailing , which is putting junk into the air all the time, will be eliminated as well.
To look up at any time and see these chemicals dispersing and then invisibly raining down on us is a crime against humanity and nature.
the critical issue no matter what is: clean air, clean nutrient filled soil and clean water.
I hope once we eventually move forward on the needed new energies to clean up the environment that gem trailing , which is putting junk into the air all the time, will be eliminated as well.
To look up at any time and see these chemicals dispersing and then invisibly raining down on us is a crime against humanity and nature.
1
President Obama in his speech mentions no less than the Pentagon's studies to bolster his case. Mitch McConnell - heard on the BBC's morning program by way of a contrarian - rambles about in general terms too much to be taken seriously, being seen as credible even slightly. Now, as I am able to express my opinions on this blog, to be able to make my voice heard and reach out to like-minded people, well, it is thanks to what was in embryo a military system; the Internet was in origin a network of communications devised by the Pentagon to stay in touch in real time. I feel strongly credibility starts on doers' desks rather than through constant Republican naysayers' stonewalling.
5
The GOP once again proves that it is the pollution party.
Sweden has power plants that burn garbage to make electricity and they have scrubbers on those plants that remove over 99% of the pollutants from the air before it is released. The plants are so efficient that they have had to start importing garbage to burn from other countries.
This would end all of our garbage problems and produce more than enough power and I have even heard that the Swedish government offered the plans to other countries for FREE but mine owners and oil company owners and all the other uber rich polluters in this country paid lobbyists and republicans to kill the idea before it ever got to the table.
The saddest thing in the world is that the US could be the best country in the world, the safest country, the cleanest country, the best educated country in the world except that we have republicans destroying the country faster than anyone can repair the damage they do.
Sweden has power plants that burn garbage to make electricity and they have scrubbers on those plants that remove over 99% of the pollutants from the air before it is released. The plants are so efficient that they have had to start importing garbage to burn from other countries.
This would end all of our garbage problems and produce more than enough power and I have even heard that the Swedish government offered the plans to other countries for FREE but mine owners and oil company owners and all the other uber rich polluters in this country paid lobbyists and republicans to kill the idea before it ever got to the table.
The saddest thing in the world is that the US could be the best country in the world, the safest country, the cleanest country, the best educated country in the world except that we have republicans destroying the country faster than anyone can repair the damage they do.
12
McConnell, and the rest of climate naysayers, should be regarded as criminals. For how long have these states, Kentucky, West Virginia, and others, been pumping poison into the air of other states with more responsible energy generation. Add to that the pollution of streams and rivers and the razing of mountains in pursuit of dirty profits. I guess the rising seas won't effect
Kentucky so much. Climate change is real, and the G.O.P. Would prefer to rot in hell rather than do what is right for the human race.
Kentucky so much. Climate change is real, and the G.O.P. Would prefer to rot in hell rather than do what is right for the human race.
9
Given the overwhelming--and it is overwhelming--evidence that humans are radically altering the environment, the only deniers left are those who have a deep ideological need for denial, and those who exploit them. Neither group will change its mind at this point, so good on President Obama for going ahead with his plan.
9
Mr. Morrisey's press conference was missing a couple of groups who should have a say in this issue, the Black Lung Association and the American Cancer Society. If he can muster those to groups, he might have presented a case with some touch of reality. Morrisey represents a small, but powerful segment of West Virginians, the coal mine owners who care little about the workers they employ or the land they despoil with their mountaintop removal. The only green they are interested in is that of the color of money.
5
The single most astounding thing to me is how all the Republicans claim to "not be scientists" in their defense of their opinions on the environment (which is what they are, opinions) yet this doesn't stop them from invading the rights Women have over their body, despite them "not being doctors".
Extremely embarrassing and shameful are the only two words I can use to describe anyone who cannot admit the scientific consensus on climate issues. Blame lies on both sides of the isle; Democrats are too timid and have yet to take these flagrant campaigns of misinformation to task.
True Americans can accept the reality of the world we live in.
Extremely embarrassing and shameful are the only two words I can use to describe anyone who cannot admit the scientific consensus on climate issues. Blame lies on both sides of the isle; Democrats are too timid and have yet to take these flagrant campaigns of misinformation to task.
True Americans can accept the reality of the world we live in.
7
"A group of lawyers, lobbyists and political strategists started devising a strategy for dismantling President Obama’s climate change regulations before he had even put forth a draft proposal."
And no doubt these lawyers, lobbyists and political strategists have the best, most humane interests of American citizens and our fellow citizens of the world at heart, especially the many millions living within a meter of sea level.
And no doubt these lawyers, lobbyists and political strategists are aware of human dependency on collapsing ocean food chains.
And no doubt these lawyers, lobbyists and political strategists pray every night for the safety tomorrow of our own smoke-jumpers and other fighters of forest fires in our flash-point, tinder-dry West.
I'm so grateful that America has so very, very many compassionate, foresightful, scientifically-aware, empathic and loving lawyers, lobbyists and political strategists. What would we do without them and their good works on behalf of us all?
And no doubt these lawyers, lobbyists and political strategists have the best, most humane interests of American citizens and our fellow citizens of the world at heart, especially the many millions living within a meter of sea level.
And no doubt these lawyers, lobbyists and political strategists are aware of human dependency on collapsing ocean food chains.
And no doubt these lawyers, lobbyists and political strategists pray every night for the safety tomorrow of our own smoke-jumpers and other fighters of forest fires in our flash-point, tinder-dry West.
I'm so grateful that America has so very, very many compassionate, foresightful, scientifically-aware, empathic and loving lawyers, lobbyists and political strategists. What would we do without them and their good works on behalf of us all?
10
How close to the coal power plants does Mr. McConnell live? The Administration has to specify exactly what remedies will be afforded those displaced workers - especially the "black lung" prone mine workers who suffer such a "dead if I do; dead if I don't" employment delimma. Ironically, Republicans in the affected states have no compunction against "interveneing" on behalf of poison producers; but fight to the last against financially intervening on behalf by those poisoned by them.
11
I can't wait until Obama writes his presidential biography. I really hope he is one hundred percent truthful because it will be historic as to the destruction and turmoil the GOP have caused in congress and their racist attitude towards our president. As for the GOP and their greedy, money-hungry bosses fighting all attempts to protect and save our environment, we can just let it ride and see just how bad it can get before they are forced to face reality. It will, of course, be too late when we are facing irreversible destruction to our environment and it won't be very comforting to tell them I told you so.
12
“It represents a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion,” (Mitch McConnel) That describes the Republican party since 2008 to a tee. These meetings are simply practice runs and brainstorming to polish their Double Speak and Newspeak where words have their opposite or double meaning.
To these conservatives everyone is equal. It is just that some, like oil and coal companies and billionaires are more equal than others or the rest of us or all of us. The bottom line is that these lawyers and corporate operatives mean to gravely injure the public or allow their principles to do so in the name of freedom and good government but they really intend to have corporate power replace elected government.. They are conspirators and while we cannot arrest them for criminal conspiracy we certainly can shun them and their employers.
To these conservatives everyone is equal. It is just that some, like oil and coal companies and billionaires are more equal than others or the rest of us or all of us. The bottom line is that these lawyers and corporate operatives mean to gravely injure the public or allow their principles to do so in the name of freedom and good government but they really intend to have corporate power replace elected government.. They are conspirators and while we cannot arrest them for criminal conspiracy we certainly can shun them and their employers.
12
How do we take back our government from partisan politicians so deeply vested in special interest money? This is certainly NOT the America to which I pledged allegiance as a schoolboy. This is a country that is fighting long-term survival decisions in favor of short-term personal wealth.
No, this is no longer the conceptual United States of America that I loved and admired. This is now something else entirely. Something really horrific.
No, this is no longer the conceptual United States of America that I loved and admired. This is now something else entirely. Something really horrific.
7
You've said it best, Ken.
Vote , in the last election the democrats received more votes than the republicans , but still lost seats . If only 4 % more liberals had voted we would be having a different discussion now .
The coal industry will eventually lose the battle unless it invests much more in research to find an economic method of removing toxins from the coal. The coal contains asbestos which is a known carcinogen. I'm willing to believe that David Ropeik and other scientists will perform epidemiological studies which will determine that coal is the major cause of the high instances of illnesses related to asbestos found in the area of southern California along I-405 between Los Angeles and San Diego.
7
If only. If only, back in 2014, those Friends of Coal lobbyists had spent that time, money and brain power on crafting a solution to our increasingly dangerous climate change problem, the EPA and the Obama administration
might have found common ground with the opposition. And we would have been that much closer to staving off disaster. Instead, it has been yet another case of stymie the president and ignore the fallout.
might have found common ground with the opposition. And we would have been that much closer to staving off disaster. Instead, it has been yet another case of stymie the president and ignore the fallout.
13
Yes. And to craft solutions to the impact emissions controls would have on coal industry and power plant workers. I feel my blood pressure going up every time I read some of their comments.
I'm glad we have someone willing to stand against the EPA and a President who thinks he's dictator.
Manmade global warming is totally unproven. The earth has not warmed since 1998.
Those who are so willing to close down coal-fired power plants and stop fracking to reach natural gas are going to wake up one day when the US has power shortages the likes of which we have never before seen in our history.
You can't store wind and solar. This will never be able to replace cheap, efficient coal and gas.
I wonder if President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Al Gore worry about climate change and carbon emissions every time they fly around in their big private jets.
These new rules are only intended for the masses not the elite.
Manmade global warming is totally unproven. The earth has not warmed since 1998.
Those who are so willing to close down coal-fired power plants and stop fracking to reach natural gas are going to wake up one day when the US has power shortages the likes of which we have never before seen in our history.
You can't store wind and solar. This will never be able to replace cheap, efficient coal and gas.
I wonder if President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Al Gore worry about climate change and carbon emissions every time they fly around in their big private jets.
These new rules are only intended for the masses not the elite.
2
You live in Santa Fe where solar power, all of the Southwest,could be providing electricity. Like that horrible plant on the Navaho Reservation....etc
You've never heard of batteries? They store wind and solar.
Man made global warming has been accepted by every single meaningful scientist on Earth, by the way.
Man made global warming has been accepted by every single meaningful scientist on Earth, by the way.
Did I miss the part in the article about the SCOTUS ruling and the EPA last month? Obama cannot just formulate rules and regulations and the EPA just cannot enact and enforce regulations without studies and cost benefit analysis. I see nothing on nuclear energy in the proposed rules.
Obama has driven the coal industry into bankruptcy and power companies are not far behind. Electricity at any costs is not an option.
AS far as the Pope, stick to religion and come out with encyclical and a moral obligation to end abortion upon demand.
Obama has driven the coal industry into bankruptcy and power companies are not far behind. Electricity at any costs is not an option.
AS far as the Pope, stick to religion and come out with encyclical and a moral obligation to end abortion upon demand.
4
Statements like "It will hurt the people of West Virginia" that you constantly see in the press should be followed by, "However the health of the people of West Virginia, currently hurting, will be helped by this plan."
There is a natural connection between religion and saving the earth. As a man of God, the creator, (as many believe) the Pope is the perfect spokesman for supporting steps against climate change. And... if we don't have a liveable earth, ending abortion is not going to matter. Climate change will end life on a far more massive scale than abortion.
The Republicans along with their unenlightened white supporters lack the foresight and honesty to communicate the costs of not addressing climate change. Their denial of the overwhelming scientific evidence that CO2 emissions are contributing significantly to global warming only exemplifies the Republicans denial of scientific data related to climate change among many other issues where the data clash with their unenlightened views and their total lack of vision. Americans need to stop voting for Republican candidates because they believe in sticking their heads in the sand along with the Republican politicians they are electing.
25
Because it is oh so inconvenient.
1
If I am to attack a problem, but only focus on one piece of the issue, like only 10% of the problem, yet still declare I am going to solve 90% of the problem, I am a fool. There is nothing the USA can do to reduce the build up of green house gases to a level that will affect the world's, the key word is world, emissions of these gases. The world, is going to keep emitting more and more greenhouse gases, because they can't afford policies like Obama's without causing short term starvation of people, which means riots and revolution. The solution is not the non-technical political solution that the Obama administration has come up with, but geoengineering.
But then why would political people come up with a practical solution?
But then why would political people come up with a practical solution?
4
Have you not heard about the upcoming meeting in Paris? The world is poised to attack this problem in earnest. The US is the lagging worst offender. This political move is designed to unleash and require technical innovation. The chaos in Syria is attributed to Climate Change from unprecedented draught driving starving masses into the cities. Geoengineering can do nothing to save the ocean, the source of 20% of the world's protein, from dying from acidification caused by CO2.
Forgive me, but bull puckey! The USA can lead the world and China will follow. The Chinese see the detriments to their business and the well being of their nation that comes from unfettered industrial pollution - and they're taking action. The rest of the modern world has already accepted that climate change is real and needs to be addressed - NOW. The arguments against taking action are "it's not going to have a sufficient impact to change the world". But change comes from many small factors - the journey has to start with a step. Why don't we take that step - shutter the 50 year old coal plants, stop clinging to the notion that we have to power our society on the decayed materials of the ancient past. The administration has proposed to enforce a rule that will help reduce atmospheric pollutants. Geoengineering solutions are a wonderful thought, but CO2 scrubbers, while entirely feasible, would require a massive amount of funding - and Congress won't even consider funding a shift to proven technologies.
Geoengineering is a nonsense solution. If we can't maintain the Earth, why would you believe we can fix it?
Who else is exhausted at the willful ignorance and regressive strategies supported by the GOP? I still struggle to understand how it is possible to vilify those who care about the environment and future well being of the planet Earth. Our President is taking steps to protect the planet. God forbid-- "These measures to improve the planet must be shut down to protect "clean" coal". May there be a euphemism for everything that is evil. Oh, but money will be lost you say? Middle class Americans will be affected you say? The end of life on planet Earth doesn't sound so great either.
The consensus of the worldwide scientific community might actually be right. And if they're wrong, God forbid, we will have created an environmentally sound infrastructure that is new, efficient, and cheap. How horrible.
The consensus of the worldwide scientific community might actually be right. And if they're wrong, God forbid, we will have created an environmentally sound infrastructure that is new, efficient, and cheap. How horrible.
Neither Kentucky or West Virginia are concerned with rising sea levels brough about by climate change; to these states that's an East and West Coast problem. Though both states have been ruiniously exploited by the coal industry it's factual that they are among the poorest of our states and are dependent upon the coal industry for economic sustenance.
Yet anyone who has travelled to or through either can't help but notice the natural beauty of unspoiled parts - those parts where the mountains haven't been leveled and the streams polluted. Unlike my home state of South Carolina, Kentucky and West Virginia and whole sections of Appalachia are not about to enjoy a manufacturing or high tech renaissance. The best and natural use for these states is to become a vast national park similar to New York's Adirondacks. That should be the future embracing reality.
Yet anyone who has travelled to or through either can't help but notice the natural beauty of unspoiled parts - those parts where the mountains haven't been leveled and the streams polluted. Unlike my home state of South Carolina, Kentucky and West Virginia and whole sections of Appalachia are not about to enjoy a manufacturing or high tech renaissance. The best and natural use for these states is to become a vast national park similar to New York's Adirondacks. That should be the future embracing reality.
1
"Its about time.." that efforts to reduce dependence on coal dealt rationally with the many contingent problems that result as one reduces the contribution of coal to the energy supply. These include: the major adverse impacts of closure of coal related economic activities and the secondary economy generated by coal revenues, concentrated in a few states with economies that are already severely depressed; intelligent use of immense natural gas resources as a transitional phase, rather than excluding them as a part of the effort; reaching out to affected industries and communities in a noncombative nonpolarizing way rather than catering to unbalanced "green" agendas. If Obama had made a good faith effort to reduce coal use in a way that reflected his responsibilities to all Americans, resistance might not have begun so forcefully and so early. But he declared war and is reaping the consequences. For all that the aggressive right has contributed to political conflict, Obama has also contributed as much or more in his second term. A host of moderates whose votes-not those of minority voters- put him in office in 2008 have long since been betrayed.
No one can seriously argue that Global Warming is not real at this point or that dire predictions of a few years ago were based on much slower estimates of the time horizon involved for most people to start suffering its unpleasant effects were too slow by decades. Just look at the draught in California and other regions, the unusually severe summer temperatures in Europe. I mean, it SNOWED on Crete where I live last winter at sea level! There are going to be some serious political dues to pay by those responsible for holding back efforts to deal with this world climate crisis while there was still a window of opportunity to mitigate it with more sensible policies. A hard rain is going to fall for the Global Warming deniers (but unfortunately the rest of us as well).
The party against everything progressive is not only adversely affecting the United States, they are greatly contributing to the destruction of our planet. The reasoning of the Right is so blinded by money and self interest that they can't open their eyes to the damage our energy practices have on the world. All the money is not going to matter one cent when the ice caps melt and the air becomes unbreathable. Of course they will blame it on President Obsma.
The President is going in the right path. This should be followed up by effective steps for reducing pollution mdrastically in Pharmaceutical, Bulk Drugs, Cement, Chemical, Sreel Plants, Plastic Industry etc. In addition effective steps should be taken for reducing pollution resulting due to all kinds of heating whether domestic or Hotel industry etc. Further, Car manufacturing needs to be stopped and Public transport should be initiated wherever possible and old vehicles need to be completely banned.
All other major countries including China, India, Brazil, Russia, Mexico, U.K and countries in Europe Union must initiate all the steps mentioned above, then only there can be reasonable reduction in global warming.
In order this to happen, electoral corruption, other corruption and hunger for huge profits by the big companies at the cost of humanity has to be curbed mercilessly. This can happen if and only if there is strong political will for the benefit of humanity. However I have my own doubts in this regard since it's much more than a million dollars question.
All other major countries including China, India, Brazil, Russia, Mexico, U.K and countries in Europe Union must initiate all the steps mentioned above, then only there can be reasonable reduction in global warming.
In order this to happen, electoral corruption, other corruption and hunger for huge profits by the big companies at the cost of humanity has to be curbed mercilessly. This can happen if and only if there is strong political will for the benefit of humanity. However I have my own doubts in this regard since it's much more than a million dollars question.
1
I have no problem with eliminating all coal and nuclear power in the US, though today's nuclear power technology is not responsible for very much particulate pollution, or greenhouse gases.
And I have no problem with replacing those cheaper power sources with wind, and solar power generation.
Nor do I have any problem with the politics of kumbayah, and pie in the sky promises from utopians who want to return the planet to, well, some climate condition of the past.
My problem is with the high probability that US energy prices will skyrocket, and that despite that, wind and energy will only provide a small percentage of our future energy needs. Thus necessitating a constriction of the US economy, the elimination of air conditioning, and the expansion of warm textile imports.
Meanwhile, China, which currently generates almost twice what the US produces in greenhouse gasses, and by agreement with the Obama Administration, will be free to continue the growth in greenhouse gas emissions, and their carbon pollution based economy, until 2030.
Even as the Chinese Government continues to steal intellectual property, hack every database they can, manipulate their currency, threaten their own human rights attorneys, and saber rattle against their Pacific Rim neighbors.
Clearly, the lame duck Obama Administration and their remaining supporters, are living in a pipe dream. The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll currently gives Obama an approval Index rating of -16.
And I have no problem with replacing those cheaper power sources with wind, and solar power generation.
Nor do I have any problem with the politics of kumbayah, and pie in the sky promises from utopians who want to return the planet to, well, some climate condition of the past.
My problem is with the high probability that US energy prices will skyrocket, and that despite that, wind and energy will only provide a small percentage of our future energy needs. Thus necessitating a constriction of the US economy, the elimination of air conditioning, and the expansion of warm textile imports.
Meanwhile, China, which currently generates almost twice what the US produces in greenhouse gasses, and by agreement with the Obama Administration, will be free to continue the growth in greenhouse gas emissions, and their carbon pollution based economy, until 2030.
Even as the Chinese Government continues to steal intellectual property, hack every database they can, manipulate their currency, threaten their own human rights attorneys, and saber rattle against their Pacific Rim neighbors.
Clearly, the lame duck Obama Administration and their remaining supporters, are living in a pipe dream. The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll currently gives Obama an approval Index rating of -16.
Well, there you go. It was a Rassmussen poll. Who else could come up with a -16???!
Roger Martella was a leading environmental advisor in the GW Bush administration. James Watt was Interior Secretary under Reagan. James Inhofe of OK heads up the senate's environmental committee. Some of the people most responsible for the implementation and direction of our environmental policies have been enemies of just about all environmental protection, way more than this climate action plan. Name anything that rescues us from environmental degradation. They're against it.
"Protect future generations" indeed. State "Sanctuaries"? The twisted logic of those blind to the most basic needs of future generations is disgraceful. Critical climate shifts throughout the world should be enough to muzzle these people. Record floods, record, droughts, record heat, record everything. Shame on those who advocate protection of future generations while advocating just the opposite. Shame on anyone who buys the notion that destruction of environmental regulations, or ignoring them, is patriotic.
"Protect future generations" indeed. State "Sanctuaries"? The twisted logic of those blind to the most basic needs of future generations is disgraceful. Critical climate shifts throughout the world should be enough to muzzle these people. Record floods, record, droughts, record heat, record everything. Shame on those who advocate protection of future generations while advocating just the opposite. Shame on anyone who buys the notion that destruction of environmental regulations, or ignoring them, is patriotic.
2
The GOP "plan" for the planet's future lies at the confluence of climate change denial, minimalist government and the idolatry of the market place. If one believes that there is no anthropogenic climate change problem, that government should be "small enough to drown in a bathtub", and that profits and market forces are the arbiters of what is good or not, of course the GOP plan makes sense. For everyone else - and everything other living thing - GOP obstruction to the amelioration of anthropogenic climate change is literally a prescription for lethal disaster.
Climate change is the greatest threat humanity has ever faced. The facts that we are responsible and that our actions or inaction hold the welfare of children and future generations in the balance means we must act swiftly, and that sacrifices and fundamental changes to our industrial processes, though painful, are imperative. The U.S. election of 2016 may well be a pivotal event in history, both human and geological. Those who stand in the way of quick action must be voted out, and the forces resisting action must be brought to heel. Job displacements are painful indeed, but they are temporary and rectifiable. Runaway climate change is essentially permanent. We face an existential crisis, and need bold leadership and grand plans, not GOP denial, pandering and servitude to those whose only concerns are quarterly earnings and stock values.
Climate change is the greatest threat humanity has ever faced. The facts that we are responsible and that our actions or inaction hold the welfare of children and future generations in the balance means we must act swiftly, and that sacrifices and fundamental changes to our industrial processes, though painful, are imperative. The U.S. election of 2016 may well be a pivotal event in history, both human and geological. Those who stand in the way of quick action must be voted out, and the forces resisting action must be brought to heel. Job displacements are painful indeed, but they are temporary and rectifiable. Runaway climate change is essentially permanent. We face an existential crisis, and need bold leadership and grand plans, not GOP denial, pandering and servitude to those whose only concerns are quarterly earnings and stock values.
6
Well said, thank you.
Lowering consumption of carbon fuels lowers the demand and the price of the fuels. Of course, this is why the energy industry is fighting the climate agenda.
Besides, climate aside, what's wrong with trying to save energy, and save money?
The energy industry wants us to become addicted to its product, so they can maximize their profits.
This isn't about science, it's about greed.
Besides, climate aside, what's wrong with trying to save energy, and save money?
The energy industry wants us to become addicted to its product, so they can maximize their profits.
This isn't about science, it's about greed.
2
Carbon in the atmosphere dissipates slowly, much more slowly that the average human life span. So it cumulates and we are reaching a danger point. If we are going to persuade the coal interests and the many industries that depend on coal to support a carbon budget, we are going to have to bail them out with billions. An analogy is what West Germany gave to East Germany to make unification work. Take that number and multiply by 500.
Why is there such immediate opposition to a logical position of leadership in preserving our environment? How can we expect other nations to curb harmful emissions if we don't show that as a rich nation we are willing to take a hit to our economy at a time when the cost to us in the future will either be inestimable or just too damn late. My great grand uncle invented the most predominately used method of extracting sulphur from oil to produce clean burning fuel and lubricating oils through his invention of vacuum distillation and fully recoverable liqid sulpher dioxide resulting in efficient and safe liquid extraction of sulphur in 1907. I am sure that it was more expensive but it reduced the sulpur content to nearly zero. Sulphur is what produces acid rain destroying our lakes and oceans. Uncle Lazar must be spinning in his grave seeing what selfish ego centric capitalists are doing to the world.
5
Obama's plan is more than reasonable and perhaps doesn't go far enough. Our collective consciousness must also shift with the individual and collective actions each of us take.
Unplug appliances when not in use or when going away for extended periods of time.
Use cold water to wash clothes.
Smallers patches of grass and mostly have grass in places like parks, public places etc.
Reuse everything.
Minimizing ordering out and bring one's own cup to get coffee.
Bring one's own bag when purchasing food and groceries. Does it make sense to buy one muffin for example, have it put in a bag and then take it out of the bag a few minutes later to eat, then throw the bag away?
Look around at the garbage bins and then multiply that by the days in a week or year. Then multiply again by the population in a community. Imagine all those bags accumulating.
Compost food which creates methane when in the garbage.
Wean off plastic.
Recycle clothing.
So many little things that each of us can do. And over time, things will shift and we will live more mindful and cleaner lives.
Unplug appliances when not in use or when going away for extended periods of time.
Use cold water to wash clothes.
Smallers patches of grass and mostly have grass in places like parks, public places etc.
Reuse everything.
Minimizing ordering out and bring one's own cup to get coffee.
Bring one's own bag when purchasing food and groceries. Does it make sense to buy one muffin for example, have it put in a bag and then take it out of the bag a few minutes later to eat, then throw the bag away?
Look around at the garbage bins and then multiply that by the days in a week or year. Then multiply again by the population in a community. Imagine all those bags accumulating.
Compost food which creates methane when in the garbage.
Wean off plastic.
Recycle clothing.
So many little things that each of us can do. And over time, things will shift and we will live more mindful and cleaner lives.
3
The Republican Party is like a really bad parent. They instinctively say NO, NO, NO and have absolutely nothing positive to offer in it's place. Pick the issue and it's the same sad old story. Health care, environment, conservation, living wages, bank and financial regulation, sensible gun regulation, equal & civil rights, diplomacy, campaign finance reform, science, maintaining and improving our infrastructure and on and on and on. It's exhausting to keep reading these stories about there opposition to every idea to make our world a better place while offering no real ideas in their place.
11
The one undeniable truth is that energy prices will skyrocket. Liberals will never let the poor suffer in any of this, I have read as much in the past. The ultimate liberal plan is to tax energy until the population can take no more. They will then use some type of system to make sure the poor are compensated for every dollar they had to pay in taxes, taking that money directly from the vanishing middle class in this country. Ultimately the rich don't care, they can afford to pay the energy freight and not change their behavior one iota. This is just another liberal Robin Hood scheme, stealing from the golden goose of the middle class and giving to the poor, at least until the golden goose croaks.
3
The republicans are the people stealing your wealth and the middle class's wealth. The top 1% pay almost no taxes and you vilify the poor, they have nothing. And you are helping the republicans do it.
The Republican response is, to say the least, ferocious. But what is missing is the science. Where's the science that supports the contention that President's plan is "radical"? (I guess it's a small victory that they are moving away from denial to being supporters of moderation. I guess they realize how overt "denialism" makes them look foolish.)
The first Republican debate takes place tonight and it will be entertaining to see how they will compete to see who can oppose the President's plan the most. I'm especially interested in what the Donald has to say.
The first Republican debate takes place tonight and it will be entertaining to see how they will compete to see who can oppose the President's plan the most. I'm especially interested in what the Donald has to say.
1
Here is a different perspective on alternate energy and climate change.
I keep hearing people on the green side with concerns about how various forms of energy are polluting the earth and creating global warming of which there is a lot of scientific support saying that it may in fact be too late to make enough changes in our lifestyles to make any difference in the global warming problem.
People on the GOP side seem to be in complete denial or just don't care about global warming (wordsmithed into climate change) and complain about cost of alternative energy (which in other terms means affecting their industry and profits).
There is another difference between the two. The green side speak of how our children and grandchildren are going to be affected by global warming. The GOP side doesn't speak on the idea of anyone being affected because hey, it can't happen if it doesn't exist. It is more of a, "why should I worry about it, it won't happen in my lifetime".
Well, that's the rub isn't it! What if we, as human beings, do actually come back to live again on this planet after we die? What if we could prove that what we are screwing up now is just going to be right where we left it when we come back? Kind of like taking a pee in the pool and going back in for a dip later.
Before exiting, go to YouTube and watch:
" Past Lives 20/20 Documentary "
Then see if you want to take a dip in the pool.
I keep hearing people on the green side with concerns about how various forms of energy are polluting the earth and creating global warming of which there is a lot of scientific support saying that it may in fact be too late to make enough changes in our lifestyles to make any difference in the global warming problem.
People on the GOP side seem to be in complete denial or just don't care about global warming (wordsmithed into climate change) and complain about cost of alternative energy (which in other terms means affecting their industry and profits).
There is another difference between the two. The green side speak of how our children and grandchildren are going to be affected by global warming. The GOP side doesn't speak on the idea of anyone being affected because hey, it can't happen if it doesn't exist. It is more of a, "why should I worry about it, it won't happen in my lifetime".
Well, that's the rub isn't it! What if we, as human beings, do actually come back to live again on this planet after we die? What if we could prove that what we are screwing up now is just going to be right where we left it when we come back? Kind of like taking a pee in the pool and going back in for a dip later.
Before exiting, go to YouTube and watch:
" Past Lives 20/20 Documentary "
Then see if you want to take a dip in the pool.
Calling carbon pollution is such a joke. It is one of the most abundant elements on earth and a major component of life. Saying that 97% of the scientists think climate change is real is not the same as fully understanding all the mechanisms that affect earths climate and having it proven as fact. Truth be told the science is far from settled. One hundred percent of the scientists though the Earth was flat. What happened to that settled science? This is nothing more than a massive power grab and scheme to redistribute wealth.
3
If you want to comment helpfully on these matters you really should educate yourself about them first. Start by learning the significance of fossil carbon and the greenhouse effect. But if you just want to blow smoke and shill for the fossil fuel industry then by all means, carry on as you are.
What? Let's look at the facts, shall we?
1. Earth was uninhabitable until the carbon that was in its atmosphere in its formative years was sequestered underground.
2. Most of that carbon turned into coal.
3. Pumping that carbon back into the atmosphere will make the Earth uninhabitable again.
4. Increased acidity in the oceans have the potential to wipe out life in the ocean as well.
Aren't the the stakes - irreversible climate changes that lead to the Earth becoming too hot and damaged to sustain life - too high to gamble on the best science being wrong? Or is it really more important to protect the wealth and power of a relative few oligarchs?
1. Earth was uninhabitable until the carbon that was in its atmosphere in its formative years was sequestered underground.
2. Most of that carbon turned into coal.
3. Pumping that carbon back into the atmosphere will make the Earth uninhabitable again.
4. Increased acidity in the oceans have the potential to wipe out life in the ocean as well.
Aren't the the stakes - irreversible climate changes that lead to the Earth becoming too hot and damaged to sustain life - too high to gamble on the best science being wrong? Or is it really more important to protect the wealth and power of a relative few oligarchs?
These are evil-doers if there ever were evil-doers. Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt is among the worst as he is in the pocket of fossil fuel corporations. Today in Europe there is widespread praise for the US formula for taking on climate change and talk of investing in the US to help build a hightech response to fossil fuels. Obama's plans will cost money, yes, but will help save the planet and our children and will have economic benefits the Republicans aren't mentioning or even thinking about. After all, future businesses aren't contributing to political campaigns today.
38
we could eliminate coal for electricity production and oil for building heating if Environmentalist and NIMBY's would just call a brief truce. Frack for natural gas, build pipelines to bring the gas to the regions where needed. 50% reduction in carbon output.
Yes, fracking has problems but are we trying to reduce carbon output or not.
State governments could tax the natural gas to ensure no one makes a profit and use the money to address environmental issues related to fracking and pay for solar panels and wind farms.
Yes, fracking has problems but are we trying to reduce carbon output or not.
State governments could tax the natural gas to ensure no one makes a profit and use the money to address environmental issues related to fracking and pay for solar panels and wind farms.
6
This is an argument and a stalling tactic designed to protect entrenched interests against the threat of 'creative destruction'.
As such, there is some credibility to some arguments, that 'creative destruction' of industries that are "too big to fail" should be phased rather than 'plunged' to destruction.
The problem with coal and fossil fuels, in general, is that we've already had decades of faux Republican phasing and denial designed to protect a select few against the welfare and the interest of both the American people and the planet itself.
The question is: how could an exceptionalist, and fittest survivor clearly see the need to 'creatively destroy you', and at the same time be completely blind to the need to creatively destroy itself?
I don't know? Maybe we should ask the Republican symbol of success: Trump! or even his idol Putin?
Republicans seem to be experts in the destruction of other peoples stuff (creatively or not), but highly reluctant to address the interests of those who can't afford the bribes.
As such, there is some credibility to some arguments, that 'creative destruction' of industries that are "too big to fail" should be phased rather than 'plunged' to destruction.
The problem with coal and fossil fuels, in general, is that we've already had decades of faux Republican phasing and denial designed to protect a select few against the welfare and the interest of both the American people and the planet itself.
The question is: how could an exceptionalist, and fittest survivor clearly see the need to 'creatively destroy you', and at the same time be completely blind to the need to creatively destroy itself?
I don't know? Maybe we should ask the Republican symbol of success: Trump! or even his idol Putin?
Republicans seem to be experts in the destruction of other peoples stuff (creatively or not), but highly reluctant to address the interests of those who can't afford the bribes.
If you are a glass half full type you can see the enormous economic opportunity here. But the opportunity involves creative destruction, winding down the coal and fossil fuel industry in favor of more modern energy paradigm. It's pure Adam Smith which conservatives ought to love. Alas, when the creative destruction involves conservative infrastructure, conservatives change their tune.
13
Republicans care more about sticking it to the black president than they care about capitalism.
The primary reason for joining the Republican party is to inoculate oneself and one's business AGAINST the dreaded 'beast of creative destruction'.
How could one possibly create a 'never-ending-gob-stopper' monopoly without killing of the competition and cornering the market? Who ya gonna call? Republicans!
How could one possibly create a 'never-ending-gob-stopper' monopoly without killing of the competition and cornering the market? Who ya gonna call? Republicans!
Why is it that republicans have a knee jerk reaction to environmental issues when really their efforts are completely self serving? All they care about is defeating anything from the Democratic Party and saving their wallets. This effort will impact my industry but the goal of a cleaner environment should be forefront in every Americans heart.
9
It's all about the humans.........even the profits are about the humans.
The problem is that Republicans believe in exceptionalism driven by a combination of 'survival of the fittest' and fate (where most actually believe and that fate is driven by their personal 'good genetics' and family values'........delusion isn't cheap, but it humans are keen to use it whenever reality bites).
This has a tendency to rule out humans other than them, their relatives, and pay-to-play friends (a legacy of tribalism).
In order to compensate for this, they invented the 'laughable curve' of "trickle down". Under this idea, the 'trickle down' (aka charity) of "the fittest" makes it's way down to the "less fittest" in proportion to their Republican definition of "fittestness".
This is more clearly observed in the way that 'Sunday's collections trickle down to the Vatican (and it's ilk)', and in the way that other charitable contributions 'trickle down' to institutionalized playgrounds of the rich (museums, concert halls, and opera houses) where the more deserving 'trickle recipients' get some opportunity to get tickets.
That's not to say that there aren't valid charities and serious givers, but that the system itself is under the certainty and the control of the 'tricklers' rather than some unbiased democratic institution..........because Republicans have a definite problem with uncertainty and lack of control associated with democracy
The problem is that Republicans believe in exceptionalism driven by a combination of 'survival of the fittest' and fate (where most actually believe and that fate is driven by their personal 'good genetics' and family values'........delusion isn't cheap, but it humans are keen to use it whenever reality bites).
This has a tendency to rule out humans other than them, their relatives, and pay-to-play friends (a legacy of tribalism).
In order to compensate for this, they invented the 'laughable curve' of "trickle down". Under this idea, the 'trickle down' (aka charity) of "the fittest" makes it's way down to the "less fittest" in proportion to their Republican definition of "fittestness".
This is more clearly observed in the way that 'Sunday's collections trickle down to the Vatican (and it's ilk)', and in the way that other charitable contributions 'trickle down' to institutionalized playgrounds of the rich (museums, concert halls, and opera houses) where the more deserving 'trickle recipients' get some opportunity to get tickets.
That's not to say that there aren't valid charities and serious givers, but that the system itself is under the certainty and the control of the 'tricklers' rather than some unbiased democratic institution..........because Republicans have a definite problem with uncertainty and lack of control associated with democracy
Bravo for the president, but why didn't he do it when he had a Democratic congress and a better chance of pulling this off instead of leaving the burden on the Democratic candidates who are running?
2
Obama had a veto proof congress for a combined total of a couple weeks.
BTW, there was some concern about the world economy during a lot of 2009.
BTW, there was some concern about the world economy during a lot of 2009.
Better late than never. And remember, he had a majority in Congress for a very brief period of time and he was trying to push thru the ACA and a program to save an exploding economy. Unfortunately, he lost the majority in the mid-term elections because, let's face it, Democrats just don't vote in mid-terms!
.........maybe it's because there are 'Republican-like-wolves' among the sheep?
Republicans know full well that money may not buy happiness, but it definitely buys politicians (of any ilk).
With the help of the Supreme's, they've converted the country into a 'political vending machine', where both politicians and legislation can be bought.
History has shown that to be devastating to all, but the few.
Republicans know full well that money may not buy happiness, but it definitely buys politicians (of any ilk).
With the help of the Supreme's, they've converted the country into a 'political vending machine', where both politicians and legislation can be bought.
History has shown that to be devastating to all, but the few.
Republicans seeking a triumph of politics over public interest
9
The whole climate change agenda is political. It ignores half the science available. Grade an A for propaganda and an F for poor policy.
Uh..........that is "self" over public interest. Exceptionalism, and "survival of the fittest" is Republican speak for me, myself, and I.
I have to laugh at the comment by McConnel that he is having trouble working with Congress.
9
Turtles are known for their outrageously wry sense of humor, along with a penchant for 'other peoples' vegetation.
........and, if not for Republicans, who would have known that the turtle beat the hare by undermining and chipping away at the hare's ability to breathe clean air, vote, get health care, retire with dignity, or otherwise compete with turtles and prosper.
Thank you Republicans for teaching us how to lose.
........and, if not for Republicans, who would have known that the turtle beat the hare by undermining and chipping away at the hare's ability to breathe clean air, vote, get health care, retire with dignity, or otherwise compete with turtles and prosper.
Thank you Republicans for teaching us how to lose.
It's about time we do something about climate change and at least this president is doing something about it. We need renewable energy. We spend so much worrying about day that we forgot about tomorrow. It's about time someone does something about it.
12
That liberal, commie, unbirthed, Kenyan, Muslim just keeps on delivering positive momentum for America and it's people.
I'm having second thoughts about Trump and the other Republican wannabee Emperors and Kings who worked so hard to create all of the problems that he's fixed.
Me and most of my relatives and friends don't have a pressing need to rip off others and destroy the planet. Maybe it's time to vote for human progress rather than the exceptional, fittest, animal-like, humans on the planet.
I'm having second thoughts about Trump and the other Republican wannabee Emperors and Kings who worked so hard to create all of the problems that he's fixed.
Me and most of my relatives and friends don't have a pressing need to rip off others and destroy the planet. Maybe it's time to vote for human progress rather than the exceptional, fittest, animal-like, humans on the planet.
While the environmental regulations may not be legally contestable, you can be sure that the power industry will mobilize their public relations team to try to get Americans to believe that restrictions on their industry will be anathema for our country. I wouldn't be surprised if they even end up saying that restrictions on toxic emission will be bad for the environment! There is no limit to the lies and distortions that their propaganda machine can create, and it's certain that many Americans will believe them. All we can do is hope that the Supreme Court will hold onto it's hat and not be swayed by the gusts of corporate greed.
19
last sentence LOL
I like to think that Churchill was correct: "Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing after they've exhausted all other alternatives" (there is some doubt that he actually used those words, but it's the thought that counts).
As we've seen with Obama care, Global warming, equal rights, voting rights, wealth disparity, and economic depression, the labyrinthine 'shenanigans' of conservatives mostly serves to chip away, undermine, and impede human progress in the interest of some existing establishment.
The question is whether on not conservative 'labels' ever really deliver ANY positive results.
The fight against 'Global Warming' is in fact an issue about conservation of the planet. Why would any conservative be against that?
The implication is that the 'conservative label' is being used and abused by pretenders.
As we've seen with Obama care, Global warming, equal rights, voting rights, wealth disparity, and economic depression, the labyrinthine 'shenanigans' of conservatives mostly serves to chip away, undermine, and impede human progress in the interest of some existing establishment.
The question is whether on not conservative 'labels' ever really deliver ANY positive results.
The fight against 'Global Warming' is in fact an issue about conservation of the planet. Why would any conservative be against that?
The implication is that the 'conservative label' is being used and abused by pretenders.
whenever i have visitors from abroad (usually mega asian cities) they are enthralled to see the clear blue skies in my neck of the woods. anyone having doubts about clean air and water needs the visit any mega asian city to see what they will have to deal with
18
If you are my age, you don't need to go to that Asian city. I grew up in the late 50's and early 60's in Los Angeles. There were times the mountains that were directly in front of our house could not be seen through the smog. I remember having afternoon P.E. (this was before smog alerts) and, after running around, trying to breathe was actually painful. You could only take half a breath and then you got a stabbing pain in your lungs! L.A. still has bad days, but it is much better than it used to be. Let's not copy China's coal policy; let's develop alternative energy instead!
We got "ours" by polluting the world, and then having the good sense to 'regulate' to reign in the local impact of pollution.
As with all Republican 'Tom foolery', outsourcing was all about 'outsourcing pollution' and wage increases.
You can't blame them from being caught in the short sighted, and unprofitable reality of the fact that there is no way to hide from the stupidity of 'profits at ANY' cost.
If we truly want to end our misery as quickly as possible, we should definitely follow the rest of the despot world and elect more right wing thinkers.
As with all Republican 'Tom foolery', outsourcing was all about 'outsourcing pollution' and wage increases.
You can't blame them from being caught in the short sighted, and unprofitable reality of the fact that there is no way to hide from the stupidity of 'profits at ANY' cost.
If we truly want to end our misery as quickly as possible, we should definitely follow the rest of the despot world and elect more right wing thinkers.
Excellent example, clean air and water is needed. Will it effect any change on global climate. No! So policy should be to fix the air and water on a reasonable schedule that does not destroy business and jobs. It took awhile to get bad, we can take some time to fix it so we do it right for all. The proper response to climate change is to accept that it occurs and plan for the results. This is more prudent than thinking we have the power to make the climate be what we think it should be. Psalm 2.
You have the liberal support but you may not have the conservatives support but who cares about them conservatives end of story.
2
The conservatives currently 'in charge' care deeply about the well being and preservation of themselves.
It's a natural outcome of their commitment to the laws of the jungle, and the survival of the fittest.
It would help a little if they would take some time out to think what happened to the lions, the tigers, the elephants, the whales, the fish, and even the sharks.
There is, you see, always another "fittest" waiting to take over from those who see themselves rather than their species as exceptional.
It's a natural outcome of their commitment to the laws of the jungle, and the survival of the fittest.
It would help a little if they would take some time out to think what happened to the lions, the tigers, the elephants, the whales, the fish, and even the sharks.
There is, you see, always another "fittest" waiting to take over from those who see themselves rather than their species as exceptional.
This is beyond labels. Will this planet continue to sustain human life if we don't change? The answer is no whether you believe in climate change or not and the answer doesn't change to accommodate you political beliefs.
We care about them conservatives' kids, who have to breath the same air as the libruls' kids.
The result will be more jobs eliminated. So, since Obama has been in office the poor are poorer and the welfare rolls are out of control and expanding. Let's see how much more damage he can do in his remaining term.
8
There are twice as many workers in solar, an expanding industry, as there are workers mining coal, a dying industry, according to Fortune magazine.
http://fortune.com/2015/01/16/solar-jobs-report-2014/
http://fortune.com/2015/01/16/solar-jobs-report-2014/
10
For every major issue requiring people to change, the cry goes up: "jobs will be eliminated". Jobs go away here and pop up there – and the world keeps turning, But there is only one world. Think beyond your back fence.
An unlivable planet, unbreathable air, and/or land under water is not a miraculous solution to our economic well being.
Smart people adapt to change and create new ways to profit. Fat-dumb-and-happy people declare that their happenstantial gains are an entitlement to eternal wealth at the expense of everything and everyone else.
The greed, hubris, and bigotry at the center of Republican doctrine is helping to preserve the status quo and the wealth of the few at the expense of the progress and innovation that we need cope with the '2nd Industrial Revolution' that is undermining the pillars of virtually every traditional institution that we've come to know and love.
We're not going to move forward by destroying the planet as we strive to concentrate all of the worlds wealth into the hands of a couple of thousand lucky winners.
Smart people adapt to change and create new ways to profit. Fat-dumb-and-happy people declare that their happenstantial gains are an entitlement to eternal wealth at the expense of everything and everyone else.
The greed, hubris, and bigotry at the center of Republican doctrine is helping to preserve the status quo and the wealth of the few at the expense of the progress and innovation that we need cope with the '2nd Industrial Revolution' that is undermining the pillars of virtually every traditional institution that we've come to know and love.
We're not going to move forward by destroying the planet as we strive to concentrate all of the worlds wealth into the hands of a couple of thousand lucky winners.
1
It is time to cut off federal funding these states that affect the health of millions of Americans and refuse to convert to alternative sources of energy. Citizens must fight back when power plants threaten their health and safety. Millenials have a chance to own the future.
The climate change deniers have harmed this planet for decades and we continue the damage without fighting back. This isn't American exceptionalism. It is another American crime going unpunished.
The climate change deniers have harmed this planet for decades and we continue the damage without fighting back. This isn't American exceptionalism. It is another American crime going unpunished.
38
Look at all the science on the matter and you will reach a different conclusion. You must separate climate change into two issues. The fact that the climate is changing and this varies by where you are on the planet is true. It always has been changing, never static. That is one issue. The other is whether man can effect that change either positive or negative. The science is quite varied on this matter and much more equal than media or those who have the 'man is the bad guy on the earth' agenda would indicate. It is unfortunate that a political agenda is out weighing sane policy and rational objectives. There should be a strategy to reduce emissions but it does not need to be as draconian as the administration or its climate fanatics advocate. Bad science is resulting in bad policy which is resulting in wasted resources. You can pretend that you can stop the ice from melting or you can prepare for the result of ice melting. That is one issue that also has some recent science to challenge previous projections. We can feign concern for polar bears who have adapted through many climate changes or we can figure out what to do with millions of people who live at current sea level.
It simply staggers me how much resistance there is to clean air and the inevitability of climate change. The opposition is worried only about its profits. The corporations are made up of humans, real people who see only the next six months. Do these real people not have children or grand children? Do they not see that there is no such thing as clean coal? Just because China does it, doesn't mean it's OK for America to do it to. Why not grasp the new energy industry, take it up and run with it, make it something world leading? Make the future better for yourselves and your children, and indeed your children's children? The one thing I find repugnant in America especially and the west in general is that there are far to many vested interests who undermine real democratic process for profit. Cutting off their own noses to spite their avaricious faces. The only joy they will bring to anyone once they have killed our rivers and ruined our climate and air, is those who told them it would lead to a certain doom, will be able to say "we told you so, now look what you've done". Is power and money so worth the price of taking us all down? Simply astonishing. Lenin said, "give a capitalist a rope and eventually he'll hang himself". It looks like he may well have been right all along, God forbid.
70
Polluters don't fear the consequences of killing and maiming multitudes of anonymous others, they fear the consequences of being exposed and losing their profits or worse yet, having to pay back some of their ill gotten wealth.
All right wing despots throughout history have used 'voodoo' of one sort or another to fool most of the people most of the time. It usually ends with the destruction of the civilization that was stupid enough dance to their voodoo while the despots were busy ripping off the wealth of the underlying civilization.
All right wing despots throughout history have used 'voodoo' of one sort or another to fool most of the people most of the time. It usually ends with the destruction of the civilization that was stupid enough dance to their voodoo while the despots were busy ripping off the wealth of the underlying civilization.
1
The arrogance of man raises its head again. There is great confusion in this discussion because so many issues get lumped into one basket. Sure we should work towards cleaner air. Are draconian measures required? No! Will cutting emissions cause a change in climate? Negligible effect. Man's effect on climate is not significant. Does anyone work for a communist? Do you have a 401K or IRA invested in stocks or mutual funds? Then you are a capitalist. Are you motivated to perform well on the job so you can advance, make more money? 'Capitalists' also. It is what makes the business world thrive. The fact that the government had to roll back some near term goals indicate the emission's schedule is too aggressive. A more reasonable strategy can reduce the devastation to the economy without effecting climate change mythical hopes. The reality is that the administration is using fear tactics about climate change to effect a politically motivated anti-coal agenda. Improving air quality needs to be done in a cost effective manner. Man's ability to alter the climate is a myth that many scientists have exposed. The media's 'man is the problem' agenda fails to give a clear airing to all the science available. Listening to half the voices results in bad policy and that is what is coming out of this administration. Bad policy is thinking that man will change the climate and trying to do fruitless things instead of preparing for the changes like rising seas that will flood islands.
I'm not sure if people really get it. CLIMATE CHANGE CAN MAKE THIS WORLD UNINHABITABLE FOR LIFE AS WE KNOW IT. THERE IS NO "PLANET B!"
25
Yes climate change could eventually make the planet uninhabitable. The dinosaurs are gone. Neither the dinosaurs nor man is going to change what happens to the climate. Man can stop pollution but that should be addressed separate from global climate change. Climate change requires reacting to the results not a fantasy belief that man will change the results. If the science shows that ocean waters will rise a few inches then it is time to have a plan to build a dike or move some people, not shut down energy production for 310 million people thinking it will makes things different for 7+ billion. It will not stop the drought in CA or the heat on the East Coast.
It's hard to get people to think about the unthinkable........particularly if the evidence is directly in their face.
Hopefully, there are a couple of brilliant progressives out there who will come up with a solution to move us off the brink, even while we continue to battle the insane right wing, world war against humanity.
Hopefully, there are a couple of brilliant progressives out there who will come up with a solution to move us off the brink, even while we continue to battle the insane right wing, world war against humanity.
“It represents a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion,” Mr. McConnell; the ideology is not blind but founded on virtually universally accepted science. The policy is as sound as can be because what is more critical than preventing human intervention from unbalancing the very nature that gave rise to and supports humanity? The elected president must consider the entire country as a beneficiary of his compassion, not a slice of it as does the elected congress. There must be a way to bolster economic health to the coal producing states, but so long as they can rely on coal production who will seek the change? Necessity is the mother of invention- a poor economy in a few states can be overcome but the drastic change in climate may not be reversed in a millennium.
108
Sorry, not universally accepted research. The agenda ignores significant science to promote a political agenda based on a 'man is the bad guy on the planet' ideology. Unfortunately those people control much of the media. Man is so arrogant. Bad policy results in wasted resources and eventual disaster as we will have failed to prepare for what we can not control believing we are big enough to change it. Psalm 2
The inquisition, the 'dark ages', and even the 'shut down' of a progressive Islamic civilization that had brought us math and science were all incubated in the closed minds of conservative thinkers who rejected, shunned, and shut down the progress and risk of free human thinking.
One would think that we would have learned to balance our fear of uncertainty, and lack of control in more progressive (aka constructive) ways.
OK, I take it back. We are learning, but maybe too slowly to protect ourselves against either the next 'dark age' or the self destruction of the species, both of which are hallmarks of conservative thinking.
I will, however, admit that it is good that our conservative thinking prevents us from jumping off cliffs into bottomless abysses, but only the real ones, not the delusional, self serving abysses of conservative Republicans and their historical cousins.
One would think that we would have learned to balance our fear of uncertainty, and lack of control in more progressive (aka constructive) ways.
OK, I take it back. We are learning, but maybe too slowly to protect ourselves against either the next 'dark age' or the self destruction of the species, both of which are hallmarks of conservative thinking.
I will, however, admit that it is good that our conservative thinking prevents us from jumping off cliffs into bottomless abysses, but only the real ones, not the delusional, self serving abysses of conservative Republicans and their historical cousins.
The desperate attempts to stop progressive measures mitigating climate change and the inevitable transition to new economies remind me of the quote: "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer
24
True!
However, I often wonder if the speed of communications and transportation (and the resulting, instantaneous spread of good as well as misinformation), has surpassed out ability to deal with uncomfortable truths in our traditional manner.
It many ways it seems that the truth that we rely on is no longer spread by 'word of mouth', but all information is spread on the volume of whoever is 'mouthing the words', and mass marketing the thoughts.
At the same time, while truth has always been in the mind of the beholder we live in a world where beholders can flock together electronically in ways that are completely unprecedented. Fox News is a prime example, but it, in turn, is dwarfed by the potential of the Internet.
The question is whether 'modern marketing technology (aka propaganda and propaganda machines), and the existence of world-wide, like-minded, virtual constituencies conform to the letter or disrupt Schopenhauer's observations.
However, I often wonder if the speed of communications and transportation (and the resulting, instantaneous spread of good as well as misinformation), has surpassed out ability to deal with uncomfortable truths in our traditional manner.
It many ways it seems that the truth that we rely on is no longer spread by 'word of mouth', but all information is spread on the volume of whoever is 'mouthing the words', and mass marketing the thoughts.
At the same time, while truth has always been in the mind of the beholder we live in a world where beholders can flock together electronically in ways that are completely unprecedented. Fox News is a prime example, but it, in turn, is dwarfed by the potential of the Internet.
The question is whether 'modern marketing technology (aka propaganda and propaganda machines), and the existence of world-wide, like-minded, virtual constituencies conform to the letter or disrupt Schopenhauer's observations.
To look at our future under the Clean Power Plan, we should look to California, which already gets 25% of its electricity from renewables. Per the EPA, California’s historic 2012 levels were 963 pounds of CO2 generated per net megawatt-hour, and its projected levels are 712 in 2020. Its goal for 2030 is 828 pounds of C02 per net megawatt-hour, and thus it has already reached its goal for the Clean Power Plan. Interestingly, despite this reduction in carbon emissions, the total per capita amount paid by the average Californian for electricity is $3589 per year, which is 17% LESS than the per capita amount paid in Missouri of $4340. Although California ranks 22nd in average retail price of electricity at 12.46 cents per kilowatt-hour (Missouri is 40th at 10.78 cents/kWh), California ranks 49th in energy usage at 201 million British thermal units (btu) utilized per capita, with Missouri ranking 25th at 301 btu per capita (http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/data.cfm?incfile=/state/seds/sep_sum/html/.... Although the obvious argument is that California uses less electricity due to its warm climate, the per capita electricity use in California was on a par with the average for the rest of the country in 1960 (http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/tracking_progress/index.html). Thus, California has reached these goals and is doing just fine.
28
Thank you for doing your homework.
I am sick and tired of the republicans/conservatives opposing everything the President proposes before they even hear the proposal. It is abundantly clear that the GOP is completely owned by special interests, however through their propaganda media they continue to deceive the ignorant. One party alone is destroying our system of government.
34
Why have the Republicans opposed everything that the President proposes? You have to ask yourself how it is possible that there is no overlapping interest on any issue. They decided after the 2008 election to become the party of NO, a party of failed ideology, and a party of the billionaires. I can't wonder how much is racism, how much is anti-intellectualism, and how much is lining their own pockets, but none of this is attractive to me.
Californians love and care about their state and environment. They are progressive people who prefer to have clean air and don't sell out to lobbyists for money. The rest of our the country should use us as a model. This is why I live in the state of California.
And destroying we the people
Commerce is commerce. Using regulation to force the power industry to switch from a heavy reliance on coal to a more carbon friendly approach will necessarily produce new commerce. Some company has to produce the wind generators; the solar panels; the fracked gas; the new nuclear facility. New transmission lines and facilities will have to be built and maintained and the old facilities converted.
There is a fortune to be made in a President Obama's proposal. Why not grab it, clean up our future, and make America a better place for our grand children? There is, of course, a price to all of this but the alternative is to drive our civilization over the cliff and back to the dark ages. It is time for our industrialist and forward thinking corporations to step up and get behind the President. Big coal doesn't own all of America; not even most of America. Commerce is commerce.
There is a fortune to be made in a President Obama's proposal. Why not grab it, clean up our future, and make America a better place for our grand children? There is, of course, a price to all of this but the alternative is to drive our civilization over the cliff and back to the dark ages. It is time for our industrialist and forward thinking corporations to step up and get behind the President. Big coal doesn't own all of America; not even most of America. Commerce is commerce.
19
You would think KY and WV and other coal-dependent states would take the initiative and support and court wind/solar companies for their states, creating new jobs and new industries. How blind can they be?
"Big coal doesn't own all of America; not even most of America."
Unfortunately big coal owns the Senate majority leader and many other "representatives of the people".
Unfortunately big coal owns the Senate majority leader and many other "representatives of the people".
Contrary to Republican lore, the country has always been led by the Federal government, often in conjunction with business, but never by business alone!
Exceptionalist can claim their title because of the exceptional country that spawns them. If history tells us anything, it is that hubris us is the best way to bring down both our exceptionalists and the country itself.
Exceptionalist can claim their title because of the exceptional country that spawns them. If history tells us anything, it is that hubris us is the best way to bring down both our exceptionalists and the country itself.
The way the divided congress moves, this will be a long haul before anything is done. It took 20 years to get lead out of gasoline. The stakes are at least as high
with the ever increasing amounts of CO2. This is why the consumer must act and not wait for congress--the game is over.
with the ever increasing amounts of CO2. This is why the consumer must act and not wait for congress--the game is over.
15
Once the government and progressive businesses teach the Republicans how to make money by doing the correct thing, Republicans, as always, will have an epiphany............and then they'll reroot in their glorious and exceptionalist discovery of somebody else's idea.
The fossil fuel corporations (along with the banking and war corporations) that run this country will not allow this! They care ONLY about their profits and not a whit about our grandchildren and their children..or the fate of this sad earth. Other jobs need to be found or created, government-funded jobs, for the people who worked in the fossil fuel industries. These should not be jobs operated by for-profit groups because for-profits don't pay a living wage and don't like unions. We need a public works program that employs people at decent wages making renewable energy, repairing infrastructure and we need to focus on developing nuclear FUSION energy. Of course our owners will not stand for such programs because they only care about their immediate profits. We really need campaign finance reform.
15
Even the most die hard 'exceptionalists' will be converting their thinking once their shore homes go under water. The downside is that they'll be asking 'we, the taxpayers' to compensate them for their losses, and, there is always the possibility that they'll come around too late to save the country or democracy from a takeover by some new rising 'foreign' exceptionalists.
Either way, the age of robots and artificial intelligence seems to be reducing rather than increasing the prospects for human labor, and this threatens capitalism itself...........not to mention the fact, that the world is already full of under and unemployed people (most of whom are not very happy with their lot in life and desperate for change). I won't even comment on the various world wide, right wing, movements intent on rolling human progress back a few centuries. Fortunately, by comparison, here in the US, we're only talking about regressing back to the way things were a piddling two century ago.
Either way, the age of robots and artificial intelligence seems to be reducing rather than increasing the prospects for human labor, and this threatens capitalism itself...........not to mention the fact, that the world is already full of under and unemployed people (most of whom are not very happy with their lot in life and desperate for change). I won't even comment on the various world wide, right wing, movements intent on rolling human progress back a few centuries. Fortunately, by comparison, here in the US, we're only talking about regressing back to the way things were a piddling two century ago.
I am afraid that severe restrictions for corporations will lead to that they will move production abroad, reducing the number of jobs in America and I do not see any options for how it would be possible to compensate this.
2
How does a corporation move power plant production ''abroad?'' Utilities are, by definition, ruled by government regulation, and it is their obligation to follow rules that are based on law.
American industry has, in the past, adapted quite readily to requirements for more efficient energy use, in, for example, the increase in automobile mileage requirements and new technologies for electric lights. This created jobs in new companies while reducing jobs in others, a familiar pattern in a market economy.
When government sets rational rules based on existing law, businesses can prosper by looking ahead rather than cling to the past.
American industry has, in the past, adapted quite readily to requirements for more efficient energy use, in, for example, the increase in automobile mileage requirements and new technologies for electric lights. This created jobs in new companies while reducing jobs in others, a familiar pattern in a market economy.
When government sets rational rules based on existing law, businesses can prosper by looking ahead rather than cling to the past.
11
Helen it would be kind of difficult to move coal production overseas. Europe is ahead of getting rid of coal production. Yes, they do pay taxes that are higher than here. Election years hear are always about less taxes, abortions, homephobia etc. I see how the wealthy built summer homes three four and five times the size it had in previous times. Is this really necessary? The greed of the wealthy has gone out of hand. The GOP is totally out of touch with the average person and their needs. They fly to their summer homes in helicopters and private planes and could not care less. The are regressive and would like to go back to the "good old days" of owning us. And they have done well since the "citizens united" was passed. Fox News is their major contributor in fooling the masses to vote against their own best interest. To make sure they have decent wages and a healthy environment. blinded by hate for this president who wants to help the average American family.
Cannot imagine how we can buy power generation abroad. Hydro from Canada? We do that. Solar panels from China? Yeah, we do that. Time to take back the future and give up coal.
I do not understand how Mr Morrisey can say, "... rarely used provision of the Clean Air Act.”, and yet say that the "The final rule ... blatantly disregards the rule of the law ...". After all, if any provision of an Act is used, whether rarely or frequently, the Act is still legal.
And, Mr Morrisey is an Attorney General!
And, Mr Morrisey is an Attorney General!
11
Cmon now! We're arguing about CLEAN air and livable land!
Only a Republican supporting someone who lives above the pollution with a guaranteed source of water, and plenty of filters to make life climatized and pleasant could vote against that!
Anyone who lives in a flood zone, drought zone, tornado alley, hurricane path, rising seas, or pollution zone should think twice before voting for one of these clowns.
There won't be many place to spend profits on a dead planet.
Only a Republican supporting someone who lives above the pollution with a guaranteed source of water, and plenty of filters to make life climatized and pleasant could vote against that!
Anyone who lives in a flood zone, drought zone, tornado alley, hurricane path, rising seas, or pollution zone should think twice before voting for one of these clowns.
There won't be many place to spend profits on a dead planet.
Earth is a lucky planet with two types of greenhouse gases:
a) Methane, water vapor, which are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen;
b) Carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, ozone and many other, which are heavier than nitrogen and oxygen.
Molecular weights of gases are playing crucial role in nature:
A) Smoke from chimney of power plants in not windy condition is going UP ~ 500 meters and after that is horizontal. It cooling with height and as it full with molecules of heavy gases forces of buoyancy can’t lift it.
B) Millions of molecules of water vapor are making any parcel of air lighter. It helps lift this parcel UP. There (10-15 miles closer to space) all kinetic, latent, and trapped infrared radiation of these molecules is going to space easy, than from ocean (land) level. PROPERTIES OF WATER help cool the atmosphere, despite water vapor is greenhouse gas.
Real reasons for climate change are:
1. Population of the earth in 1800 was 1 billion, today more than 7.2 billion. To feed growing population we created around the world 4,000,000,000 acres of fields of potato, corn, wheat, etc. These fields were created instead of former forests and virgin steppes. IT REDUCE overall continents with arable land evaporation of water from soil, reduce humidity in air and probabilities of rains-REAL COOLING mechanism in nature.
2. As we use mostly fossil fuel for our energy needs, black carbon and dusts from it cover fresh snow, which reduce reflection back to space of direct sun radiation.
a) Methane, water vapor, which are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen;
b) Carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, ozone and many other, which are heavier than nitrogen and oxygen.
Molecular weights of gases are playing crucial role in nature:
A) Smoke from chimney of power plants in not windy condition is going UP ~ 500 meters and after that is horizontal. It cooling with height and as it full with molecules of heavy gases forces of buoyancy can’t lift it.
B) Millions of molecules of water vapor are making any parcel of air lighter. It helps lift this parcel UP. There (10-15 miles closer to space) all kinetic, latent, and trapped infrared radiation of these molecules is going to space easy, than from ocean (land) level. PROPERTIES OF WATER help cool the atmosphere, despite water vapor is greenhouse gas.
Real reasons for climate change are:
1. Population of the earth in 1800 was 1 billion, today more than 7.2 billion. To feed growing population we created around the world 4,000,000,000 acres of fields of potato, corn, wheat, etc. These fields were created instead of former forests and virgin steppes. IT REDUCE overall continents with arable land evaporation of water from soil, reduce humidity in air and probabilities of rains-REAL COOLING mechanism in nature.
2. As we use mostly fossil fuel for our energy needs, black carbon and dusts from it cover fresh snow, which reduce reflection back to space of direct sun radiation.
3
If the "clean" coal lobby is up in arms about the proposed rules, it must be just what is needed.
18
Up until now, life has been one, great big, field of capitalist oysters. Now that the capitalists have eaten all the oysters and destroyed the beds, it's their job to flounder around looking for something new to feast on because feasting IS their job.
The problem is that feasters don't create, they just eat. We'll be need some new natural resources or some progressive innovation to create something new for them to eat. We might even need some changes to capitalism itself (heaven forbid the war we'll have over that!).
Interestingly, the 'sharing economy' is offering some 'socialist' alternatives that benefit more than just a few feasters without violating the rules of capitalism. All we need is a few regulation to insure that the 'middle men' don't suck up all the new oysters.
The problem is that feasters don't create, they just eat. We'll be need some new natural resources or some progressive innovation to create something new for them to eat. We might even need some changes to capitalism itself (heaven forbid the war we'll have over that!).
Interestingly, the 'sharing economy' is offering some 'socialist' alternatives that benefit more than just a few feasters without violating the rules of capitalism. All we need is a few regulation to insure that the 'middle men' don't suck up all the new oysters.
16
Quite right. This problem and many others boil down to one thing: Concentration of Power and a Check on Power.
Concentration of Power is such a threat to the Rest of Us that the US Constitution takes great pains to ensure that there is a Check on Power: the very balance of power among the branches of government.
A similarly threatening concentration of power arises among the wealthy -- wealthy individuals as well as wealthy corporations.
Difficult problems -- including climate change -- will be difficult to resolve as long as there exist powerful agents whose interests are threatened by the solution.
The solution to this larger problem is to put a Check on Power ... on the power of government as well as on aggregated commercial forces.
So the real challenge is not so much climate change -- we can solve this problem.
The real challenge is to create an effective Check on Power.
Concentration of Power is such a threat to the Rest of Us that the US Constitution takes great pains to ensure that there is a Check on Power: the very balance of power among the branches of government.
A similarly threatening concentration of power arises among the wealthy -- wealthy individuals as well as wealthy corporations.
Difficult problems -- including climate change -- will be difficult to resolve as long as there exist powerful agents whose interests are threatened by the solution.
The solution to this larger problem is to put a Check on Power ... on the power of government as well as on aggregated commercial forces.
So the real challenge is not so much climate change -- we can solve this problem.
The real challenge is to create an effective Check on Power.
Yep. We need another American Revolution. A real Tea Party. A Green Tea Party.
2
This group of people that opposes the new rules are a disgrace. Don't any of them care about their children or grandchildren? How about doing the right thing for a change? Is it always only about self interest and money?
6
The future of our country is clearly too important to leave to self-serving politicians focusing on political correctness.
6
Too much is at stake to let the fanatics win.
5
It seems to me that plans to phase out coal must include efforts to help ordinary people who are going to be hurt.
Appalachia is already suffering with drug use, poverty, and teenage pregnancy---just like the inner city. Republicans could have decided to acknowledge climate change and at the same time ensure a bright and realistic for the people of Kentucky and WV by investment in education, training, and bringing in new engineering sectors. Instead, they have decided to bury their heads in the sand and plead ignorance ("I am not a scientist"). Why? Because they don't really care about ordinary people to seriously think about long-term and sustainable solutions. And, as far the democrats are concerned, very few of them do anything other than throw money over the fence.
Appalachia is already suffering with drug use, poverty, and teenage pregnancy---just like the inner city. Republicans could have decided to acknowledge climate change and at the same time ensure a bright and realistic for the people of Kentucky and WV by investment in education, training, and bringing in new engineering sectors. Instead, they have decided to bury their heads in the sand and plead ignorance ("I am not a scientist"). Why? Because they don't really care about ordinary people to seriously think about long-term and sustainable solutions. And, as far the democrats are concerned, very few of them do anything other than throw money over the fence.
2
While there's a pronounced global consensus on climate change and the world is moving fast on transiting to the environment friendly clean energy sources, the time warped US' fossil fuel lobby is busy day and night to fight Obama's pollution controlling clean energy initiative even before its announced to a great relief of the US public and the world, knowing well the fate of similar such obstructive moves earlier against Obama's public oriented efforts like his signature legislation- the Affordable Care Act- which stands vindicated after many a political trial and repeated judicial scrutiny.
9
No thanks Mr Obama. We do not want clean air.
Signed
Republicans
Signed
Republicans
14
Ewu you should have added/ We just want to make more and more profit so we can increase our millions, buy a private plane, have another summer home, have servants that we pay little and we don't really want to educate the masses.Let them work for the 1%, as they did 100 plus years ago. We are heading for it.
An Orwellian line from McConnell at the end of this article. What a saddening spectacle this article describes.
5
The coal industry will cry "this kills jobs". While never acknowledging all the job losses they caused in Appelacia (not the mention the extreme environmental degradation they have caused as well), by moving to mountain top strip mining. Hypocrisy at its finest, and the reason that area is so repressed in so many ways.
7
Yes, look at McConnell's words at the end of the article--that's hypocrisy!
The speech the President made today on climate control was more important than any speech he has given during his term in office. The effort he urged was more important than the efforts made during the Civil War, World War II or the Cold War. It is an effort to save our global habitat be for it is too late.
He has to ask us for our help and to organize for that help. He did that during his campaign for the presidency and people's help and contributions followed. Let it be so again.
He has to ask us for our help and to organize for that help. He did that during his campaign for the presidency and people's help and contributions followed. Let it be so again.
7
It's high time we got started on reducing the environmental debts and overall deficit that we've stuck the grandkids with.
One wonders why people who blat about debt and deficit at every opportunity haven't been interested in these debts and deficit--oh, wait, just kidding, I know why.
And so do most others.
One wonders why people who blat about debt and deficit at every opportunity haven't been interested in these debts and deficit--oh, wait, just kidding, I know why.
And so do most others.
7
We are stuck in spending all our tax money on the military, CIA, Si etc (0ver 60% of our taxes). Less than 6% on education, or human welfare and 1% on environmental issues. That shows clearly where our politicians and corporate welfares interest lies. We need a radical change in mindset for the average American citizens, who are bombarded by issues told to hurt them if they vote for the ACA act. Yet the GOP time and time again is wrong and not interested in the public well being. This is just another case. Clearly seen on their early resistance by hiring corporate lawyers to protect their
profits. God help us average citizens if any of those guys get elected next year.
profits. God help us average citizens if any of those guys get elected next year.
Meet the people that don't want your children to have breathable air!
9
Do any of you commenters want to join me in telling these obnoxious, arrogant folks to grow up-- those who want to sue Obama before they ever even hear his plan?
11
The silly part of all of this is the fact that the Republican-favored coal industry has been devastated by simple economics. The proverbial hand-writing on wall could not be clearer that McConnell et al are on the wrong side of an economic phenomena they dont understand to begin with. Example: the main power plant for Louisville, sitting in middle of coal country, has just (thankfully) just converted to natgas.
Earlier in time, we attempted to "protect" Detroit in the name of jobs, only to create a mess wherein all but Ford ended up in bankruptcy, while foreign manufacturers produced what was (and arguably continues to be) a better product, gaining US marketshare in process. GM's one-time 50% marketshare in US is now less than 20%.
This is a simple case of present vs. future value. If we have an obligation to our future generations, the choice is clear. Politicians, however, deny/disclaim/fold/spindle and mutilate anything that may upset their perception of jobs, despite the scientific facts to the contrary. Thus, McConnell continues to take the usual "Koch Brothers"- prescribed actions despite the fact that coal employment is now at 100-year lows in his own state and that a large portion of the industry is operating in bankruptcy. So lets deny reality and let the litigation bar benefit from a taxpayer-paid onslot of denial in the form of litigation.
Mitch, once again, your head-in-sand denial of reality approaches laughable. How long have your been in office?
Earlier in time, we attempted to "protect" Detroit in the name of jobs, only to create a mess wherein all but Ford ended up in bankruptcy, while foreign manufacturers produced what was (and arguably continues to be) a better product, gaining US marketshare in process. GM's one-time 50% marketshare in US is now less than 20%.
This is a simple case of present vs. future value. If we have an obligation to our future generations, the choice is clear. Politicians, however, deny/disclaim/fold/spindle and mutilate anything that may upset their perception of jobs, despite the scientific facts to the contrary. Thus, McConnell continues to take the usual "Koch Brothers"- prescribed actions despite the fact that coal employment is now at 100-year lows in his own state and that a large portion of the industry is operating in bankruptcy. So lets deny reality and let the litigation bar benefit from a taxpayer-paid onslot of denial in the form of litigation.
Mitch, once again, your head-in-sand denial of reality approaches laughable. How long have your been in office?
14
Time for him to be voted out. How citizens of Kentucky don't understand this guy is going to continue destroy their country, land and people, by citing with his friends in the coal industry. He truly does not give a damn about the citizens. I guess brain washing via TV ads is the culprit.
Its high time this battle was held. The coal industry cannot be allowed to hold the world to ransom any longer, the stakes are simply too high. There are cleaner forms of energy out there, which are both economically viable and scientifically credible and they need to be supported. We cannot continue risking the future of life on earth for the sake of a few thousand coal industry jobs. We have to look at the big picture here. And what is Pres Obama fighting for at the end of the day - cleaner air for all to breathe! Is that such a terrible thing? I wish him the best of luck in his efforts, we ALL need this to win through.
15
For the foreseeable future, big coal is in trouble. Demand is way down. A 500million plus dollar coal mine was sold for a dollar in Australia. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-31/a-queensland-coal-mine-sold-for-ju.... Same situation with Solid Energy in New Zealand.
Obama's timing is excellent. Now is the time to phase out coal. Regardless of the facts, Republicans will blame him for the end of a dead-end industry.
Obama's timing is excellent. Now is the time to phase out coal. Regardless of the facts, Republicans will blame him for the end of a dead-end industry.
9
This is no surprise. Obama waited until the last three months of his two terms to make any serious proposals at all, and in the end they are all nothing new and all old recuts of the long overdue. The rise of Trump is an excellent exemplary case of what happens when a 'leader' that is perceived as lacking in content is to be substituted. The populaarity of Trump would have been unthinkable before the Obama administration, it is indicative of the the level of discontent with the Obama administration that anyone is paying attention to Trump at all. Very few people envision Trump as the president in the near future, just as very few people perceive Obama as more than the below-average president. The last eight years were eight years lost for the US in terms of opportunities. This kind of decline has led political sicentists open and publicly debate the fall of the U, not because this is happening as a consequence of Obama's actions, but as a consequence of Obama's failure to lead with a vision. There never was a vision, which is why people entertain Trump in their minds - simple substitution between equal attributes. Marketing 101.
The opportunities lost in the last 6 years were due to blind and rabid opposition to Mr. Obama's vision by Republicans. I agree that the US is declining inexorably from its previous status as an example of the leading democracy of the world, but it's because of GOP idiocy. The rest of the world looks at us and shakes their collective head at our failure to provide reasonable health care for all, the decline of our educational system, the growing prevalence of poverty and extreme wealth disparity, and above all the way that right-wing politicians unerringly keep proposing simple, obvious, easy, and completely ineffective remedies for complex problems.
1
Beyond the denial of climate change, the most troubling theme of this story is how our government ''works.''
Thinking ahead, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a coal state Republican who was re-elected with a whopping 807,000 votes in 2014, organizes officials from many states and business interests to oppose a policy that has not even been proposed.
This as 64% of Americans favor stricter controls on power plant emissions, according to Pew Research.
History will not look kindly on this generation of American government ''representatives,'' who work tirelessly against progress while defiling our home, the Earth.
Thinking ahead, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a coal state Republican who was re-elected with a whopping 807,000 votes in 2014, organizes officials from many states and business interests to oppose a policy that has not even been proposed.
This as 64% of Americans favor stricter controls on power plant emissions, according to Pew Research.
History will not look kindly on this generation of American government ''representatives,'' who work tirelessly against progress while defiling our home, the Earth.
34
I see parallels with the secession of the Confederate States of America and the beginnings of the Civil War and these current groups, the US Chamber of Commerce, the Military Industrial Complex, ALEC, state attorney generals "who would like to put a bullet in this thing."
6
Climate change denial is like "shushing" someone who jumps up and yells "FIRE" in a burning theater. After all, why ruin a perfectly good movie?
11
Brilliant and succinct and brief. Bravo!
What all these people who are blocking efforts to minimize human impact on climate change do not get is that in the end this affects us; humans. And not the earth! The Earth will be here for millions of years more with or without us. Life on the other hand will always find a way (I think this was a quote from Jurassic Park)!!
So we can choose to fight each other to extinction or help each other survive - the choice is ours to make.
So we can choose to fight each other to extinction or help each other survive - the choice is ours to make.
5
Indeed, the choice already may have been made. I fear that it is already too late to prevent catastrophic rises in sea levels that will displace huge segments of the worlds population who live in coastal areas. The chief scientist of NASA recently declared that the polar ice caps are melting much faster than they had predicted and that sea levels on the east coast could rise 10 -15 feet in the next 50 years. Think of what that will do to cities like Miami, New York and Boston. What effect will this have on economies? Where will these millions of refugees live?
I very much support Obama's plan. Nonetheless I find this article wanting in its depiction of the Republican opposition. I could find no clear statement indicating the nature of the Republicans' legal challenge. "It disregards the rule of law", we are told. What does that mean? There's a state by state strategy, we're told. A strategy to do what? It's apparently related to Clean Air Act regulations, but why do the Republicans object to them? We're simply not told what their reasoning is. You may find slight hints of the Republican rationale if you know what you're looking for. But in an article laying out their strategy, the rationale should be front and center.
Maybe the Republicans are acting irrationally, but we aren't told their rationale, In fact, the Republicans argue that the Obama plan is unconstitutional because it exceeds executive power. They also believe it exceeds the statutory power granted by the Clean Air Act. This is similar to the attack against Obama's immigration plan, which we were told would fail, but is alive and well. And it is not that different from the first challenge to the ACA, which we were also told had no chance, but went down to the wire.
The bona fides of the Republican strategy have been ignored. Their argument isn't even stated. If Obama's plan went down, I'd be angry and I'd want to know why. But I'd have to go somewhere else to find out what the Republicans are arguing.
Maybe the Republicans are acting irrationally, but we aren't told their rationale, In fact, the Republicans argue that the Obama plan is unconstitutional because it exceeds executive power. They also believe it exceeds the statutory power granted by the Clean Air Act. This is similar to the attack against Obama's immigration plan, which we were told would fail, but is alive and well. And it is not that different from the first challenge to the ACA, which we were also told had no chance, but went down to the wire.
The bona fides of the Republican strategy have been ignored. Their argument isn't even stated. If Obama's plan went down, I'd be angry and I'd want to know why. But I'd have to go somewhere else to find out what the Republicans are arguing.
1
The right wing and its supporters want to end life on Earth as we know it. They want to foul the atmosphere, the land, and the oceans in such a way as to make the majority, if not all, of the planet uninhabitable for future generations. This means that for short term power and $$$ they are willing to mortgage the lives of their children and grandchildren and all future generations.
12
A massive turnout of voters in 2016 voting the straight Democrat ballot is the only way to save the planet.
Since lobbyists are not able to think beyond their bank accounts, let alone planet-wide phenomena, perhaps it would help to provide an analogy to something they do every day: charging their phones.
When a cellphone is charging, there is circuitry in place to monitor how full each battery cell is. That circuitry throttles back the power supply so that the battery doesn't overcharge and go boom. (This is true of most every rechargeable electronic device of current tech including plug-in cars).
All this heat we have been generating since the industrial revolution began has so far gone into a "battery" of sorts. We never created a mechanism that couples the amount of heat we produce to the capacity of that battery. And we are now finding out that the battery is almost full, but we don't have collective agreement to stop charging that battery further.
That battery is the big drink.
And not to point out the obvious, but this battery doesn't care if our disagreements end up at the Supreme Court, or not. It obeys its own set of laws. All day, every day.
When a cellphone is charging, there is circuitry in place to monitor how full each battery cell is. That circuitry throttles back the power supply so that the battery doesn't overcharge and go boom. (This is true of most every rechargeable electronic device of current tech including plug-in cars).
All this heat we have been generating since the industrial revolution began has so far gone into a "battery" of sorts. We never created a mechanism that couples the amount of heat we produce to the capacity of that battery. And we are now finding out that the battery is almost full, but we don't have collective agreement to stop charging that battery further.
That battery is the big drink.
And not to point out the obvious, but this battery doesn't care if our disagreements end up at the Supreme Court, or not. It obeys its own set of laws. All day, every day.
5
Who benefits financially from climate change denial?
Koch Industries, Big Oil
Who is funding climate change denial?
Koch Industries, Big Oil
Koch Industries, Big Oil
Who is funding climate change denial?
Koch Industries, Big Oil
21
I find it ironic that the very politicians who are always outraged about what we are doing to our children and grandchildren with the national debt and economic policy can so very easily dismiss climate change as a myth and insist that polluting our air and waterways is the right of every state.
107
They really do believe that the imaginary God they idolize in their own image wouldn't let their garbage destroy the planet.
The Republicans' culture of life begins and ends with the fetus. After you're born you're on your own.
Odd that not one single scientist could be trotted out to act as a mouthpiece for all the conservative know nothings...
90
odd that not one single scientist was trotted out to discuss the environmental impact of couple million acres of solar panels or wind farms. no one acting as a mouthpiece for liberal sci-fi enthusiast.
The States should form regional Pacts (the type the left claims is allowed by the Constitution) and establish Sanctuary Regions that refuse to enact any of these regulations cooked up by bureaucrats at the EPA. Congress should also replace the EPA with an Economic Growth Agency, which regulates energy with economic growth as its major focus, not this year's climate theory.
2
The latest climate theory? What are you talking about? In broad outline, climate change has been understood and predicted since Arrhenius in the late 19th century. If you want to look at theory change, try economics. Do you think that increasing economic disparity and flat-to-declining wages are predicted by the laws of supply and demand? Think again. It is now clear that institutional factors such as inherited wealth are the primary drivers of these major economic trends that (as a by-product) are also fueling the very political divisiveness that makes it hard to come to a consensus around climate action or economic reform.
2
clinton epa forced my local utility to clean up its coal burning power plants 20 years ago. the utility used every trick in the conservative playbook at that time to fight the epa, fortunately for the region the utility lost and did the necessary changes. guess what the current management now openly acknowledges the foolhardiness of those days. within a year after they installed the equipment to clean up their emissions the air quality dramatically improved and most importantly the bay adjoining the power plants now have the cleanest pristine marine environment for marine life to thrive. this region has now quietly become the model for rest of the country of what a air and water cleanup effort should be. the entire community bought in into the vision two decades ago and now the results are spectacular. oh and a year after the equipment was installed we no longer had to get our cars certified for emissions yearly, back then that pollution control stuff on cars was controversial , not anymore
1
I was not aware that climate change for this year's theory from the bureaucrats in DC. I have been reading about climate change for years and from top scientists and now a reader tells us that it is a passing fad, the Cabbage Patch Doll of theories. Focusing only on growth (as in our right to make money first and foremost) without regards to the consequences, is exactly what has created this situation.
So we have opposition from something called "American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity".
Can we assume that they will soon be joined by "The American Coalition For Invisible Pink Unicorns"?
Can we assume that they will soon be joined by "The American Coalition For Invisible Pink Unicorns"?
59
A rough estimate shows that the plan would, when fully implemented, reduce US carbon emissions by about 10% and the world's by about 2%. Anthropogenic emissions warm the climate by about 0.01 degrees per year (very roughly). So this plan would reduce the temperature by about 0.0002 degrees per year, or 0.01 degrees in 50 years. What is that worth? Is it worth anything at all? Will it only shift carbon-intensive jobs to China?
11
China is saying that they plan on mitigating their carbon footprint. If they do this, they will continue to fly past us with regards to economic growth. Yes they will continue their control of natural resources around the globe but if they offset their carbon outputs from these investments and we stand idle our Nation will move into rapid economic decline simply for our failure to lead the world through this mess.
By your logic we should never do anything about global warming until others agree to do the same. But that is a recipe for failure. Big problems are tackled one step at a time.
So you believe that this initiative alone is meant to solve the problem of climate changes. News flash: it will take a number of tough and gutsy decisions to address this matter and this is only one of them. Using meaningless math to prove that we need do nothing is idiotic
A bunch of corporate executives, aided by smart lawyers, cannot dictate and decide the fate of climate of the world. Already, the Earth is literally facing the heat of climate change and many low lying islands are vanishing in rising sea levels. Also many parts of the U.S. are witnessing unprecedented droughts while some are facing sudden floods. It is just matter of time when nature would strike with full force and show its might. Selfish and money minded corporate heads should understand the ground reality and think of future of this Earth and our generations. Mr.Obama is taking the right decision keeping the future generation in mind.
59
History shows: Yes they can. With as your aftermath you describe. Money, reason, cannot stop them. Only the force of an organized public protecting their children's lives.
And a large and populous country like India can also do her bit, her share of cleaning up the environment, the skies, the oceans and the earth.
1
Coal has lost the war.
Mitch McConnell and the rest of the Republicans just don't accept it yet, and continue the fight to poison the planet.
Mitch McConnell and the rest of the Republicans just don't accept it yet, and continue the fight to poison the planet.
54
Meanwhile, SteveS, the Chinese, by their agreement with the Obama Administration, are free to continue expanding their greenhouse gas emissions until at least 2030. Even as China currently generates almost twice the greenhouse gases, by volume, as the US.
It's about time that steps be taken to reduce America's dependence on coal. Needless to say, we need to encourage development of alternative sources of energy, such as wind energy, as other countries are doing. Even China, which has a horrendous air pollution problem, is considering phasing out some of its coal fired electricity plants.
34
China...'considering'.... Tells it all
Meanwhile, Germany is building or has built 10 new coal generation plants. Taking nuclear plants offline has raised the cost of electricity high enough for German manufacturers to consider Asian locations.
But by their agreement with the Obama Administration, Mr. Eisen, the Chinese may continue to increase their greenhouse gas emissions until 2030.
Even if this coalition were to someday gain a victory in the courts, it will take so long that the rule will be enacted de facto. Who in their right mind would finance a coal plant that violates these rules? Which utility executive would approve a new coal plant? This is a slow moving, risk averse industry which lives off of guaranteed returns. Sen McConnell knew this, so instead of negotiating and legislating, he gets to squeeze out donations and the support of the anti-Obama conservative base.
72
i've now read hundreds of articles on the subject...there is basically total agreement:
keep burning oil/coal: we'll run out of clean air and water;
stop burning oli/coal; we will lose some jobs.
keep burning oil/coal: we'll run out of clean air and water;
stop burning oli/coal; we will lose some jobs.
Follow the money. Thanks Mr. President for leading the way.
35
Almost from the day he took office, President Obama has had to struggle to do the right thing for the country in the face of bitter and implacable opposition from the Neanderthals of the Republican Party and their Big Business allies, whether it was to save a plunging economy with stimulus spending, extend health coverage to more Americans, make our banking system more secure from future meltdown, limit our involvement in Middle East wars or, as here, to battle to leave our children a world with clean air and water. Whatever his flaws and failings and, yes, his failures, voting for him was one of the best things I ever did for the well being of the country.
188
Big business acts in its own interest. If climate change brings all the disastrous consequences predicted, the economy will crash and big business will have to work to revive it. In the long run, then, it is inevitable that big business will support efforts to reverse global warming. it seems to me that the best strategy for those advocating an aggressive climate plan is to work with and convince big business that now is the time. Treating big business as the enemy is counterproductive.
Counterproductive? And big business isn't working toward one result, more profit at any cost to health and welfare of the planet and anything that depends of the wellness of biosphere. Big bigness looks at exploitation of the earth in one way only - if we don't, someone else will. Big business is well aware of the damage they are doing. their ethically challenged response is work faster to make more money before it's too late.
How much will this bold plan lower our temperatures?
6
Probably not a lot, but it's a start, you have to start somewhere and this is at least SOMETHING. Up to now the efforts have been substantially below what is required. Pres Obama deserves credit for seizing the nettle once more and doing what is necessary, I'm just sorry it took him so long to get round to it.
At least you've fessed up to the fact that they're climbing.
It's not just about global climate change. It's about pollution generally. The coal companies don't own the sky and the air. It belongs to all of us. I believe that a majority of us would like the sky and the air to remain clean and breathable.
1
If as West Virginia's attorney general Partrick Morrisey says,
“'This [Clean Air Act] rule represents the most far-reaching energy regulation in this nation’s history, drawn up by radical bureaucrats and based on an obscure, rarely used provision of the Clean Air Act.'”
is true, the legal challenge being brought by the 15 plus Republican state attorneys general is irrelevant. It's just political eye-wash. A rule based upon a provision, no matter how "obscure," of the Clean Air Act, cannot be illegal. Oh, yes, except in the eyes of the Republicans.
Almost every action taken by the Obama administration has been challenged in court by Republicans. When will the Republicans stop tilting at windmills?
“'This [Clean Air Act] rule represents the most far-reaching energy regulation in this nation’s history, drawn up by radical bureaucrats and based on an obscure, rarely used provision of the Clean Air Act.'”
is true, the legal challenge being brought by the 15 plus Republican state attorneys general is irrelevant. It's just political eye-wash. A rule based upon a provision, no matter how "obscure," of the Clean Air Act, cannot be illegal. Oh, yes, except in the eyes of the Republicans.
Almost every action taken by the Obama administration has been challenged in court by Republicans. When will the Republicans stop tilting at windmills?
45
"When will the Republicans stop tilting at windmills?"
Only when the rest of us stop trying to build them. Give it time. Millennials are Greener than their elders. I just wish we had time for the GOP (Gun-nuts, Old Puritans) to age out of voting.
Only when the rest of us stop trying to build them. Give it time. Millennials are Greener than their elders. I just wish we had time for the GOP (Gun-nuts, Old Puritans) to age out of voting.
They have wasted BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars fighting Obama every step of the way but republican voters still vote for all this waste because republicans TELL them that they are the party of fiscal responsibility and their voters believe them even though they have never done a single thing that was fiscally responsible.
How can people not believe in things that are easily proven, like voting records?
How can people not believe in things that are easily proven, like voting records?
Don't be deceived: these dead-enders have nothing. If we are to have a future everyone needs to stop with the hating and deception and short-term profits and think about whether they add up to something we all want.
The simple dynamics of how our climate is changing should be obvious to anyone following the news; there is already enough additional energy in the system from our growing heat-trapping blanket to provide the dangerous complexities such as the California drought, the worldwide heat records, the disrupted Arctic circulation that makes those snowballs in hell for Inhofe to demonstrate to a corrupted congress, and on and on. It's boring going on listing it all but pretty clear its getting hotter. Here's one good place that collects the news and analysis:
http://www.climatecentral.org/
This is serious business. The cosmetic universe distracts and addicts us to entertainment, "excitement"; some people are making a lot of money keeping people from thinking about what's real. Now that money is being spent electing people who work to keep us from noticing the lies and paying attention to our common future.
Sandy and other blackouts remind us that all this entertainment is conditional on solving energy and maintaining infrastructure.
Are we so gullible that a fake can convince us that reality is optional and subject to politics?
The scientific understanding is largely uncontroversial.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
The simple dynamics of how our climate is changing should be obvious to anyone following the news; there is already enough additional energy in the system from our growing heat-trapping blanket to provide the dangerous complexities such as the California drought, the worldwide heat records, the disrupted Arctic circulation that makes those snowballs in hell for Inhofe to demonstrate to a corrupted congress, and on and on. It's boring going on listing it all but pretty clear its getting hotter. Here's one good place that collects the news and analysis:
http://www.climatecentral.org/
This is serious business. The cosmetic universe distracts and addicts us to entertainment, "excitement"; some people are making a lot of money keeping people from thinking about what's real. Now that money is being spent electing people who work to keep us from noticing the lies and paying attention to our common future.
Sandy and other blackouts remind us that all this entertainment is conditional on solving energy and maintaining infrastructure.
Are we so gullible that a fake can convince us that reality is optional and subject to politics?
The scientific understanding is largely uncontroversial.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
57
The opposition from the U.S. Chamber of Coomerce and the GOP to any attempt to protect our planet from the long-term effects of climate change due to man's activities sadden me greatly. I'm a supporter of Obama's initiatives to protect our planet. Here is what I will never understand... if I am wrong, and that efforts to save the planet are unnecessary, then money will have been spent unnecessarily on the project. And yes, jobs will be lost no doubt, although most of those jobs are "old school" and will shortly be rendered obsolete anyway. I might add that my former employment sector, automotive, has went through this shakeout, losing thousands of jobs, so I'm very sympathetic, but you retire, you retrain, you move on. New technologies open new opportunities, especially for a new generation.
But if I am right... our planet is in peril, and this will be the last best chance to save Earth from catastrophic climatic events. It will be more than just a particular sector of jobs lost, and there will not be a second chance to undo these events.
I'll never understand the mind of a businessperson, i guess, especially when it seems that our Chamber of Commerce seems to be so stuck on game-planning only for the next business quarter and not for the long run. It really HAS to be apparent to these folks, yet they persist, literally putting a gun to the planet's head, spinning the cylinder and pulling the trigger.
It doesn't make sense.
But if I am right... our planet is in peril, and this will be the last best chance to save Earth from catastrophic climatic events. It will be more than just a particular sector of jobs lost, and there will not be a second chance to undo these events.
I'll never understand the mind of a businessperson, i guess, especially when it seems that our Chamber of Commerce seems to be so stuck on game-planning only for the next business quarter and not for the long run. It really HAS to be apparent to these folks, yet they persist, literally putting a gun to the planet's head, spinning the cylinder and pulling the trigger.
It doesn't make sense.
97
Contrary to the naysayers, who often have the most to lose monetarily, I put a lot of credence in the scientific community who overwhelmingly agree that humans are a driving force behind the rapid climate change we are witnessing. To listen to the likes of Mitch McConnell push to continue our use of burning coal to produce energy as if its impact is benign, reminds me of the vast panel of executives from cigarette companies who, back in the '80s, all denied any link between smoking tobacco and lung cancer, despite the vast amount of evidence existing that pointed to multiple "hazardous" effects from its use.
We have the know-how to rapidly move towards an ever diminished use of burning fossil fuels with multiple renewable energy sources. Until we stop voting in politicians who will do everything in their power to stop going where we need to go in terms of addressing climate change with real urgency, then is it any wonder our natural world seems to get more intense with each passing year?
We have the know-how to rapidly move towards an ever diminished use of burning fossil fuels with multiple renewable energy sources. Until we stop voting in politicians who will do everything in their power to stop going where we need to go in terms of addressing climate change with real urgency, then is it any wonder our natural world seems to get more intense with each passing year?
46
Great comparison! Once the sea levels have overwhelmed some of our low lying areas, can our government sue the coal industry (and other big-carbon emitters) to help fund relocations, alternative energy development and protective measures? I sure hope so.
In spite of all the noise and opposition, and with full understanding that he and his actions have not been without fault, I'm very proud and glad that we have Mr. Obama as our President.
In spite of all the noise and opposition, and with full understanding that he and his actions have not been without fault, I'm very proud and glad that we have Mr. Obama as our President.
1
And remember that John Boehner was caught red handed handing out bribery checks from the tobacco lobby on the house floor and nothing was done to him. This will be just another thing for republicans to collect bribes for.
Republicans never are held accountable for their actions and they are always doing bed things, to America and Americans.
Republicans never are held accountable for their actions and they are always doing bed things, to America and Americans.
Once upon a time, America was the center of optimism, creativity, and can-do attitudes, no matter how big the problem. Today, we have the Republican Party. How far will they continue to drag us from our place as a world leader on all that makes the lives of people better on this sacred Earth?
68
"American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity". If that isn't an oxymoron, I don't know what is!?
33
I support climate warming and carbon emission. While we will have to adapt to the changes in our Earth, climate warming is nothing new in Earth's history. In fact one of the most biological verdant period was the Cambrian Explosion period when atmosphere CO2 was high and temperatures were warm. As a former Northeast resident, I welcome any amount of warmth. Yes, there will be changes on Earth but in the end the changes will be for the better. Obama's Climate Plan is politically driven and will hamper our economy.
8
And how long did those earlier changes take? We are in unknown territory. I agree that if we had 100,000 or even 10,000 years for the predicted warming to occur, humans and animals could migrate and adapt.
We are talking 100 years. Our economy won't endure the loss of our coastal cities. Civilization may fall from drought, unchecked migrations of desperate people, and violent weather. We are playing dice with the planet. I hope your home in Honolulu is far from the water.
We are talking 100 years. Our economy won't endure the loss of our coastal cities. Civilization may fall from drought, unchecked migrations of desperate people, and violent weather. We are playing dice with the planet. I hope your home in Honolulu is far from the water.
Bit of a suggest: get ahold of a map showong what the continents and oceans looked like back then. Compare it to what they look like now, paying close attention to sea levels.
Then move back from the coast. Quite a bit back, as there're a lot of inland seas.
But thanks for the bring-back-the-glorious-trilobite argument, and for honestly saying that yep, planet's warming up and the czuse is us.
Then move back from the coast. Quite a bit back, as there're a lot of inland seas.
But thanks for the bring-back-the-glorious-trilobite argument, and for honestly saying that yep, planet's warming up and the czuse is us.
"in the end the changes will be for the better"
Granted, the fall of the dinosaurs was perhaps a good thing for us mammals but do you generally see mass extinction events as things to look forward to?
Granted, the fall of the dinosaurs was perhaps a good thing for us mammals but do you generally see mass extinction events as things to look forward to?
The most disgusting thing of all is that these people have children who have children of the age where they will be hard pressed to find a place to live on the earth by the time they reach middle age. Their utter greed have doomed their children and grandchildren to lives of utter despair, homelessness and poverty. We have become the most selfish nation on earth and these people are just okay with it all because they'll be dead by that time it comes. But at least they'll be rich, right? How can anyone in their right minds vote for republicans?
23
GOP to America - "Don't breath the air, don't drink the water..." with apologies to the respective songwriters and performers :-(
11
Consider that the Pentagon recently "released a report asserting decisively that climate change poses an immediate threat to national security, with increased risks from terrorism, infectious disease, global poverty and food shortages."
And consider that many of our lawmakers have been slowing action on this "immediate threat to national security" in return for petrodollars. Why is this not a crime punishable by long prison sentences? (and this also goes for those paying the bribes)
I am not even considering the damage these people are doing to the biosphere on which we all depend.
And finally, why aren’t democratic lawmakers asking this question in public?
And consider that many of our lawmakers have been slowing action on this "immediate threat to national security" in return for petrodollars. Why is this not a crime punishable by long prison sentences? (and this also goes for those paying the bribes)
I am not even considering the damage these people are doing to the biosphere on which we all depend.
And finally, why aren’t democratic lawmakers asking this question in public?
24
"corporate lawyers, coal lobbyists and Republican political strategists..."
In other words the usual suspects when it comes to battling anything good for the earth or the people on it in the interests of preserving their own lucre...
What utter forces of darkness these people are.
In other words the usual suspects when it comes to battling anything good for the earth or the people on it in the interests of preserving their own lucre...
What utter forces of darkness these people are.
45
You write: "Move to fight Obama's climate plan started early". Early? Obama announced in a 2008 campaign stop that if elected he would bankrupt the coal industry. I would think that put the industry, the utilities that use coal and the states whose electric grid depends on coal on notice. Obama may have waited until the last months of his presidency to reveal the details but his intent has been clear all along.
4
I am thrilled that President Obama has aligned himself with Pope Francis on this topic. This change in our energy policy will create more jobs, decrease our need to be involved in the Middle East, reduce medical costs related to emissions and land/water poisoning and give future generations a cleaner world to live in. Without it, we are leave a deadly legacy for our children in the name of big oil, coal and gas.
26
Quite obviously, it's all about MONEY -- THEIR'S! These greedy people can't keep their minds focused on the future of our Global home and what is in the interest of EVERY LIVING BEING -- human & animal!
14
This has become a poor excuse for a country and society.
7
Well, they can't blame Obama for not trying now, at least.
3
Didn't America and American industry once have an old-fashioned, "can do" spirit? Republican politicians run around criticizing President Obama for not proclaiming "American exceptionalism" everywhere he travels, but they object to anything he does to move us forward. How can we call ourselves exceptional if we refuse to lead in clean energy technology, if we refuse to even repair our own infrastructure, if we refuse to provide our citizens with access to healthcare, if we refuse to address our endless gun violence… I could go on. How, exactly, are we exceptional if we cannot address the large challenges in front of us?
15
It is remarkable that pro-business Republicans do not have the foresight or resourcefulness to adapt coal plants to alternative energy or their workers. The rest of the modern (and not so modern) world evolves while the US is stuck in the mud of yesteryear's technology.
22
The GOP never does anything, even if it's the right thing to do, unless they believe it will line their pockets with money. Sadly for them, their blind near-sighted devotion to fuel sources e.g. coal that have been used for thousands of years, dooms them and the states they represent to even more financial hardship as they miss out on new technologies and power sources that will generate limitless clean energy - and at prices the fossil fuel industry could never compete with.
11
Yes, yes, yes !!!
We already know umpteen million domestic jobs will disappear and life as we know it in the USA will evaporate if even a small step toward reducing carbon emissions is undertaken. The evidence is in, or so I am told. Also, clearly life in Europe stinks because per capita energy usage is amazingly less, and alternatives like wind and solar are actually in active use.
But please ...... we beg you, take a moment to not trouble us with the speechifying and a barrage of attack ads right now, led by an angry Senator from KY and a blonde industry spokes lady wearing a black pantsuit.
It is summer now, and we all just want a few more months of peace before your billions are spent on the 2016 election cycle ads.
We already know umpteen million domestic jobs will disappear and life as we know it in the USA will evaporate if even a small step toward reducing carbon emissions is undertaken. The evidence is in, or so I am told. Also, clearly life in Europe stinks because per capita energy usage is amazingly less, and alternatives like wind and solar are actually in active use.
But please ...... we beg you, take a moment to not trouble us with the speechifying and a barrage of attack ads right now, led by an angry Senator from KY and a blonde industry spokes lady wearing a black pantsuit.
It is summer now, and we all just want a few more months of peace before your billions are spent on the 2016 election cycle ads.
9
Reality check the pollution from power plants isn't issue it wastefull use of power or electric . Cars leading cause polition in usa an world. Build mass transit system so people have alternative to cars. Futile to blame power companys for our own needs for electric when we ones turning on devices .Computors are leading cause of power consumssion in usa ,billions servers are on 24 hours a day in idle
I understand the Republicans are planning a remake of their favorite movie, Dr. No, with Mitch McConnell taking over Sean Connery's role as James Bond.
Can't wait for the trailers.............
Can't wait for the trailers.............
6
I am more and more drawn to T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men when reading of the dismal fight of climate change deniers solely in the name of free markets and profit, and their potential 'victory'.
One line, especially: "This is the way the world ends...
Not with a bang but a whimper".
One line, especially: "This is the way the world ends...
Not with a bang but a whimper".
6
Air pollution and global warming are certainly problems worth solving -- but it's not going to happen with a president working through executive orders and a just-say-no congress essentially driving themselves into an acrimonious and unruly stalemate time and time again. Every important issue (and the unimportant ones too) seem to languish unresolved in a sea of acrimony. Like the noisy, argumentative neighbors down the street, you wish they would just go away making room for nicer, more helpful and useful replacements to move in.
Well, it's a nice thought anyway...
Well, it's a nice thought anyway...
4
Mitch McConnell and his allies are squandering a golden opportunity by wasting money and political capital on his phony "War For Coal." He should be bending over backwards, using every trick in the book, to attract alternative energy manufacturing companies to his state and more generally to his region.
Tying up resources fighting court battles that are frankly insane in the face of a warming planet does a terrible disservice to his unemployed constituents. But, hey, Republicans don't know how to create solutions for the future. They only know how to cling desperately to a past that is dead and gone, and there you have Mitch McConnell.
Tying up resources fighting court battles that are frankly insane in the face of a warming planet does a terrible disservice to his unemployed constituents. But, hey, Republicans don't know how to create solutions for the future. They only know how to cling desperately to a past that is dead and gone, and there you have Mitch McConnell.
47
Since there will not be a black Democrat presidential candidate in 2016, this strategy is very dangerous for the Republicans. The racists in the base who reject any move because it comes from a black president will begin to look more logically into Republican anti environment proposals and conclude that the Republicans are the property of selfish fatcats.
14
We'll export the coal to China so they can produce Iphones and other goods for export here with the worst imaginable pollution while we feel virtuous. Why don't people realize that the export of American jobs is a climate issue as well as an economic one, but one our corporate puppets in DC will not face.
14
Why do these people hate our planet so much? That's really the only question that needs to be asked.
64
Why do these people hate our planet so much? That's really the only question that needs to be asked.
=======================================
Why does this Administration hate our Constitution so much that it thinks it can ignore laws the way they are written? That's really the only question that needs to be asked.
=======================================
Why does this Administration hate our Constitution so much that it thinks it can ignore laws the way they are written? That's really the only question that needs to be asked.
1
It is not that they hate the planet so much as they love money.
1
Why do they hate everything?
They hate themselves.
And in their illness they feel that if they are miserable everything and everyone must be made to feel miserable as well. They are sacred. They have been "scardy cats" forever. Bulling gives them false sense of power. McConnell's world is crumbling around him. He constantly feels threatened this makes him and all the others feel hollow and empty inside so they need to be in control at all times, must be "right" at all times.
Little boys not capable of doing a grown up job.
So glad they are being exposed for what they are.
We have awakened.
WE must make this next election about us, the people and our home above all else.
WE, 300,000,000 of us have great powers for change.
Create the change WE want in our minds everyday and visualize what and how WE
see our world the way WE want it for the betterment of ALL.
For the first time ever We are really seeing.
The democratic/capitalistic process as we know it is falling apart.
WE will be creating a new kind of democracy once this fall of Rome is completed.
There is no escaping the evolution of human consciousness.
They hate themselves.
And in their illness they feel that if they are miserable everything and everyone must be made to feel miserable as well. They are sacred. They have been "scardy cats" forever. Bulling gives them false sense of power. McConnell's world is crumbling around him. He constantly feels threatened this makes him and all the others feel hollow and empty inside so they need to be in control at all times, must be "right" at all times.
Little boys not capable of doing a grown up job.
So glad they are being exposed for what they are.
We have awakened.
WE must make this next election about us, the people and our home above all else.
WE, 300,000,000 of us have great powers for change.
Create the change WE want in our minds everyday and visualize what and how WE
see our world the way WE want it for the betterment of ALL.
For the first time ever We are really seeing.
The democratic/capitalistic process as we know it is falling apart.
WE will be creating a new kind of democracy once this fall of Rome is completed.
There is no escaping the evolution of human consciousness.
One has to be incredibly evil to fight efforts to limit global warming - EVEN BEFORE THE DETAILS ARE ANNOUNCED! Such blind ideological opposition is akin to risking the future of today's youth around the world, as well as everyone living on Earth in the future! I cannot imagine such insensitivity to others - this is sociopathic behavior on a massive, possibly unimaginable scale, and a new low in morality!
168
As has been amply demonstrated, literally ANYTHING that Obama proposes is opposed, simply because he proposed it. The merits of any position or proposal have no relevance. Others have called this ODS - Obama Derangement Syndrome :-(
3
Mr. Eskildson has hit the nail on the head. This is sociopathic and immoral behavior. It would be one thing to fight a policy because you have a better, cheaper or more effective alternative to propose; but to allow the planet and its biosphere to suffer and to die because your sponsors want you to protect their next quarter profits is just plain evil.
The Republicans in Congress and particularly those in the Senate are clearly morally corrupt to the core. This is truly a "Have you no shame?" moment in American politics.
The Republicans in Congress and particularly those in the Senate are clearly morally corrupt to the core. This is truly a "Have you no shame?" moment in American politics.
1
@pnut
"Why have the big energy companies been caught flat footed here? "
They have been fighting for survival. Several have already filed for, or ar in bankruptcy as alternative energy takes its place. As usual, the answer is money and power. Without the money and support from the coal industry, the GOP domination of politics in Appalachia will lose its place.
Mitch McConnell will no longer have the money coming in as the industry dries up, and his voting base is out of work.
"Why have the big energy companies been caught flat footed here? "
They have been fighting for survival. Several have already filed for, or ar in bankruptcy as alternative energy takes its place. As usual, the answer is money and power. Without the money and support from the coal industry, the GOP domination of politics in Appalachia will lose its place.
Mitch McConnell will no longer have the money coming in as the industry dries up, and his voting base is out of work.
49
The GOP had no place at all in Coal Country until the Democrats deliberately destroyed their economy.
1
You seem to be saying that this measure will cause unemployment in Kentucky. Is that a good thing? Probably not for the people who are going to be unemployed.
It's not alternative energy that's doing it; alternative energy will be used only as long as it is heavily subsidized. It's natural gas and the fracking revolution.
It's not alternative energy that's doing it; alternative energy will be used only as long as it is heavily subsidized. It's natural gas and the fracking revolution.
The coal industry and the politicians that support it should not be blaming President Obama. They should be blaming their partner in these proposed law suits - the oil and gas industry. Greater air pollution from coal and the low price of natural gas have convinced China to reduce it purchases of coal and to switch its electric power plants to fuels other than coal. US electric utilities have also been replacing coal-fired plants with gas-fired electric generation.
Another article in the Business section of today's paper reports that another major coal producer just filed for bankruptcy, the eighth coal producer to do so in recent years. Coal production has not been increasing, it has decreased 15% since 2008.
Unless the coal industry can find new uses for coal, it will continue to decline. Blaming President Obama, who hasn't even implemented new regulations about air pollution yet, just wastes our precious time. We don't need more pointless partisanship.
Another article in the Business section of today's paper reports that another major coal producer just filed for bankruptcy, the eighth coal producer to do so in recent years. Coal production has not been increasing, it has decreased 15% since 2008.
Unless the coal industry can find new uses for coal, it will continue to decline. Blaming President Obama, who hasn't even implemented new regulations about air pollution yet, just wastes our precious time. We don't need more pointless partisanship.
84
The best use for the vast majority of coal is permanently occupying its current space in the ground.
2
There seems to be a general confusion in terms. Climate change should be the term of choice, as it describes the process very accurately. Whether you choose to call global warming or climate change, this is happening and at an alarming rate. Politicians can turn an eye away and the masses can be mislead. Nevertheless, the science is solid and deniers are doing nothing but stalling the very few steps left before we enter in a positive loop feedback propelled by the methane release of the permafrost and north pole underwater frozen methane sources. Good news. Earth will survive, but humanity, it's a different story.
30
Coal mining and coal burning are two of the most disastrous actions taken by any industry.
They have removed mountain tops, polluted streams, destroyed millions of acres of hardwood forests, and polluted the air we breath.
The coal industry is responsible for close to 60% of childhood respiratory illnesses and acid rain that has caused deforestation from the Mississippi to the Atlantic. It is responsible for the haze over the Grand Canyon. Yes many will lose jobs as it declines, and so will several state treasuries. However, that does not give them the right to subject the majority of us to its detrimental effects.
Also, as we have seen, the mine owners have evades safety rules, and obstructed investigations into accidents. Miners have been afflicted with Black Lung Disease, it is one of the most dangerous occupations, right along with fishing off Alaska. We will still need coal to make steel, and some other products, but nowhere as much as is being used now.
It is an industry that is going the way of many that have been supplanted by more modern methods and products. W. Virginia is one of the poorest states in the union, so who has coal helped? As far as can be seen, certain CEOs, and fund managers, but not the residents who live around the mines.
They have removed mountain tops, polluted streams, destroyed millions of acres of hardwood forests, and polluted the air we breath.
The coal industry is responsible for close to 60% of childhood respiratory illnesses and acid rain that has caused deforestation from the Mississippi to the Atlantic. It is responsible for the haze over the Grand Canyon. Yes many will lose jobs as it declines, and so will several state treasuries. However, that does not give them the right to subject the majority of us to its detrimental effects.
Also, as we have seen, the mine owners have evades safety rules, and obstructed investigations into accidents. Miners have been afflicted with Black Lung Disease, it is one of the most dangerous occupations, right along with fishing off Alaska. We will still need coal to make steel, and some other products, but nowhere as much as is being used now.
It is an industry that is going the way of many that have been supplanted by more modern methods and products. W. Virginia is one of the poorest states in the union, so who has coal helped? As far as can be seen, certain CEOs, and fund managers, but not the residents who live around the mines.
233
Coal mining and coal burning are two of the most disastrous actions taken by any industry.
They have removed mountain tops, polluted streams, destroyed millions of acres of hardwood forests, and polluted the air we breath.
The coal industry is responsible for close to 60% of childhood respiratory illnesses and acid rain that has caused deforestation from the Mississippi to the Atlantic. It is responsible for the haze over the Grand Canyon.
====================
Actually, it's been responsible for keeping the lights on in your house for decades.
Oh, you Mr Underwood been contributing to that haze over the Grand Canyon. California utilities have been buying power from coal-fired plants in Arizona for ages.
They have removed mountain tops, polluted streams, destroyed millions of acres of hardwood forests, and polluted the air we breath.
The coal industry is responsible for close to 60% of childhood respiratory illnesses and acid rain that has caused deforestation from the Mississippi to the Atlantic. It is responsible for the haze over the Grand Canyon.
====================
Actually, it's been responsible for keeping the lights on in your house for decades.
Oh, you Mr Underwood been contributing to that haze over the Grand Canyon. California utilities have been buying power from coal-fired plants in Arizona for ages.
Who was helped by coal? Mitch McConnell, a very wealthy man. Set a picture of Mitch alongside one of a miner, or better yet, a lunch x-ray of each, and you'll see who has profited more from coal.
Obama won't be satisfied until he has set the country on a long term de-growth economy which will impoverish all of us whilst Asia expands.
"under my plan of cap and trade electricity prices will necessarily skrocket!"
What more do you need to know? You will soon have hundreds of dollars left in your monthly budget to spend on items other than your utility bill.
"under my plan of cap and trade electricity prices will necessarily skrocket!"
What more do you need to know? You will soon have hundreds of dollars left in your monthly budget to spend on items other than your utility bill.
10
Nonsense. The economy including mostly energy as gone productive through the roof under Obama.
24
Jobs are shifting. It's happened in many industries, it's now happening in energy. There are jobs in energy, there will be jobs in energy. But the jobs are shifting.
http://www.theenergycollective.com/katherinetweed/2213656/coal-loses-nea...
http://www.theenergycollective.com/katherinetweed/2213656/coal-loses-nea...
Nonsense. The economy including mostly energy as gone productive through the roof under Obama.
============
I notice the startling lack of citation of any facts for this assertion
============
I notice the startling lack of citation of any facts for this assertion
1
Past economic "truisms"
- automobiles will never function as well with unleaded gas
- solar power will never be able to compete with fossil fuels
- wind power will never be able to compete with fossil fuels
- electric cars will never be an economic alternative to internal combustion engines
- economic growth always requires more fossil fuel consumption
- saving energy means a lower standard of living
- oil spills are a necessary price for economic growth
- etc.
- automobiles will never function as well with unleaded gas
- solar power will never be able to compete with fossil fuels
- wind power will never be able to compete with fossil fuels
- electric cars will never be an economic alternative to internal combustion engines
- economic growth always requires more fossil fuel consumption
- saving energy means a lower standard of living
- oil spills are a necessary price for economic growth
- etc.
58
# 2,3,4 are still true.
From what I can see here, it's the usual. Politics attempting to explain science. Science is science, regardless of what people say. You can enact policy based on your faulty view of science (or perhaps your correct view of science). Policy is policy, regardless of science. Science doesn't know policy any more than policy knows science. We need deep and far thinking people to combine the two.
16
Science knows when polititians cut off their funding. Scientists see other scientists threatened with inquisition and jail for not conforming.
1
Or, people involved in policy ask people qualified in science and technology for advice.
I really, really miss the Office of Technology Assessment. Newt killed it.
Look up "OTA reports". Congress used to get regular updates on things they couldn't be expected to be experts in. "I'm not a scientist", remember?
http://ota.fas.org/
I really, really miss the Office of Technology Assessment. Newt killed it.
Look up "OTA reports". Congress used to get regular updates on things they couldn't be expected to be experts in. "I'm not a scientist", remember?
http://ota.fas.org/
1
And how would you accomplish that when you either get policy you agree with or you don't, and it will never please everyone or their would be no need to make policy and seek to alter the course of destruction of the planet for the sake of noting more than greed.
Well, if the Republicans hate it, it must be the right thing to do. They hate America, so if they say NO, the answer must be YES.
In the meantime, let's all act like their bronze-age cult belief isn't the most important thing to them -- and let's sit around and listen to them intently, with furrowed brows so they think we are taking them seriously. Let's pretend that the right-wing doesn't hate science, math and critical thought, and let's all pretend that when conservative christians start babbling about science, try not to laugh out loud at their bloviating. We all know that whatever they are repeating, like parrots, they heard from Rush or Hannity...
In the meantime, let's all act like their bronze-age cult belief isn't the most important thing to them -- and let's sit around and listen to them intently, with furrowed brows so they think we are taking them seriously. Let's pretend that the right-wing doesn't hate science, math and critical thought, and let's all pretend that when conservative christians start babbling about science, try not to laugh out loud at their bloviating. We all know that whatever they are repeating, like parrots, they heard from Rush or Hannity...
51
" if the Republicans hate it, it must be the right thing to do. They hate America, so if they say NO, the answer must be YES".
What kind of logic is that? All this "bloviating" seems crystal clear and you're a bloviater.
What kind of logic is that? All this "bloviating" seems crystal clear and you're a bloviater.
This is just Obama trying to create some lasting boondoggle for his green energy cronies before leaving office. If the policy had any merits whatsoever, he'd have proposed it earlier in his tenure and made it a piece of signature legislation, rather than something shoved down people's throats by executive fiat during an election year.
10
The President did propose it during his first term. Congress refused to go along then. We've waited long enough.
26
Obama owes environmentalists. One big donor has waited long enough.
1
This is not "executive fiat." This is the EPA regulating an air pollutant. The EPA is required to do so by the Clean Air Act—signature legislation of... Richard Nixon!
"Green energy cronies" is hilarious and also not a thing... have you ever met an environmental activist? You know how much money environmental groups spend on lobbying last year? About $7m. Oil and Gas? $144m. Coal alone? $10m.
"Green energy cronies" is hilarious and also not a thing... have you ever met an environmental activist? You know how much money environmental groups spend on lobbying last year? About $7m. Oil and Gas? $144m. Coal alone? $10m.
4
The scientific community is selling its little slice of death to generate funding.
The politicians are exploiting this to generate a cap-and trade business that they will invest heavily in and profit from.
The common man in the street will be left holding the bag, and paying the costs for a crisis we can neither control nor stop that we didn't cause.
It's a planet thing we don't understand.
Future generations will have a good laugh.
The politicians are exploiting this to generate a cap-and trade business that they will invest heavily in and profit from.
The common man in the street will be left holding the bag, and paying the costs for a crisis we can neither control nor stop that we didn't cause.
It's a planet thing we don't understand.
Future generations will have a good laugh.
6
Maybe and maybe not, depending on whether future generations a) think it's funny and/or b) exist.
17
"Slice of Death"?? Dividend cap and trade, which works in BC, will give the proceeds back to the consumers. Future generations will cry at your misinformation.
20
Human caused climate change has been known about since at least the mid 1980's.
15
Sound science not politicians should make these decisions.
15
Unfortunately its all mixed up in the crazy world of "Climate Change". Scientists, who's work is only believed by minorities, have become political activists, picturing themselves as harbingers of disaster and heroes, and 24/7 news agents have become wizened to the fact that imagined global disaster can make big money. It's a sick world, and the US president has now put himself at the head of it.
Another winning issue for Democrats. Here in Maine our number one industry, Lobstering, is threatened by global warming and pollution.
Hello hydrogen!
Hello hydrogen!
52
Um, what's hydrogen and exactly where can we find it? Does this mean we're going back to the Zeppelin era?
The climate definitely changes, but not because Obama told it. Climate scientists promise that the next winter will be one of the coldest in 30 years time. In view of this prospective Obama's ruling, leading to delays in construction of new power plants doesn't look very good for the country.
7
"If Global Warming is Real, Why is it Cold Outside?"
http://thisishistorictimes.com/2013/01/pyrotechnicality/
In other words: Local temperature observations made over a relatively-short time-period do not accurately reflect long-term trends in global temperatures.
Furthermore, this "coldest winter in 30 years" you cite as evidence against the existence of global warming could actually be evidence proving it, assuming it does indeed happen and is sufficiently relevant at all:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/06/can-global-war...
In that case, the effect of elevated greenhouse gases could be thus summarized: seasonal extremes on both ends of the temperature spectrum become more exaggerated, making summers hotter, and winters colder, while the overall, average temperature of the global atmosphere rises (and catastrophic weather events, such as hurricanes, become worse).
There is virtually 100% scientific consensus on the existence of global warming. Anyone denying it is either ignorant of the issue, not arguing in good faith, or a crackpot – possibly all three.
http://thisishistorictimes.com/2013/01/pyrotechnicality/
In other words: Local temperature observations made over a relatively-short time-period do not accurately reflect long-term trends in global temperatures.
Furthermore, this "coldest winter in 30 years" you cite as evidence against the existence of global warming could actually be evidence proving it, assuming it does indeed happen and is sufficiently relevant at all:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/06/can-global-war...
In that case, the effect of elevated greenhouse gases could be thus summarized: seasonal extremes on both ends of the temperature spectrum become more exaggerated, making summers hotter, and winters colder, while the overall, average temperature of the global atmosphere rises (and catastrophic weather events, such as hurricanes, become worse).
There is virtually 100% scientific consensus on the existence of global warming. Anyone denying it is either ignorant of the issue, not arguing in good faith, or a crackpot – possibly all three.
35
It is so easy to say "scientists promise", but it does not sound like real scientist.
They promise little but work with facts to predict what will probably happen. I live in Alaska, winters and summers have been and continue to be warm, very warm by any standard - it is 74 and beautifully sunny right now. With the water temperatures in the ocean - deep and surface - warming, the permafrost melting, ocean water raising, arctic species - animals, plants, birds, et al - being replaces with species from a warmer clime, will, I ain't no scientist and I cannot promise anything but, things they be a chang'en. and there ain't no intelligent way to deny that. Interesting to me the groups that are spending millions on fighting the presidents guide lines. Only large companies that are making money off of coal, gas, and oil. What do mothers and dads, kids, animals, plants and, well, you and I who ain't got no where to go (not meant to be a double negative) when this earth is changed irreversibly? I believe that science will help us to adapt to the changing conditions, but I cannot understand why we seem to be so unwilling to do what we can now to limit the destructive changes that are taking place as we exchange emails. May all be well with you. I write this only in kindness and concern. Maybe you can tell me what is the basic belief that you are working from that makes you feel that the climate is not changing and that we don't need to do anything about it.
They promise little but work with facts to predict what will probably happen. I live in Alaska, winters and summers have been and continue to be warm, very warm by any standard - it is 74 and beautifully sunny right now. With the water temperatures in the ocean - deep and surface - warming, the permafrost melting, ocean water raising, arctic species - animals, plants, birds, et al - being replaces with species from a warmer clime, will, I ain't no scientist and I cannot promise anything but, things they be a chang'en. and there ain't no intelligent way to deny that. Interesting to me the groups that are spending millions on fighting the presidents guide lines. Only large companies that are making money off of coal, gas, and oil. What do mothers and dads, kids, animals, plants and, well, you and I who ain't got no where to go (not meant to be a double negative) when this earth is changed irreversibly? I believe that science will help us to adapt to the changing conditions, but I cannot understand why we seem to be so unwilling to do what we can now to limit the destructive changes that are taking place as we exchange emails. May all be well with you. I write this only in kindness and concern. Maybe you can tell me what is the basic belief that you are working from that makes you feel that the climate is not changing and that we don't need to do anything about it.
35
Which climate scientists? Farmers Almanac? Coldest where?
9
"The challenge of our time." Oh, please! The President just cut a deal with the Chinese, the largest carbon-plus polluter, in which they continue to massively increase carbon emissions for fifteen years while we cut carbon emissions.
The primary purpose of the Climate Change mantra is to economically hamstring the west with more expensive energy; and, thus slower growing economies relative to the developing world which get a free "polluting" ride for decades to grow their economies at the expense of the developed world. Just another redistribution/equality scheme.
The primary purpose of the Climate Change mantra is to economically hamstring the west with more expensive energy; and, thus slower growing economies relative to the developing world which get a free "polluting" ride for decades to grow their economies at the expense of the developed world. Just another redistribution/equality scheme.
12
If you count the ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere due to emissions directly from US for the past 100+ years, it will easily beat all other countries combined. So you pay your debt first and then talk later.
20
The xenophobe considers climate change.
Let's count all the life saving medical and agricultural technology we developed, and computers, TV, etc. that we have shared with the world. We owe nothing!
Greedyness will keep this from happening. The United States may make strides to curb greenhouse gas emissions from powerplants. But there also must be a willingness and resolve on a global scale to increase the cost of coal and to increase the taxes on imports from countries that are not taking any action to curb greenhouse gas emissions. While this may be a global issue, the United States and its citizens must step up and do what is right for the planet we live on, our families, and our future generations. Please people, just look at the weather today, it is foolish for us not to take actions to address the climate change issue. Quit the political posturing for once.
6
Greedyness? How about just plain greed? It works and it's five letters shorter. Saves energy.
5
Opponents to the President's proposal are quick to raise alarms about the plight of the poor, who may suffer higher electricity bills as a result.
Oddly, it never seems to occur to them that they could protect the poor from this fate simply by shaving executive compensation and shareholder earnings, and have a safer planet in the bargain.
Which suggests where their concerns really lie.
Oddly, it never seems to occur to them that they could protect the poor from this fate simply by shaving executive compensation and shareholder earnings, and have a safer planet in the bargain.
Which suggests where their concerns really lie.
111
Although I might favor it, I don't understand how shaving executive compensation and shareholder earnings, by themselves, will help the poor.
Opponents to the new regulations warn that it will increase costs to the utilities, forcing them to raise their rates, hurting the poor.
They simply don't mention that instead of passing the costs down to consumers - which they claim would be a very bad thing - they could also absorb them by reducing executive compensation and dividends to shareholders.
But, clearly, those options are not on the table. In other words, its not the poor they're worried about.
They simply don't mention that instead of passing the costs down to consumers - which they claim would be a very bad thing - they could also absorb them by reducing executive compensation and dividends to shareholders.
But, clearly, those options are not on the table. In other words, its not the poor they're worried about.
Like many across the nation, my local power company allows customers to opt into a program whereby all of their energy usage must be purchased from renewable sources: e.g. wind and solar power. If you have this option, please take a few minutes to sign up for it.
6
Like many across the nation, my local power company allows customers to opt into a program whereby all of their energy usage must be purchased from renewable sources: e.g. wind and solar power. If you have this option, please take a few minutes to sign up for it.
==============
Right. Power companies spend lots of time sorting good "green" electrons from evil "red" electrons
==============
Right. Power companies spend lots of time sorting good "green" electrons from evil "red" electrons
4
Clearly you missed the point.
Electricity (or "electrons" as you so scientifically put it) can be sourced from renewable, emissions free sources like wind, solar, and hydrothermal. Switching to these "clean" sources of energy means a net decrease in the amount of CO2 and other pollutants and greenhouse gases.
Demanding, through consumer choice, that power companies begin switching to these cleaner energy sources may not be the most ideal way to solve the climate crisis but is one of the few strategies that can be enacted by individuals (besides installing your own solar panels).
This debate has been hijacked by science deniers and capitalist cronies who seem to be oblivious to the seriousness of the situation. Our planet is dying before our eyes, and we would rather fight tooth and nail to preserve inefficient and ancient fossil fuel technology than be leaders in the switch the modern energy sources. The current energy system benefits only the large companies than ravage natural resources chasing short term profits, everyone else is a loser in this game. Cheap, clean, renewable energy will revolutionize society from the bottom up and disrupt the imbalance of wealth and control of production in this country.
Electricity (or "electrons" as you so scientifically put it) can be sourced from renewable, emissions free sources like wind, solar, and hydrothermal. Switching to these "clean" sources of energy means a net decrease in the amount of CO2 and other pollutants and greenhouse gases.
Demanding, through consumer choice, that power companies begin switching to these cleaner energy sources may not be the most ideal way to solve the climate crisis but is one of the few strategies that can be enacted by individuals (besides installing your own solar panels).
This debate has been hijacked by science deniers and capitalist cronies who seem to be oblivious to the seriousness of the situation. Our planet is dying before our eyes, and we would rather fight tooth and nail to preserve inefficient and ancient fossil fuel technology than be leaders in the switch the modern energy sources. The current energy system benefits only the large companies than ravage natural resources chasing short term profits, everyone else is a loser in this game. Cheap, clean, renewable energy will revolutionize society from the bottom up and disrupt the imbalance of wealth and control of production in this country.
27
Well, yes, in a sense. Of course power companies have to know where their energy is coming from. How else can they meet fluctuating demand without creating blackouts or brownouts?
3
It's estimated this legislation will cost the average American family an additional $1,000 per year. This is pocket change to Obama and Hillary.
Our efforts are meaningless since both China and India (the worlds largest sources of greenhouse gases) are not participating in reducing their greenhouse gases.
President Obama is using the EPA to pursue his personal agenda despite conflicting evidence that greenhouse gases actually have any impact on global warming. All at the expense of the American people.
Our efforts are meaningless since both China and India (the worlds largest sources of greenhouse gases) are not participating in reducing their greenhouse gases.
President Obama is using the EPA to pursue his personal agenda despite conflicting evidence that greenhouse gases actually have any impact on global warming. All at the expense of the American people.
10
"Conflicting evidence?" Maybe on talk radio, but not in the scientific community. And who is "estimating" this $1k/yr figure? Coal companies?
15
Which right wing radio station did you hear this on?
It's estimated that this regulation (the legislation was passed long ago) will save consumers several thousand $ per year. At least $1,000 per year in direct expenses for energy which will be replaced by solar, and several thousand per year in reduced medical expenses. People will live longer.
Many people are already saving lots of money on electricity using solar energy, which often costs them nothing. Many people are actually making money selling excess electricity generated by solar panels back to the utilities.
Of course, the Koch brothers want regulations to stop this as it lowers the demand for their fossil fuels.
Many people are already saving lots of money on electricity using solar energy, which often costs them nothing. Many people are actually making money selling excess electricity generated by solar panels back to the utilities.
Of course, the Koch brothers want regulations to stop this as it lowers the demand for their fossil fuels.
1
Watch out everyone. I understand that the O man's next move will be to prohibit people from passing gas except on every other weekday, holidays and sundays. It will help. I promise. Really. No joke.
3
You don't get it.
9
Don't give up your day job.
5
We've got evidence Obama can't work across the aisle, can't conduct a critical rollout (ACA), can't work with allies (Israel), can't negotiate with enemies (Iran), can't back up promises (red line in the sand), can't manage to keep at least one house of congress, and although there is more, I'll stop with, he can't pick a good secretary of state.
So why should we trust that he knows anything about climate change? For all the squishy green rhetoric (think spoiled veggies) there is little hard scientific evidence for climate change -- because it doesn't really qualify as a science as its hypotheses are not falsifiable. They can't be tested for a number of reasons including the fact that all these horrifying scenarios won't occur for years. It's a religion, maybe.
We have 5% of the world population. It's a nice conceit (comparable to thinking Iran will behave if we sign a treaty) that China et al will follow our lead. But they won't because -- they want the most reliable, cheapest source of energy available -- fossil fuels. They want to live like us.
Hey. I'm in a blue state. I don't see solar panels or wind farms. I see an epidemic of SUVs (and bad drivers), huge houses and progressive sentiment. Looks like Goreland.
Hey, I'm all for controlling pollution, protecting the environment, etc. I wept when Cecil the Lion died. I feed songbirds in my backyard to the point they say to each other, hey -- what's up? You want to grab some munchies at Ralphies?
So why should we trust that he knows anything about climate change? For all the squishy green rhetoric (think spoiled veggies) there is little hard scientific evidence for climate change -- because it doesn't really qualify as a science as its hypotheses are not falsifiable. They can't be tested for a number of reasons including the fact that all these horrifying scenarios won't occur for years. It's a religion, maybe.
We have 5% of the world population. It's a nice conceit (comparable to thinking Iran will behave if we sign a treaty) that China et al will follow our lead. But they won't because -- they want the most reliable, cheapest source of energy available -- fossil fuels. They want to live like us.
Hey. I'm in a blue state. I don't see solar panels or wind farms. I see an epidemic of SUVs (and bad drivers), huge houses and progressive sentiment. Looks like Goreland.
Hey, I'm all for controlling pollution, protecting the environment, etc. I wept when Cecil the Lion died. I feed songbirds in my backyard to the point they say to each other, hey -- what's up? You want to grab some munchies at Ralphies?
7
Lots of "hard science" to demonstrate anthropomorphic climate change. Open your eyes.
11
You don't need to trust the O man. You can read the history of global warming, study what other white scientists in Europe and elsewhere have found and decide for yourself how severe it is. Most of the intellectuals (rational, non religious) people I trust find Global warming to be a severe show stopper to our current way of life.
About SUVs, cows and farming, yes, they constitute and great deal but they lag behind the coal power generators in terms of total ppm.
Now, please don't bring cecil the lion into the mix. Almost all human beings reading news on the internet seem to like the lion more than the 200,000 people who lost their lives in Syria. It's a human mental disorder. Get over it.
About SUVs, cows and farming, yes, they constitute and great deal but they lag behind the coal power generators in terms of total ppm.
Now, please don't bring cecil the lion into the mix. Almost all human beings reading news on the internet seem to like the lion more than the 200,000 people who lost their lives in Syria. It's a human mental disorder. Get over it.
12
But have you ever seen. "Global warming to be a severe show stopper to our current way of life," or is it just something these intellectuals you trust believe in? At a certain point rationality needs to overcome pure political beliefs.
The planet has serious climate issues. Obama has been in office for two terms, and at the end of his second term he addresses climate issues.....
I agree with the need for climate policy, but have little faith that something will actually be accomplished.
I agree with the need for climate policy, but have little faith that something will actually be accomplished.
5
And Obama is a smart guy, so he knows that. When you propose reform, however important, that you know will not pass, you're not doing it just to waste time. Your purpose is to embarrass the political opposition. The Republicans' favorite game is sometime played by the Democrats, and that's what's going on here.
2
Yep. Unlike FDR, LBJ and, yes, RWR, who each worked with (and succeeded in a) divided government, BHO has been unable to do so. Indeed, Legislators of his own party have even found him difficult to work with.
Instead, the President has waited until his last two years to cook up a myriad of programs the Constitutionality of which are suspect. No parliamentary debate. Just a nod from his 38% and we are off to the races.
Devious? Cowardly? Both? Take your pick.
One thing is for sure. If a Republican President were to pursue this stealth method of governing, this newspaper would be screaming bloody murder.
Instead, the President has waited until his last two years to cook up a myriad of programs the Constitutionality of which are suspect. No parliamentary debate. Just a nod from his 38% and we are off to the races.
Devious? Cowardly? Both? Take your pick.
One thing is for sure. If a Republican President were to pursue this stealth method of governing, this newspaper would be screaming bloody murder.
3
"One thing is for sure. If a Republican President were to pursue this stealth method of governing, this newspaper would be screaming bloody murder."
Hi Robert -- It was v.p. Cheney, and his sidekick, GWB, who took the USA down the garden path, with elegant guile, and into the trillion dollar war in Iraq. It's ongoing still, adding daily to its hundreds of thousands casualties and millions of refugees. The press, including NYT, had less to say about that crime than they do about the EPA's long overdue CO-2 ruling. As a capitalist, I judge the CO-2 rule to be the better investment.
Hi Robert -- It was v.p. Cheney, and his sidekick, GWB, who took the USA down the garden path, with elegant guile, and into the trillion dollar war in Iraq. It's ongoing still, adding daily to its hundreds of thousands casualties and millions of refugees. The press, including NYT, had less to say about that crime than they do about the EPA's long overdue CO-2 ruling. As a capitalist, I judge the CO-2 rule to be the better investment.
9
Oh, please!
I am so tired of being told what we have to do to decreased per capita energy use while at the same time the US is growing like a third world country thanks to immigration - legal and illegal - and thus wiping out any benefits that we might have individually made by the fact that the 'capita' is increasing at an alarming rate.
Third world people who enter the first world significantly increase their carbon footprint. This is not news. Jose may be sleeping in a walk-in closet in a bedroll but he is living in a home w/A/c, electric lights and first world amenities.
I am an old line environmentalist who has gone out of my way to conserve energy, decrease my carbon footprint, and in general be a good citizen.
Until Obama is ready to decrease US population growth by cutting legal immigration back dramatically and sending our illegal immigrant population back to their respective countries, I refuse to take him seriously on 'greenhouse gases'. He is simply being silly. I am appalled that anybody could be impressed at his obviously politically slanted plans.
I am so tired of being told what we have to do to decreased per capita energy use while at the same time the US is growing like a third world country thanks to immigration - legal and illegal - and thus wiping out any benefits that we might have individually made by the fact that the 'capita' is increasing at an alarming rate.
Third world people who enter the first world significantly increase their carbon footprint. This is not news. Jose may be sleeping in a walk-in closet in a bedroll but he is living in a home w/A/c, electric lights and first world amenities.
I am an old line environmentalist who has gone out of my way to conserve energy, decrease my carbon footprint, and in general be a good citizen.
Until Obama is ready to decrease US population growth by cutting legal immigration back dramatically and sending our illegal immigrant population back to their respective countries, I refuse to take him seriously on 'greenhouse gases'. He is simply being silly. I am appalled that anybody could be impressed at his obviously politically slanted plans.
6
Uh, huh. And HOW much additional carbon emissions do 1000 immigrants produce compared to the building and development in almost any suburban town?
The 1000 immigrants will ultimately require all that building and development, not to mention more cars, and more highways. Immigration has caused about 2/3 of the population growth over the last 45 years (during which time we went from 200 million to close to 320 million) and it is projected to contribute 4/5 of the population growth between now and 2050, by which time the population will reach more than 400 million (Pew Research Center, 2008).
3
Are you not aware that immigrants are a big part of 'building and development in almost any suburban town'?
Please.
A big issue is population explosion. A big part of population explosion in the US is immigration.
It's a fact - deal with it.
Please.
A big issue is population explosion. A big part of population explosion in the US is immigration.
It's a fact - deal with it.
3
It will be fascinating to watch the Republican presidential candidates dig in their heels and deny climate change. They know the scientists are correct and that we face a grave threat from climate change, but they must appease their funders and the fossil fool voters. Money talks and politicians are handpuppets.
10
It is safe to say that, as an institution the GOP takes a much dimmer view of all things scientific (to wit, human-caused climate change, evolution) than the Democratic party. But that it's Mr. Obama taking the stand he has on trying to reverse human-caused climate change guarantees howling opposition by Republicans.
Regardless, the profound question for those who will be alive as the 21st century draws to a close is will whatever Obama manages to do to slow CO2 emissions be too little too late. If so, we may find ourselves relying on science to come up with wildly risky measures like seeding the oceans with iron or launching massive umbrellas to shade the Earth.
Regardless, the profound question for those who will be alive as the 21st century draws to a close is will whatever Obama manages to do to slow CO2 emissions be too little too late. If so, we may find ourselves relying on science to come up with wildly risky measures like seeding the oceans with iron or launching massive umbrellas to shade the Earth.
8
Thanks Captain Picard. What people need to do is to learn the science and see for themselves what small validity these doomsday predictions (There's big money in that, too.) actually have.
The country does not nearly have the ability to replace the electric capacity it will lose if this action goes forward with wind and solar. This is a fact and Obama knows it. The reduced supply will increase costs which will mainly hurt the poor and impoverished. However, Obama and dems. in power have consistently proven they don't care about the poor or poverty. They know if they expand the dependancy state their politcal power grows and this is their only concern.
Nowhere in the Constitution is this action of bureaucratic fiat permitted. The executive branch does not have the authority to implement these rules by fiat either. This is know as tyranny. The government jack boot in now applying even more pressure on the citizens throat. All over an unproven theory about carbon forcing that due to actual scientific observations is losing credibility every year.
Nowhere in the Constitution is this action of bureaucratic fiat permitted. The executive branch does not have the authority to implement these rules by fiat either. This is know as tyranny. The government jack boot in now applying even more pressure on the citizens throat. All over an unproven theory about carbon forcing that due to actual scientific observations is losing credibility every year.
9
How do you think the founding fathers would have handled an issue in the constitution like climate change? Imagine something else, that everyone was doing at the time that they knew had the cumulative effect of destroying earth's habitability - let's say cutting down oak trees. Wouldn't they have outlawed the cutting of oak trees in the constitution?
So, now that we know about climate change, does the general welfare preamble not permit the public, acting through its elected agents, to take action to preserve itself? Or is the constitution a suicide pact?
So, now that we know about climate change, does the general welfare preamble not permit the public, acting through its elected agents, to take action to preserve itself? Or is the constitution a suicide pact?
2
It's called "better late than never."
The fact that Obama knows and you obviously don't is that abundant natural gas is replacing coal and all but making the burning of coal obsolete. (Burning natural gas produces about half the atmospheric carbon that burning coal does) In the short to medium term, increasing renewable energy from wind and solar is icing on the cake. In the long term, if solar and wind can't provide the energy we need, we are going to have to turn to nuclear, or drastically reduce population.
2
The proper analysis of this issue is to examine the downside of following each side's position on global warming.
If we follow the view of the scientific community that climate change is real and bold action is needed to avoid catastrophic changes to the climate and this turns out to be wrong, the worst thing that happens is we spend money on cleaner forms of renewable energy that helps free us of our dependency on foreign oil. Not a bad downside.
If we follow the view of the climate change doubters and they turn out to be wrong, we get a catastrophic change in the climate. A horrible downside.
I only hope this plan goes far enough as I am not willing to make a bet against the views of the scientific community with stakes that are this high.
If we follow the view of the scientific community that climate change is real and bold action is needed to avoid catastrophic changes to the climate and this turns out to be wrong, the worst thing that happens is we spend money on cleaner forms of renewable energy that helps free us of our dependency on foreign oil. Not a bad downside.
If we follow the view of the climate change doubters and they turn out to be wrong, we get a catastrophic change in the climate. A horrible downside.
I only hope this plan goes far enough as I am not willing to make a bet against the views of the scientific community with stakes that are this high.
405
The proper analysis of this issue is to examine the downside of following each side's position on global warming.
=================
No, the proper analysis of this issue is to examine what the Clean Air Act says the EPA can issue rules to regulate.
It doesn't appear, according to Lawrence Tribe and many others, that the Administration doesn't have the power to issue these rules the way the law is written.
=================
No, the proper analysis of this issue is to examine what the Clean Air Act says the EPA can issue rules to regulate.
It doesn't appear, according to Lawrence Tribe and many others, that the Administration doesn't have the power to issue these rules the way the law is written.
Easy for you to say. Shall we bankrupt entire industries, maybe even states, based on hope?
No, the case has simply not been adequately made. In order to succeed, someone with more credibility than Obama has to make it. It also cannot be based on grand sweeping proclamations that fail to consider consequences. Everyday people are going to feel those consequences.
The truth is that the debate is far from over. A real debate hasn't started. It was shut off prematurely. Rational questioning was derided. A real debate allows both sides to be heard. There's very little listening going on.
Turns out the real "deniers" are those who refuse to deal with the questions. What you resist persists, however. Those questions are not going away.
No, the case has simply not been adequately made. In order to succeed, someone with more credibility than Obama has to make it. It also cannot be based on grand sweeping proclamations that fail to consider consequences. Everyday people are going to feel those consequences.
The truth is that the debate is far from over. A real debate hasn't started. It was shut off prematurely. Rational questioning was derided. A real debate allows both sides to be heard. There's very little listening going on.
Turns out the real "deniers" are those who refuse to deal with the questions. What you resist persists, however. Those questions are not going away.
that kind of reasoning is known as "Pascal's wager". It shouldn't be used because it doesn't care about the truth. Seeking the truth is fundamental for it puts people in a "looking for tools" mode which will allow them to get to the truth. A useful side effect is to generate knowledge.
About global warming, we know the truth. It's happening.
About global warming, we know the truth. It's happening.
Typical win/win posture from President Obama. Its as if the members of this Administration were too busy studying themselves at college and didn’t take a course in basic economics. Or, worse yet, they did, but cynically bet on the fact that their supporters did not.
Truth is there are no win/wins. Since our remote (and common) ancestors were expelled from the Garden of Eden, everything is a trade off. In any policy, there is always a loser. Always. No exceptions.
Here a huge number of jobs will be lost. Prices will rise. And with wages and salaries perpetually lagging for the huge majority of workers (not the President or his liberal, green supporters) the cost of living will rise.
The President wont tell you that. And those who support him are unwilling (or unable) to ascertain the "lose" and true cost.
Indeed, even if we wanted a debate now, there can be none because the President - now in the lame duck portion of his second term - cowardly imposes his will extra-Constitutionally. To derail it, groups have to litigate against his action -- costing, money, time and uncertainty.
But this is how the President sells all of his policies. It's win, win win. No losers. Except for the Americsn people and our Constituional form of government.
Truth is there are no win/wins. Since our remote (and common) ancestors were expelled from the Garden of Eden, everything is a trade off. In any policy, there is always a loser. Always. No exceptions.
Here a huge number of jobs will be lost. Prices will rise. And with wages and salaries perpetually lagging for the huge majority of workers (not the President or his liberal, green supporters) the cost of living will rise.
The President wont tell you that. And those who support him are unwilling (or unable) to ascertain the "lose" and true cost.
Indeed, even if we wanted a debate now, there can be none because the President - now in the lame duck portion of his second term - cowardly imposes his will extra-Constitutionally. To derail it, groups have to litigate against his action -- costing, money, time and uncertainty.
But this is how the President sells all of his policies. It's win, win win. No losers. Except for the Americsn people and our Constituional form of government.
5
I worry that this approach will lock us into existing technology and stop work on fusion development or other technologies.
1
Don't worry, fusion is only about 20 years away. Will be next year too. And even at the end of Hillary's second term - still 20 years away!
1
It's a nice, parting gesture from Obama to Tom Steyer on his way out the oval office door- but It's really too little too late. Hillary will approve the Keystone Pipeline anyway.
Even if the U.S. went cold turkey on carbon emissions tomorrow, global pollution is so far out of control, we are beyond any repairable measures. Japan's Fukushima nuclear reactor alone will contaminate the Pacific Rim waters in the next 15 years on an unimaginable scale, and no amount of money or legislation is going to be able to fix that...
Even if the U.S. went cold turkey on carbon emissions tomorrow, global pollution is so far out of control, we are beyond any repairable measures. Japan's Fukushima nuclear reactor alone will contaminate the Pacific Rim waters in the next 15 years on an unimaginable scale, and no amount of money or legislation is going to be able to fix that...
10
Actually, not unimaginable, measurable and dilute. http://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/03/14/2014/three-years-after-the-fu...
Such Gloom & Doom. There is NO way to know change NOW will not make a difference. Nothing beats a TRY! Go for it, I say!
Soooo...we give up?
What chance of success does any climate change policy have when this nation's population growth, 80 percent of which is immigration driven, is expected to give us 430 million people by 2060 and 600 million people by century's end? I think Obama is dead wrong when he says climate change is a greater challenge to our society than unsustainable population growth. What is gained by "reducing carbon footprints" when you keep adding footprints?
6
By this logic, countries whose populations move here will be reducing their carbon footprints, canceling out the immigration effect.
Well Dave, 65,915,796 Americans voted for President Obama in 2012.
i, and my fellow 65 million Obama supporters, think you are dead wrong and Obama is totally right about Climate Change.
i, and my fellow 65 million Obama supporters, think you are dead wrong and Obama is totally right about Climate Change.
Despite its noble, high-minded purpose, this measure is problematic for at least two reasons. First, it is such a sweeping rewriting of US policy, it is questionable whether it is legitimate rule making or actually improper legislating by executive fiat. Secondly, the ultimate price will be paid by middle income families, who will likely face drastic increases in their basic utility costs. Maybe this is a worthwhile sacrifice to be borne by many millions of families least able to afford it for the cause of reducing carbon emissions. Maybe not. But it would be refreshing if the White House could be honest about the possible heavy cost to be paid by working class Americans for this latest "legacy" project, rather than pretending there will be no piper to be paid, as was falsely promised with Obamacare.
1
Finally, somebody is doing something meaningful about climate change in this country! Kudos to President Obama.
This is how the United States should lead the world. Let me repeat: THIS IS HOW THE UNITED STATES SHOULD LEAD THE WORLD.
Actually it would be better if coal as a power source was outlawed in this country 10 years from now. We should also reject oil and its derivatives as fuel sources. Vehicles should be powered by batteries or clean burning natural gas, which emits half the CO2 of gasoline. We should create as much power from solar and wind as possible.
Cries of criticism from the Neaderthals like McConnell are to be expected, since he represents a coal producing state. But he is fighting a losing battle as the intense climate change becomes more and more apparent and people realize that the scientists weren't just joking. In opposing strong measures to fight climate change, Republicans will be hammering nails in their own party's coffin. So be it.
This is how the United States should lead the world. Let me repeat: THIS IS HOW THE UNITED STATES SHOULD LEAD THE WORLD.
Actually it would be better if coal as a power source was outlawed in this country 10 years from now. We should also reject oil and its derivatives as fuel sources. Vehicles should be powered by batteries or clean burning natural gas, which emits half the CO2 of gasoline. We should create as much power from solar and wind as possible.
Cries of criticism from the Neaderthals like McConnell are to be expected, since he represents a coal producing state. But he is fighting a losing battle as the intense climate change becomes more and more apparent and people realize that the scientists weren't just joking. In opposing strong measures to fight climate change, Republicans will be hammering nails in their own party's coffin. So be it.
15
This is how the United states should lead the world? you mean the same US that refused to partake to the Tokyo protocol, that in 2010 had a per capita CO2 emissions of 17.5 tons per year where EU has an aggregate per capita emissions of 8.1 tons per year?
Let's be clear: the US are part of the worst offenders in terms of CO2 emissions. Getting to be better is not really difficult for them.
However, the fact that president Obama actually tries to improve the situation is still something to salute, even though it falls short of the actual needs...
Let's be clear: the US are part of the worst offenders in terms of CO2 emissions. Getting to be better is not really difficult for them.
However, the fact that president Obama actually tries to improve the situation is still something to salute, even though it falls short of the actual needs...
Frist president to support gay marriage, only president to provide national healthcare, normalizing relations with Cuba, nuclear deal with Iran and the most ambitious climate change policies in history.
Things can every easily change but as of right now I think he's a safe bet for a consensus ranking as a top 15 president
Things can every easily change but as of right now I think he's a safe bet for a consensus ranking as a top 15 president
18
When you look back, judging by today's standards, he ranks much higher. I would go with #1.
I have great respect for a number of presidents; Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, T Roosevelt, (Mt Rushmore), and F Roosevelt; but they all had problems by today's standards. Washington and Jefferson were slave holders. Lincoln, in many ways a great president, fought to keep the south in the union. Wouldn't we really be better off without Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas? I sometimes wish he would have just let them go.
I love TR in a way, but really, he spent much of his life trying to make up for the fact that his dad didn't fight in the Civil War. The whole San Juan hill thing was like little Bush (George the incompetent) going to war in Iraq. Franklin was a good president in many ways, but he had his faults.
Obama is actually a great president, as smart as they come, accomplished much, especially considering the republicans.
Speaking of which, 50 years from now, today's republicans will be looked on as vile, except perhaps in Texas.
I have great respect for a number of presidents; Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, T Roosevelt, (Mt Rushmore), and F Roosevelt; but they all had problems by today's standards. Washington and Jefferson were slave holders. Lincoln, in many ways a great president, fought to keep the south in the union. Wouldn't we really be better off without Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas? I sometimes wish he would have just let them go.
I love TR in a way, but really, he spent much of his life trying to make up for the fact that his dad didn't fight in the Civil War. The whole San Juan hill thing was like little Bush (George the incompetent) going to war in Iraq. Franklin was a good president in many ways, but he had his faults.
Obama is actually a great president, as smart as they come, accomplished much, especially considering the republicans.
Speaking of which, 50 years from now, today's republicans will be looked on as vile, except perhaps in Texas.
I always thought it was the responsibility of the legislative branch (congress) to pass legislation and the executive branch's responsibility was to enforce the legislation that passed. Did Obama raise his hand and swear to support and defend the constitution? Not sure he's read it or if he did he respects it.
5
The Courts have repeatedly ruled the authority in the Environmental Protection Act gives any President the authority to do exactly what Obama is doing.
10
a typical ignorant remark. how about you folks stop with the obama hating and start caring about this country and our impact on the planet.
10
Not sure you understand the Constitution. The Congressionally passed Clean Air Act authorizes the President to set regulatory standards for air pollutants in order to protect public health. Greenhouse gases are an air pollutant and the CAA authority to regulate them through the promulgation of regulations was upheld by the Supreme Court.
4
Thank you, Mr. President, for taking an enlightened path to the future. Your political opponents on this obvious issue will fight tooth and nail to preserve the flow of $$ to the carbon industries, but I'm optimistic that the time has arrived for the American people to speak with their votes about their children's and grandchildren's planet.
25
Here in this historic town in north western MA, people are proud to be conservationists, protectors of land, they will banish plastic bottles of water because they are harmful for environmental degradation. Yet, they frown upon a simple solution such as a clothesline. NIMBY they say, not here, it will bring the real estate price down. (sheesh). Do you know how much you can save if you did not use a clothes dryer and instead hung out jeans, towels, comforters, blankets, linen out in the sun! We use clothesline (hidden in our backyard away from public viewing lest a neighbor should come knocking) for almost 5 months a year and our energy savings are huge. The clothes smell of fresh sunshine.
38
And they also bring in every dust mite and pollen available...thank your lucky stars you don't suffer from seasonal allergies (we didn't until about age 40...)
Clothes dryers are sometimes the best alternative. Good for you for hiding your laundry line.
Clothes dryers are sometimes the best alternative. Good for you for hiding your laundry line.
Please don't hide your clothesline from your neighbors' view. Hang your laundry in the FRONT yard from now on! Show others how saving energy and using the sun as a source for heat is done. Others will learn from you, especially the kids.
1
We are pollen allergy sufferers, alas. We do not hang clothes outside in the month of May, peak pollen season. Dust mite, not so sure if hanging clothes bring dust mites, direct sun rays do kill dust mites. We have less skin rashes when we hang dry clothes outside versus the months we don't dry them outdoors.
1
And let the Pub outrage and ignorance begin.
Because of the Koch Brothers and many other enormous coal corps, the Pubs who once believed in climate change now do not. Their money speaks volume in the Pub political realm (but what good is their money when there is no earth that can sustain life).
Of course this exposes the Pubs' protection of these corps over the dire consequences of climate change affecting us all. With the evidence now worldwide and especially in our artic, it is getting harder and harder for the Pubs to deny its existence.
Their willingness to do nothing about it, not alone to recognize it precludes most of the Pub presidential candidates from becoming serious presidential material or from ever becoming the president of the United States.
Because of the Koch Brothers and many other enormous coal corps, the Pubs who once believed in climate change now do not. Their money speaks volume in the Pub political realm (but what good is their money when there is no earth that can sustain life).
Of course this exposes the Pubs' protection of these corps over the dire consequences of climate change affecting us all. With the evidence now worldwide and especially in our artic, it is getting harder and harder for the Pubs to deny its existence.
Their willingness to do nothing about it, not alone to recognize it precludes most of the Pub presidential candidates from becoming serious presidential material or from ever becoming the president of the United States.
8
Please share this slogan......IS IT ON?....TURN IT OFF!
Conservation of energy is the easiest way to attain the goal of 32 percent reduction of carbon emissions.
I used 30 percent less heating oil and electricity to heat and cool this house by weatherizing which means to seal air leaks to the outdoors, attic, and basement. I also added extra batts of insulation to the attic and the air duct work. That was 11 years ago. Imagine how many thousands of my dollars I saved!
I taught myself how to save energy by extensive reading of government, commercial, and private internet websites. You can too if you want to spend just a few dollars to save thousands, and the environment.
Senator McConnell is an old man with little future, so what does he care? President Obama has two young daughters to think of. We all have family somewhere and should be just as concerned as Obama about reducing energy use and the resulting reduction in carbon emissions.
Please conduct a public awareness campaign to teach the public how easy it is to save energy and reduce carbon. Thank you.
Make a habit of turning things you don't need ON, OFF. You will save energy, reduce carbon, and save your money. It's a win-win for everyone.
Conservation is the key. IS IT ON?......TURN IT OFF!
Conservation of energy is the easiest way to attain the goal of 32 percent reduction of carbon emissions.
I used 30 percent less heating oil and electricity to heat and cool this house by weatherizing which means to seal air leaks to the outdoors, attic, and basement. I also added extra batts of insulation to the attic and the air duct work. That was 11 years ago. Imagine how many thousands of my dollars I saved!
I taught myself how to save energy by extensive reading of government, commercial, and private internet websites. You can too if you want to spend just a few dollars to save thousands, and the environment.
Senator McConnell is an old man with little future, so what does he care? President Obama has two young daughters to think of. We all have family somewhere and should be just as concerned as Obama about reducing energy use and the resulting reduction in carbon emissions.
Please conduct a public awareness campaign to teach the public how easy it is to save energy and reduce carbon. Thank you.
Make a habit of turning things you don't need ON, OFF. You will save energy, reduce carbon, and save your money. It's a win-win for everyone.
Conservation is the key. IS IT ON?......TURN IT OFF!
33
Indeed, demand-side reduction is an incredibly powerful way of saving energy, and the reason it is is why the existing established-on-fossil-fuels enterprise is poised to collapse. Solar and wind are getting SO cheap, when generated nearby use, that they can be had for less than the cost it takes to send power and energy using the fossil fuel and transmission line networks, let alone cost of the fuels and generation themselves.
1
Remember when Obama promised unequivocally that Obamacare would save each American family $2500 a year? Did that happen? Now he promises that his onerous greenhouse gases reduction plan will be an economic boon for the American people. Meanwhile, China is given a pass to pollute at will all the way to year 2026, while American industry must cut emissions drastically. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice and we need a new president who has the best interests of the American people in mind for a change.
3
and who would that be oh paul? please, share your immense wisdom with us. or do we have to suffer through another 4 years of your belly aching and irrelevant comments?
1
Um. Wrong. Obama is the instrument. About time he did this. He's late.
The imperative sits upon any President. Whether or not the demagogues funded by fossil fuels see it or not, going to zero Carbon energy makes great business sense. Anyone else will get bulldozed, to the cost of their stockholders.
The imperative sits upon any President. Whether or not the demagogues funded by fossil fuels see it or not, going to zero Carbon energy makes great business sense. Anyone else will get bulldozed, to the cost of their stockholders.
1
God speed Mr Obama. Wishing you much success in your mission to help make this planet a green one, for our kids, grandkids, and future generations of Americans and all humans. Because we are one human family.
61
Who would vote for a Republican Party that doesn't recognize scientific consensus on the reality of global warming and therefore places the selfish interests of the oil industry above the survival of life, human and otherwise, on Planet Earth?
31
Maybe uneducated peoples? Maybe selfish, "I'll get some before he gets some!" Mind set. I don't care because it's not effecting me. (Yet, I don't think.) (Ha,ja, get it, "I don't think".) Sad, as the oil age will end soon anyway. We should have transitioned decades ago. But then we would have missed out on all these Middle East wars. Oh well.
2
Why can both parties not even come together on an issue so obvious and urgent as climate change. As Mr. Obama said, it seems ridiculous that we have to put up with dull excuses for Republican inaction. Honestly, grow up. We have challenges that need to be addressed, and its your job to address them. Stop playing politics and do something that will truly benefit everybody.
59
He just did. And the intransigent GOP is the result of the dumb downed voters who put them in. It will take years to fix that.
4
Some in the Republican fold have tried and are trying. I would welcome a bipartisan approach. But to the degree they sell out to fossil fuel interests (Koch brothers, for instance), they are captured, and stuck.
it is worth noting that a largely Democrat-driven policy which failed to pass in the House would have completely undermined President Obama's new, laudable policy had it passed.
Greenhouse emissions are a function of per capita emissions times population, as John Holdren, President Obama's science advisor, showed around four decades ago. S744 would have tripled immigration numbers while doing nothing substantive to halt illegal immigration. Since the average immigrant's greenhouse emissions rise fourfold after arrival in the US (because most immigrants come from countries with very low per capita emissions), that bill, which would have added more than 100 million immigrants to the population by 2050, would have been a lose-lose for the planet.
The Democratic party needs to recognize that even the current million legal immigrants per year is too much, both because of the urgency of climate change, and because it really does take jobs from Americans. Several hundred thousand would be a much more reasonable number. Unfortunately, Democratic leaders don't want to discuss the numbers.
Greenhouse emissions are a function of per capita emissions times population, as John Holdren, President Obama's science advisor, showed around four decades ago. S744 would have tripled immigration numbers while doing nothing substantive to halt illegal immigration. Since the average immigrant's greenhouse emissions rise fourfold after arrival in the US (because most immigrants come from countries with very low per capita emissions), that bill, which would have added more than 100 million immigrants to the population by 2050, would have been a lose-lose for the planet.
The Democratic party needs to recognize that even the current million legal immigrants per year is too much, both because of the urgency of climate change, and because it really does take jobs from Americans. Several hundred thousand would be a much more reasonable number. Unfortunately, Democratic leaders don't want to discuss the numbers.
5
Cumulatively, the United States is responsible for more emissions from fossil fuels than any other country in the world. As the leading climate offender, it is our ethical responsibility to reduce our impacts significantly and quickly. Thank you President Obama for taking this important step.
12
Slight correction: The 400 million wealthiest people on the planet produce, through their travel and purchasing and lifestyles, 40% of all the emissions. So, no matter where you are and live, if you are comfortable, IT'S YOU (and ME, of course). The only responsible thing is to do everything possible to get off fossil fuels as quickly as possible. As are we.
Bravo President Obama! You make me proud!
21
Mitch McConnell should be deeply ashamed of his position which is scientifically unsound and politically bought. Mitch McConnell is a danger to our nation's well-being and the voters of his state will never breathe easier for his position of power.
125
on behalf of thousdands of displaced steel workers all across America, thank you mr. Obama for all but assuring us that the good paying jobs we had will never return. The damage you have inflicted upon the oil, gas, and steel industry is unprecedented by any that came before you. At our union hall there is a large sign that reads "Is it 2016 yet"?
7
We were bleeding steel jobs long before Obama even entered politics. And, the expansion of domestic oil and gas production under President Obama is truly remarkable. It's time to stop repeating all this silliness -- blame, blame, blame Obama. Talk to Mr. McConnell about good paying jobs and union wages.
11
I'll take the needs of my great-great-grandchildren over the needs of today's displaced steel workers. It's called the "big picture." You can't build steel if the planet isn't habitable...
13
So those jobs should remain even if a byproduct of its production is an unlivable world? Not the kind of union I'd like to join. In any event, good luck with job prospects under a Republican president,
6
The climate deniers and special interests will never change. It is useless to even listen to them. We must act and act now.
Global warming is a global problem but the US can turn it into a global economic opportunity. We can export this technology around the globe. The cost to generate electricity from the wind is down to less than 3 cents per KWH. That's in the same range as a coal plant. Solar is still much higher, about 5 times higher, but rapidly coming down. Solar has its advantages in the right environment.
By mandating the use of these technologies, prices will drop and production will benefit from economies of scale. Innovation and invention will further drive down prices. It wasn't long ago when the automakers bitterly complained about emissions and mileage requirements. Now they are happy to make clean running, efficient cars. These new regulations will have the same effect on electric utilities.
What's missing from the discussion is energy storage. Elon Musk has the right idea and is building a one billion dollar lithium battery plant for cars. An easier to implement variation of these batteries could be used to build massive electric storage facilities that will even out the random nature of wind and solar. This is the key to unlock the total potential of renewables and we aren't even talking about it. Mr. Obama, are you listening?
Global warming is a global problem but the US can turn it into a global economic opportunity. We can export this technology around the globe. The cost to generate electricity from the wind is down to less than 3 cents per KWH. That's in the same range as a coal plant. Solar is still much higher, about 5 times higher, but rapidly coming down. Solar has its advantages in the right environment.
By mandating the use of these technologies, prices will drop and production will benefit from economies of scale. Innovation and invention will further drive down prices. It wasn't long ago when the automakers bitterly complained about emissions and mileage requirements. Now they are happy to make clean running, efficient cars. These new regulations will have the same effect on electric utilities.
What's missing from the discussion is energy storage. Elon Musk has the right idea and is building a one billion dollar lithium battery plant for cars. An easier to implement variation of these batteries could be used to build massive electric storage facilities that will even out the random nature of wind and solar. This is the key to unlock the total potential of renewables and we aren't even talking about it. Mr. Obama, are you listening?
7
So much for President Obama being either lame or a duck.
Well done, Mr. President. I support your efforts for cleaner air and water.
Well done, Mr. President. I support your efforts for cleaner air and water.
116
Of course this is the most important issue both domestically and globally on which the future of the human species (not to mention countless others) hangs. It is a relief that President Obama is finally doing something about it, though his initiative will be challenged legally until the cows come home, but I hope that the mere threat of enforceable limits on power plant carbon emissions will goad utilities to action.
Still, it will be seen as one of the great tragedies of the 21st Century that this comes 15 years too late. For, if the Bushes and the whole Republican cabal had not STOLEN the election from Al Gore in 2000, meaningful action on climate change would have already happened!
Still, it will be seen as one of the great tragedies of the 21st Century that this comes 15 years too late. For, if the Bushes and the whole Republican cabal had not STOLEN the election from Al Gore in 2000, meaningful action on climate change would have already happened!
8
As exciting as the new images of Pluto are, there are no indications humans can live there - or anywhere else but here. We have to assume that earth is our only one planet. Let's support President Obama's plans and keep our home inhabitable.
28
Indeed, more than "keeping it habitable", when will people realize that the cost of FIXING the problem of climate change is 1000x more than the cost of stopping it? Worse, in order to do any of the things we might do to fix it, you have to stop making it worse first.
8
This prospective American Citizen (Green Card still in process, after 15+ years of diligently following the process, paying taxes etc. Don’t get me started!) is proud of the President and all what he does, who is taking a long-term view, regardless of the lack of cooperation from the people who think about next week’s sound bites, not what will be remembered about fifty or more years from now.
President Obama’s opposition, all of it, play for today’s Faux News carnival. He is, whenever he can, trying to get stuff done that will be in the history books. About a hundred years from now. When McConnell, Trump and their ilk will be mere footnotes, or worse.
President Obama’s opposition, all of it, play for today’s Faux News carnival. He is, whenever he can, trying to get stuff done that will be in the history books. About a hundred years from now. When McConnell, Trump and their ilk will be mere footnotes, or worse.
162
Wishing you good luck on the green card! Congratulations! And you are spot on about the future. The global warming deniers will be viewed as completely daft, evil people, much as we refer to the industrialists of a hundred years ago as Robber Barons. The problem is, we may not have history for much longer, as ecosystems fail and the mass extinction now underway gets worse. No one left to read or write history.
2
Reducing the flow of greenhouse gas emissions to stabilize the stock of greenhouse gases, especially in the context of a rapidly expanding global economy, will require substantial changes in human behaviour, both on the demand side and on the production side. Households and Businesses can reduce their draw on fossil-fuel-intensive products as was by the responses to the sharp increases in oil prices in the mid-1970s, the early 1980s, and over the last few years.
Other options include smaller and more fuel-efficient vehicles, less energy-intensive household appliances, and better designed and managed homes and office buildings. While we can expect with some confidence gains in technology in the future, the magnitued of the gains, their timing and their specificareas are very much guesswork. The President is right, we need to start yesterday for climate change adaptation. We owe it to future generations.
Other options include smaller and more fuel-efficient vehicles, less energy-intensive household appliances, and better designed and managed homes and office buildings. While we can expect with some confidence gains in technology in the future, the magnitued of the gains, their timing and their specificareas are very much guesswork. The President is right, we need to start yesterday for climate change adaptation. We owe it to future generations.
165
The Congressional Republicans opposing President Obama's climate protections as a liberal overreach must have missed the memo on the EPA beginning a Nixon trademark. That party has fallen into deep disregard for science and for longterm thinking.
78
I agree to a point. But they oppose anything Obama. Sadly, much of that is race related and fear of blacks by lot of people (a declining number, but still big numbers).
7
I think they would oppose this by any Democrat. Heck, they oppose it when Katharine Hayhoe and Bob Inglis say the same thing, and they are thorough Republican conservatives.
3
They also missed the Supreme Court decision in which it was decided that EPA DOES have the authority to regulate carbon emissions under the Clean Air Act.
3
Combatting climate change is a misnomer. Climate, like every part of Nature, has a mind of its own, independent of human beings. The correct name for what is needed is Combatting Contamination.
I would like to know just what will be substituted for fossil fuels. The topography of the country doesn't lend itself to hydroelectric generation. As for sunshine, or wind power, are they reliable? That leaves nuclear generation. Nothing wrong with that if extra care is taken.
I would like to know just what will be substituted for fossil fuels. The topography of the country doesn't lend itself to hydroelectric generation. As for sunshine, or wind power, are they reliable? That leaves nuclear generation. Nothing wrong with that if extra care is taken.
1
Unfortunately, that is not true, as was shown by Lord Kelvin and then Arrhenius in the 19th century. Unfortunately, rather than take time to debate it (there's nothing to debate) I'm going to soak in the pleasure of what Obama just accomplished!
6
Argument from ignorance.
We affect climate greatly. If you haven't seen the evidence, which has been repeated in many places, you are deliberately avoiding it.
That you cannot imagine a solution does not make the claim incorrect.
Nuclear generation is too expensive, too slow, and has failed to innovate (negative learning curve) or meet any business mark of cost or schedule. It was a promising technology that businesses seem to not be able to do, despite the fact that presently the U.S. taxpayer is the insurer of last resort.
Besides, no one wants nuclear waste transported, cooling is a problem (rivers and lakes are drying up, due to climate change droughts; sea levels are rising).
We affect climate greatly. If you haven't seen the evidence, which has been repeated in many places, you are deliberately avoiding it.
That you cannot imagine a solution does not make the claim incorrect.
Nuclear generation is too expensive, too slow, and has failed to innovate (negative learning curve) or meet any business mark of cost or schedule. It was a promising technology that businesses seem to not be able to do, despite the fact that presently the U.S. taxpayer is the insurer of last resort.
Besides, no one wants nuclear waste transported, cooling is a problem (rivers and lakes are drying up, due to climate change droughts; sea levels are rising).
9
Now if we could just have a ban on all small-engine machinery that burns a combination of oil and gas and that creates lots of noise pollution, as well. Examples of these machines are leaf blowers, weed whackers, and some lawnmowers and chainsaws. Cost-effective alternatives that are better for the environment are available, and there is no longer any good reason to exempt such machines from air and noise pollution laws.
My city tried to encourage their retirement through an exchange program that allowed the purchase of the newer models at a substantial discount. That sort of thing is a good start, but does little good when many homeowners use hired landscapers and greedy landscaping companies refuse to spend even a penny to try to protect workers' and others' health. Health is the most precious asset most of us have, and neighbors and businesses should not have the right to generate as much air and noise pollution as they like in the name of prettier landscapes.
My city tried to encourage their retirement through an exchange program that allowed the purchase of the newer models at a substantial discount. That sort of thing is a good start, but does little good when many homeowners use hired landscapers and greedy landscaping companies refuse to spend even a penny to try to protect workers' and others' health. Health is the most precious asset most of us have, and neighbors and businesses should not have the right to generate as much air and noise pollution as they like in the name of prettier landscapes.
16
What? Like get cows? Some people have considerable acreage that requires the use of real tools.
Landscapers are small businesses and not regulated like Microsoft and Shell Oil.
Landscapers are small businesses and not regulated like Microsoft and Shell Oil.
1
McConnell's comment is about himself and the Republican party: “It represents a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion,”
67
President Obama's environmental protections have thrown down the gauntlet for 2016 candidates. So far, the Democrats are looking to continue a legacy of ecological responsibility, while the Republicans have established that they are neither scientists nor followers of scientists. Business as usual for the GOP and those left suffering from water scarcity, natural resource depletion and severe weather. Apparently, JEB!'s "Right to rise" slogan applies to sea levels and temperatures of the earth and waters.
460
Agree - environmental sustainability is a much larger issue: it involves more of us even than healthcare and gay marriage. It also conveniently offers a partial drown out of the debate on healthcare, when opponents appear to have no alternative proposals, and it splits the business base in the Republican party.
4
I hope that whoever is the Democrat's nominee uses your last line in discrediting JEB!, the probable Republican nominee.
6
What is a President doing meddling in how the US uses energy resources, this is unprecedented and sure to be fruitless! Or maybe not. The Washington Post recently ran an "electrical power generation by source of energy" graphic that was is interesting to review:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/power-plants/
You click an energy source icon (wind, solar, oil) and the graphic displays the use of that resource by state for electrical generation. My point is, that if you click to check for electrical generation by oil in the US you should be very surprised. I was, the US generates only about 1% of it's electricity with oil! About the same as we get from solar! Amazing, I'd not have guessed that.
Then I recalled why. During the Arab Oil Embargo in the 70s, Jimmy Carter led the charge to enact legislation to severely limit the use of oil for generating electricity in the US. This forward thinking move (unpopular at the time) has saved us immeasurable problems: higher electrical costs due to cost fluctuations, military commitment to oil states, and carbon pollution. This, all because a President had the foresight to get a smart energy idea enacted in legislation for the public good.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/power-plants/
You click an energy source icon (wind, solar, oil) and the graphic displays the use of that resource by state for electrical generation. My point is, that if you click to check for electrical generation by oil in the US you should be very surprised. I was, the US generates only about 1% of it's electricity with oil! About the same as we get from solar! Amazing, I'd not have guessed that.
Then I recalled why. During the Arab Oil Embargo in the 70s, Jimmy Carter led the charge to enact legislation to severely limit the use of oil for generating electricity in the US. This forward thinking move (unpopular at the time) has saved us immeasurable problems: higher electrical costs due to cost fluctuations, military commitment to oil states, and carbon pollution. This, all because a President had the foresight to get a smart energy idea enacted in legislation for the public good.
16
I keep saying it. Jimmy Carter. Best President. Ronald Reagan. Worst.
14
Politics aside Carter was brilliant on foreign oil, disparaged by the status quo for it. Hey what would a nuclear engineer know about energy, right? An actor ... ah well never mind.
13
Deniers please just stop. First, you're demonstrably wrong. Second, you diminish us all by your ignorance. And third, you are being used by profiteers who care not about what you think or the state of your lives. If you can't be part of the solution, please just get out of the way.
413
On June 20, 1979, the Carter administration installed solar panels at the White House. Carter predicted at the dedication ceremony: "In the year 2000 this solar water heater behind me, which is being dedicated today, will still be here supplying cheap, efficient energy…. A generation from now, this solar heater can either be a curiosity, a museum piece, an example of a road not taken or it can be just a small part of one of the greatest and most exciting adventures ever undertaken by the American people."
By 1986, Reagan gutted research and development budgets for renewable energy and eliminated tax breaks for wind and solar and quietly dismantled the White House solar panel installation.
What horrible leadership we have and will have until money is no longer equated with speech and corporations aren't people anymore. We all know better. Soylent green is people.
By 1986, Reagan gutted research and development budgets for renewable energy and eliminated tax breaks for wind and solar and quietly dismantled the White House solar panel installation.
What horrible leadership we have and will have until money is no longer equated with speech and corporations aren't people anymore. We all know better. Soylent green is people.
31
The most solar hot water heaters I'd ever seen was in Izmir Turkey in 1991. Virtually every house. Not because of green goals, it was simply cheaper than burning kerosene to heat water.
Here in Miamuh, all of South Florida really, a blue or black barrel of water, in the sun, will make water hotter than one can stand.
Here in Miamuh, all of South Florida really, a blue or black barrel of water, in the sun, will make water hotter than one can stand.
10
We always go with the bad policies first, like ethanol.
1
Mitch McConnell accused President Obama of being tired of working with the Congress. Of course Obama is tired of dead ends from a do-nothing and obstructionist entity whose Republican leaders set out from the 2008 election to make his Presidency a failure! These are the legislators who would choose government shutdowns and fiscal cliffs to negotiating with Obama; who underhandedly sent a letter to Iran discrediting potential accords; who helped Netanyahu snub Obama by inviting him to address Congress; who wasted untold time trying to repeal the ACA; whose inability to pass a bill for immigrant reform led Obama to take responsibility for this need. President Obama recently reached a climate agreement with China, because he is a leader, and he continues to be responsible for our environment.
354
Mitch McConnell, his cohort of republican governors and many senators denying climate change and pronouncing. 'I am not a scientist' governors need to wake up and work constructively with democrats. Work with the president and protect this planet for your children and our children.
Why is it that you have to oppose everything - your party is headed for a minority soon. Work constructively with the democrats on initiatives and show American Leadership
Take the long term view
Why is it that you have to oppose everything - your party is headed for a minority soon. Work constructively with the democrats on initiatives and show American Leadership
Take the long term view
11
Mitch is one of the traitors who met on the even of President Obama's first inauguration and agreed to sabotage all his efforts. How can they lie like they do when the proof is right there to read that they are lying.
1
We've been waiting for this for decades- just move up the regulation dates
1
nteresting, but look at some real data, Minnesota. They have a 25% renewable target by 2025 (passed in 2007) and are ahead of schedule. Electric prices are middle of the pack compared to other states in the US. Industrial electric costs have been declining. On a national scale, coal is responding to the free market. Utilities are converting to nat gas because it is cheaper than coal. They are not going to build new coal plants but more new nat gas plants. Cost per megawatt of unsubsidized solar is already less than a new coal plant even before the regulation and it continues to decline.
15
Natural gas isn't that much better than coal in terms of carbon dioxide...
About 50% better for nat gas than coal. Its a start.
8
Whatever is Mitch McConnell whining about?
After all, his state, Kentucky, has the exclusive coal supply contract for the International Space Station.
After all, his state, Kentucky, has the exclusive coal supply contract for the International Space Station.
20
As a public health student, who was also one of the 400,000 people who marched in NYC's climate change march in September 2014, I fully agree that addressing climate change is a public health imperative. Our planet's health is our health. I applaud this leadership and encourage us all to continue to hold our leaders accountable for taking meaningful action on this issue.
327
Sorry, waaaay too late. Nothing will make any difference anymore. Die is cast.
1
M, I've been reading that we are too late, as well. Can you cite some papers and articles so that others might read them? My reading has been on blogs, and I'd like to see citations and links for the scientific articles so that we may all become aware and informed. It's worse than anyone thought, is what I'm reading.
M, it's never too late. Even small conscious changed will add up to bring about long term benefits. Each time a new energy consuming gadget is introduced don't we all adapt to it, but it and use it? Same way we can help reverse adverse habits that harm environment. Mr Obama is right in urging Americans to take the lead, the world will follow.
3
The cluelessness of President Obama is baffling. "No challenge poses a greater threat to our future..", and his answer is "green house gas"?? Only one in one hundred Americans would likely agree with him. The obvious threat to our immediate future is extreme militant Islam. They want to kill us, and they will kill us if we continue to take our eye off the ball as Obama has. A little more gas from natural sources will not.
This man needs to go away quickly because his misplaced and/or foolish priorities have devastated our country.
This man needs to go away quickly because his misplaced and/or foolish priorities have devastated our country.
4
Bearboy, it is clearly the biggest challenge facing the country and the entire global community. Thank God he recognizes that you have to deal with long-term phenomena which voters do not immediately recognize as a big issue. He will be viewed very favorably by history when they review those actions in the future.
138
Well the fear mongers and those susceptible to their rhetoric would certainly have you believe that "extreme militant Islam" is our greatest threat. Those with a longer view of threats to the planet as a whole would agree wholeheartedly with the president.
72
To what devastation, sir, are you referring? Does it occur to you that my chances of being killed by an American yahoo with a gun far exceed my chances of being killed by a muslim extremist? And it's true that climate change will not kill me; but I have two daughters that I care about. And their are billions of parents with billions of children that they care about, and they might just be forced to live truly desperate lives because of our failure to take better care of this planet, our only home.
152
Climate is going to be the "gay marriage" of the twenty-teens. We'll see public opinion swaying from "no big deal" to "freakout" as the facts pile up to drown out the anti-science propaganda being spewed by the likes of McConnel and the Kochs.
227
What a weird comparison. An unnecessary and inapt comparison. But whatevevs. Twenty-teens have totally been there/done that and no propaganda is seriously drown-outable...at all. The one thing you are on target about is the "freak out", and it will be all of humanity soon freaking out.
1
I agree with you.
The Koch Brothers are both MIT grads. Evidently, although they studied science, they sure don't believe in science.
They inhereited a boatload of money and assets from their father Fred Koch, who was a founder of the John Birch Society. What a couple of fine, upstanding lads (NOT).
The Koch Brothers are both MIT grads. Evidently, although they studied science, they sure don't believe in science.
They inhereited a boatload of money and assets from their father Fred Koch, who was a founder of the John Birch Society. What a couple of fine, upstanding lads (NOT).
4
Try going to all solar, just like Germany.....except now they are burning more coal than ever!
2
According to this article, a week ago Saturday Germany actually got 78% of their energy from renewables.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/07/29/3685555/germany-sets-new-ren...
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/07/29/3685555/germany-sets-new-ren...
21
Lynn,
There was a day recently that Denmark got 100% of it's energy from renewables.
There was a day recently that Denmark got 100% of it's energy from renewables.
10
Wrong. The article said Germany got 78% of ELECTRICITY from renewables. That is still a major achievement, but since electricity only amounts to around 20% of a typical country's end use energy, it's not nearly as major as Lynn from NY implies.
3
Sen. McConnell - Kentucky and West Virginia have been in the coal extraction business for over 100 years.
Why are your people still so poor?
Why hasn't the immense wealth extracted from your state been shared with the population?
And more broadly - the cost-effectiveness of renewable energy technology has been accelerating for decades. Why have the big energy companies been caught flat footed here?
They have nobody to blame but themselves - lobbyists and PR campaigns aren't going to make this go away.
Why are your people still so poor?
Why hasn't the immense wealth extracted from your state been shared with the population?
And more broadly - the cost-effectiveness of renewable energy technology has been accelerating for decades. Why have the big energy companies been caught flat footed here?
They have nobody to blame but themselves - lobbyists and PR campaigns aren't going to make this go away.
577
Even the extremely conservative Margaret Thatcher shut down most of the coal mines in the 1980's.
7
Not only poor, but in terrible health as a population, including countless miners with black lung!!
And of course seeing the infinite wisdom that emperor Obama has, the Russians,Chinese and Indians will follow suit.
3
What is leadership? Are you proposing that doing the right thing only makes sense if everybody else does it? Perhaps we should torture because others do it.
How can the type of thinking that you are engaged in ever do anything but remove us from what makes us good?
How can the type of thinking that you are engaged in ever do anything but remove us from what makes us good?
31
The Chinese and Indians can breath the air in their cities and follow our lead, or perhaps even lead themselves. It does not take infinite wisdom to see this danger, just a belief in the scientific method.
11
Too late Mr. President?
A Special Message to Congress.
"This generation has altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale through a steady increase in CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels."
President Lyndon Johnson.
1965
A mere 50 years AGO.
A Special Message to Congress.
"This generation has altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale through a steady increase in CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels."
President Lyndon Johnson.
1965
A mere 50 years AGO.
225
Its been going on since the Industrial Revolution. At the cost of former colonies of developed nations of Europe. In the name of development, advancement, technology. Native tribes' conservation and frugal methods of respecting nature, in receiving and giving to Nature, was dismissed as "Primitive" and "Backward". Just in my parents' generation (In their high 80s, early 90s), drastic changes have happened to their environment. Forests have been cleared, orchards have been cleared to make room for sub divisions, malls, mega cinemas. They used to walk or bike (which did wonders to their health and fitness), now they have to depend on a car, fill gas, maintain the car, pay the insurance. They stood aghast at McMansions, people's lifestyles being swept away by consumerism. A gadget for everything that they used to do with their own hands. Gadgets that cost energy, or batteries which are expensive for them. They watch people throw away plastic, glass, electronics, clothes as though they just didn't care where these end up, landfills, river streams, oceans. They watched with disbelief as the pharma industry too over everything, from making antibiotics that feed cattle, poultry, livestock, to over prescription of antibiotics by doctors who had no idea of long term effects like bacterial immunity to antibiotics, super infections, mega infections. Chemical lawns, polluted drinking water. Hormones entering the streams.
4
WOW! Thank you for reminding us that 50 years ago we were warned! (And did little.)
2
Future generations will read about this day in their history books and think of it as an iconic day where America took a necessary step toward saving our planet. Truly proud to be an American on this day.
215
Elan, perhaps this is true, but I really think this will ultimately decided by a major Supreme Court decision, one of those Brown-vs-Board-of-Ed turning points. Unfortunately, our politics will drag this out well past Obama's presidency. Let's hope the court sees the light by then.
1
Except of course, um, the rest of the globe needs to also sign on. So many confuse decisions we make here as being a global panacea. Unfortunately the world's population will not be denied the inextricable economic entanglements of creating goods for global consumption. And energy will be expended to make sure it all happens. There simply is no other choice. Americans will not turn off the consumption spigot and neither will the rest of the world. All it will take is another huge economic downturn for folks like you to clamor for jobs and spending and infrastructure projects - all of which we need - conveniently forgetting the costs to the climate to do that. So don't fool yourself thinking Obama accomplished anything. The equation of 7 billion people is written in stone as to the carbon outlays necessary to allow them to exist. There is no escape from that harsh reality.
3
Me, too
1
A masterclass in leadership from the President. Good job sir!
335
...and about time.
2