Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama Plans to Overhaul Environmental Policies
In a news briefing at the start of his second week in office, Obama announced he is directing federal agencies to reexamine two policies that could force automakers to produce more fuel-efficient cars yielding fewer greenhouse gas emissions.
Smoke billows from a car's tailpipe in San Francisco, California. Barack Obama intends to reduce US carbon emissions from 1990 levels by 80 percent in 2050. International environmental groups have praised evidence of swift change by US President Barack Obama in his inaugural week, saying it could transform Washington from a green "pariah" into a world leader. (AFP/Getty Images/File/David Paul Morris)
The moves are aimed at reversing decisions by Bush administration, which he said had stood in the way of bold action by California and other states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
"The days of Washington dragging its heels are over," Obama said.
He said he could not promise a "quick fix" for the nation's dependence on foreign oil, but he pledged to "commit ourselves to the steady, focused, pragmatic pursuit" of energy independence.
Obama said the administration would ensure that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built in the United States and would start by implementing new fuel efficiency standards for the 2011 model year.
"Our goal is not to further burden an already struggling auto industry," he said, but to help American automakers prepare for the future and "thrive by building the cars of tomorrow."
Separately, the State Department is expected to name Todd Stern, formerly a senior official in the Clinton administration, as the new U.S. envoy on climate change, news agencies reported. Stern, a partner in a Washington law firm and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress think tank, coordinated the Clinton administration's Initiative on Global Climate Change from 1997 to 1999 and served as the top White House negotiator on the Kyoto talks on global warming from 1999 to 2001.
In executive orders he signed today, Obama instructed the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider whether to grant California a waiver to regulate automobile tailpipe emissions linked to global warming, and he ordered the Transportation Department to issue guidelines to ensure that the nation's auto fleet reaches an average fuel efficiency of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, if not earlier.
On Dec. 19, 2007, then-EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson blocked the efforts of California and more than a dozen other states to limit automobiles' carbon dioxide emissions, arguing that President George W. Bush had addressed the issue by signing a law that same day raising the corporate average fuel-efficiency standard to 35 miles per gallon by 2020. But California's tailpipe emissions rules would have effectively required even greater fuel-efficiency increases, by seeking to cut vehicles' greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent between 2009 and 2016, something American automakers have resisted.
The Bush administration never issued near-term guidelines for tighter fuel-efficiency standards. The Transportation Department circulated a proposal last fall that would have required auto companies to build new cars averaging as much as 31.8 miles per gallon by 2015, compared with the current level of 27.5 miles per gallon, but it announced less than two weeks before Bush left office that it would not issue formal guidelines.
Daniel J. Weiss, who directs climate strategy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, praised the new administration for pressing ahead with ambitious fuel economy goals.
"President Obama's actions will reduce our oil dependence by speeding the production of the gas-sipping cars of the future," Weiss said before today's announcements. "He understands that oil and gasoline prices will rise with our recovering economy, and more fuel-efficient cars will help families cope with higher prices. And other countries will want to buy our more-efficient vehicles."
Obama, who has consistently urged U.S. automakers to produce more fuel-efficient cars, is likely to accelerate the timeline for raising the nation's corporate average fuel economy for cars and trucks. The Transportation Department guidelines must be issued by April in order to affect the 2011 auto fleet.
Granting a waiver for California to regulate tailpipe emissions would affect nearly half the U.S. auto market. Thirteen other states -- including Maryland -- and the District have already adopted California's proposal, while at least four others have pledged to do so. When the EPA rejected the waiver, Obama issued a statement saying the decision "is yet another example of how this Administration has put corporate interests ahead of the public interest. If the courts do not overturn this decision, I will after I am elected president."
"Not only is the new president a man of his word, but he's making a dramatic break with the Bush administration's climate policy," said Frank O'Donnell, who heads the advocacy group Clean Air Watch. "It's a powerful signal that science -- and the law -- will guide his administration's decisions. This should prompt cheers from California to Maine."

11 Comments so far
Show AllIt's been a week of multiple Obamagasms! Now I'm sleepy.
There's been so much optimistic news, I don't know if I want to follow politics anymore. I guess I like watching train wrecks.
This image seems to be becoming true...
http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/2_image001.jpg
I think one vital thing that really needs to be addressed is the governments involvement in weather control...namely spraying chemtrails. These trails have been part of a government weather control experiment to avoid treating the underlying cause of climate change by applying toxic chemicals into our atmosphere. You can see the proof in many ways: looking up in the sky when trails are being sprayed (usually a weekly event); look at how the horizon of our skies are changing from blue to white - an effect of chemicals such as aluminum and barium;also with people that still believe that these chemtrails are contrails check out research and websites by scientists who have done extensive research (e.g Cliff Carnicom - http://carnicom.com and William Thomas - http://www.willthomasonline.net/index.html). This chemical spraying exists and has been for over 10 years, which is even documented in government records. Back when these first started Dennis Kucinich, tried to help pass a law that would prohibit the government from using these. The information about chemtrails is well documented but under discussed. Now that we have a government suppossedly more concerned with the environment... public discussion and public mandate is needed. These trails are affecting every living thing on this planet...just look how DDT, never sprayed in the polar regions are now heavily concentrated there. Please speak out!
< "It's a powerful signal that science -- and the law -- will guide his administration's decisions. This should prompt cheers from California to Maine."
Yea Obama!!!
(I live in Maine.)
Let the public shaming of the disgraceful GWB cabal begin! Reptilian brained policies that shamed the nation will start to be revised. Cleaning up the god awful filthy mess that is the SOUL of GWB will truly be a Herculean chore, but this new administration is signaling that is up for the challenge.
Note to Dubyuh and his cheerleader and presumptive GOP star for 2012 Palin: - The Flintstones was NOT a documentary!!!
The very exciting consequences of converting most land transportation to all electric is that we can solve so many potentially catastrophic problems -- (1) dependence on foreign oil and the high cost of protecting our foreign sources, (2) air and water pollution, (3) global warming, and (4) inflation and the falling value of our dollar. Solving just one of these problems would justify the work involved in bringing about this change. With all four solutions in our hands, it is sheer foolishness to put this off even one more day.
Nothing will happen,however, as long as oil and coal companies, that want to keep selling us their fuels for as long as possible, are covertly impeding every effort to implement change.
For the last five to ten years many companies around the world have been working on overcoming the drawbacks that once made electric vehicles very unpopular. They have made outstanding progress and now have made the electric vehicle a marvel rather than a nightmare. Once we adopt the idea of eliminating the internal combustion engine and accept the change, we can open up huge new industries for making this new commerce work to our benefit. We will be amazed at how fast we will progress to make electric vehicles better and more affordable. In less than ten years time, we will look back at the gas-guzzling, toxic-spewing vehiles like we did the horse and buggy.
The problem is lack of dedicated, fearless leadership. Without leadership, the public will not be informed of the crucial nature of this need until it is perhaps too late. Without leadership corporations will not proceed quickly and effectively or receive the capital necessary to advance to the next crucial stage. Without leadership the oil companies will continue to control our destiny -- a destiny that we can easily predict because it is happening now.
"The very exciting consequences of converting most land transportation to all electric...."
I am not convinced. Electrical devices have their own heinous impact upon the environment (especially those related to transportation), so moving from one energy source to another is just using a thimble rather than a teaspoon to bail out the sinking ship.
We need to reduce our transportation needs (eliminate the global economy anyone?). We need to reduce the over-specifications of our transportation modes (why does anyone need a 400 hp car or 100 hp motorcycle?). We need to reduce the consumptive urge to replace our vehicles every few years. We need to reduce our angst at sharing transportation.
Reduce, reuse, recycle.
Never criticize a man until you've walked a mile in their moccasins - Native American proverb.
Yes all those reductions are recognized by most to be part of the sustainable approach to transportation. Technology hasn't changed much. A century ago they knew locally produced cars could achieve 200 mpg on locally produced zero-carbon biofuels, sustainably. They built things to last and they kept them well and long. They didn't mind public transportation. The difference today is that we are entrenched in the legacy of a predatory capitalism that choked the nation's spirit, obscured its sensibilities, and enslaved it to material gluttony. The same General Motors that begs for public bailouts today wiped out public transportation in the early 20th century. We have a culture of waste now. A splendid outcome of liberal economic policy. But now we must stop complaining or we might lose our jobs! God Bless Our McJobs!!
About electric vehicles: Comparing gasoline internal combustion with coal-fired electric generation, gasoline power costs about 1.5 times electric power, which includes the monetary cost of the Pentagon's petro-imperialism (neglecting the incalculable human costs). Gasoline spews the pollution right into our nostrils, and electric places high demand on expensive heavy metals (batteries). Replacing gasoline with diesel puts the two general approaches closer in costs. Replacing the diesel with renewable biodiesel and replacing coal electric with renewable solar/wind eliminates the Pentagon imperialism and the carbon emissions. Shifting the renewable energy production (ownership) to the local level solves a huge political problem for the people. The shift to renewables gives electric a significant advantage because the land/space cost is about 1/5th but has greater material costs, so a combination of both probably makes sense. To limit these costs, we can hybridize (series diesel-electric), lighten the vehicle, reduce the reserve horsepower, drive slower (all add up to 200 mpg), drive less, and use trains, buses and bicycles.
.There is much that needs to be done or corrected. Obama may have eight years to accomplish some of these things, and I applaud his efforts to this point. But the real solutions are not wedded to the occupant of the White House or even the Legislators. The impetus for real and lasting change will only come from the people themselves.
So will we decide in favor of the planet and everything on it, or will we remain dependent on a few years of a hero and then back to waste, pollution, sickness and death?
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
ardee? Thou? A Seismic Shift? Has BHO made some initial decisions that mitigate your prior analysis, if I recall the sense of it correctly, that he would produce little change for the better for the common woman, man, child, dog, cat, goldfish or Mother Earth?
If you have, we may meet in the middle. I'm a mainline BHO fan, yeah. But obeisance to Israel, warring with Afghanistan and bombing Pakistan are Dead Wrong! He will do much good. And fail too.
How MUCH Good he does WILL be a function of activism, organizing, marches, demonstrating-vocal, visible demands upon the new president by the "people themselves."
How can we go back and forth if we agree? Well, we'll figure something out...azjoe.
We see things not as they are, but as we need them to be.
He's done more things right in two weeks than the Wanker did in
eight years. Also it is such a relief to see our President
speak intelligently without smirking at the end of a sentence.