CQ WEEKLY – COVER STORY
STATE OF THE UNION PREVIEW
Feb. 9, 2013 – 2:45 p.m.
On Climate, Obama Holds the Reins
By Geof Koss, CQ Staff
|
||
|
Environmentalists and others worried about climate change were heartened by the prominence that President
At his swearing in, though, Obama’s words soared as he pledged to “respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.”
Not much has changed in Congress, where the partisan gridlock almost guarantees inaction on any kind of significant global-warming legislation. As scientists become more certain about the causes and consequences of the warming planet, political opponents are just as determined not to act.
But to achieve dramatic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, Obama doesn’t need Congress. A landmark 2007 Supreme Court decision gives the administration the regulatory tools to proceed on its own, and without the constraints of another campaign, Obama is free to go ahead with tough environmental regulations that were put on hold until after the election.
Obama’s EPA already is moving to limit emissions by new power plants under the Clean Air Act, and environmentalists are encouraged that his second term may yield regulatory curbs on existing power plants and industrial polluters. Nominating
Former Vice President Al Gore, who shared a Nobel Peace Prize for his work on global warming, noted in a CNN interview that Obama devoted more words in his inaugural speech to climate change than to any other subject. “I was very happy about that,” Gore said. “And I think he will follow through.”
The administration can still expect resistance from congressional Republicans, but Democratic gains in the last election virtually ensure that opponents of EPA regulation lack the votes to roll back new regulations.
For instance, Illinois Republican
“But,” Shimkus continues, “I understand the law and I understand court rulings and I understand the playing field. I just hope the administration understands the effect on jobs and the economy and the increased cost of energy.”
With polls showing growing popular support for action on climate change in the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy, even some congressional Republicans are willing to talk about global warming.
“As we see a change in our energy dynamic, there is also a very keen awareness about energy production, energy consumption, that demands attention to the environmental aspect as well,” says Alaska Sen.
Murkowski says measures to mitigate climate change should be “part and parcel” of a “no regrets” energy program to reduce greenhouse gases, increase efficiency and bolster resilience to storms, droughts and floods.
On Climate, Obama Holds the Reins
“Raising our energy costs, imposing the mandates, other heavy-handed ideas that are out there for reducing greenhouse gas emissions — they’re not going to pass Congress,” she says. “We’ve already tried that once.”
Regulatory Approach
Obama put climate change at the top of the political agenda in his 2008 campaign, when he expressed hope that his nomination would mark the “moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”
In the heady early days of the new administration, there was progress on legislation to establish a market-based, economywide system for capping greenhouse gas emissions; it passed the then-Democratic House in June 2009.
Then things bogged down in the Senate. Kerry spent most of 2010 brokering a bipartisan package with South Carolina Republican
With the legislative strategy doomed, the White House began flexing its regulatory muscle. The 2007 Supreme Court decision required EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act if global warming was found to pose a danger to public health. The EPA issued, in 2009, an endangerment finding that triggered a regulatory response.
Facing the threat of regulation, automakers agreed to double the fuel economy of their vehicle fleets by 2025. The EPA, meanwhile, set emissions rules for new power plants that will dramatically reduce emissions. Environmentalists hope that, with the elections over, the EPA will take the next, more contentious step and limit emissions by existing power plants, oil refineries and other industrial polluters.
“Seventy percent of the carbon emissions come from a combination of the electricity sector, the industrial sector and the transportation sector,” says Senate Environment and Public Works Chairwoman
In fact, the United States has already has made strides in reducing emissions. Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in the first quarter of 2012 fell to the lowest level in two decades, according to the Energy Information Administration. Although the sluggish economy was a factor, the recent glut of inexpensive, domestic natural gas has prompted power companies to switch from coal to cleaner gas. Gasoline demand also has fallen, as motorists drive less and shift to more-efficient cars. And wind- and solar-power production has doubled in the past four years.
A recent analysis by the World Resources Institute found that clamping down on power plants, natural-gas systems and powerful greenhouse gases known as hydrofluorocarbons — in concert with state efforts to increase renewable power sources and energy efficiency — would enable the United States to meet its international pledges to reduce emissions by 17 percent below 2005 levels by the end of the decade, even without new federal legislation.
Although emissions legislation stands no chance in this Congress, more-targeted bills might. Strengthening infrastructure to withstand severe storms, for example, is an area that even some skeptics of human responsibility for climate change are willing to discuss.
Congress last month appropriated $50.5 billion in emergency aid to areas hard-hit by Sandy, including money for long-term storm protection projects. And senators from New York, New Jersey and Delaware are seeking authorization for more storm resiliency spending in the next water resources bill.
Another area of potential bipartisan cooperation is energy efficiency. Promoting efficiency can reduce energy demand and carbon emissions while promoting energy independence, job creation and operating-cost reduction.
On Climate, Obama Holds the Reins
In the waning hours of the last Congress, lawmakers cleared a scaled-down energy efficiency bill that requires technical changes to federal energy efficiency standards for appliances and requires better coordination of Energy Department research programs. The bipartisan Senate sponsors, New Hampshire Democrat
In the weeks ahead, Obama’s biggest climate-related challenge is likely to come from his own supporters. The president faces the decision of whether to sign off on construction of the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry crude oil from the tar sands of Western Canada to Gulf Coast refineries.
Obama is being pressured by business interests, labor unions and the Canadian government to approve the project, which also enjoys public support. But environmentalists say the pipeline would encourage further development of the tar sands, significantly increasing carbon emissions. Critics are planning a rally on the National Mall this month and are counting on Kerry — whose department is reviewing the Keystone project — to weigh in with the president against approval.
Environmentalists who cheered Obama’s inaugural remarks on climate change say that approval of the pipeline would stain his legacy. “I think it would be a terrible message,” says Sen.
“Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and more powerful storms. The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transition, we must lead it.”
— Obama’s second inaugural address,Washington, Jan. 21
Status of the issue: Congress hasn’t taken up climate legislation since 2009, when the House passed a bill that would have established a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions; a Senate version was never taken up on the floor. During Obama’s second term, regulatory actions — including fuel efficiency standards for vehicles and EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions — will be a central part of the administration’s plan to move ahead without Congress.
Lauren Gardner contributed to this report.