Planet Earth: Too Big to Fail
The Obama administration has given itself an extraordinarily powerful tool that could help the president achieve all three of his top domestic goals at once--but only if he has the political moxie to deploy it to its full extent.
That tool is the proposed Endangerment Finding--a formal declaration by the Environmental Protection Agency that global warming indeed threatens human health and welfare. Once the administration issues the final declaration, the Clean Air Act is triggered, giving the administration sweeping authority to decide how to reduce global warming pollution from power plants, vehicles, and other sources, how much, and how fast. According to a groundbreaking new analysis from New York University, the administration could even unilaterally establish a cap-and-trade system very similar to what Congress is considering.Obama's landmark proposal means that the administration no longer has to go through Congress to make the green economy a reality. No horse-trading with hostile Republicans. No need to throw tens of billions of dollars at the oil and coal industries to win the votes of polluter-friendly members of Congress. No need for sixty votes in the Senate (or even, for that matter, fifty). It will be the EPA looking at the science, listening to public comment and deciding how best to protect the planet, public health and the economy.
With this authority, the administration can do what has been widely dismissed as politically infeasible, but what scientists and others warn is environmentally and economically essential: reducing US global warming pollution from 25 percent to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.
Doing this raises the possibility of giving our children a green and bountiful planet to grow up in and spur the creation of millions of new, high-paying green jobs; it would also go a long way toward achieving Obama's goal of cutting healthcare costs to pay for his $50 billion to $65 billion healthcare plan.
How? Pollution from fossil fuel power plants (mostly coal) adds $167 billion to America's annual healthcare bill, as a result of increased asthma attacks, respiratory diseases, heart attacks, lung cancers, mercury poisoning and other impacts that come with coal's soot and smog. Acting against global-warming pollution would cut other kinds of toxic pollution too, as businesses invest in energy efficiency and clean energy and move away from polluting sources of energy. Add the tens of billions of dollars of additional healthcare costs from auto tailpipe pollution, and the savings are even higher--potentially paying for the entire additional cost of President Obama's healthcare plan.
Despite these benefits, the administration has suggested it might slow-walk its way to climate regulation, in hopes that Congress will produce a bill more precisely suited to greenhouse gas regulation than the Clean Air Act Authority.
We've seen the consequences of this kind of caution and delay before--and they're not pretty. During the Clinton administration, Greenpeace and other environmental groups sued the EPA to require it to issue the endangerment finding. Under pressure from industry, the Clinton administration did nothing and punted the decision to Bush. It took until 2007 for the Supreme Court to decide that the government had to make a decision about the finding and until last week for the government to actually do it. In the meantime, the United States has put a decade's worth of avoidable pollution into the atmosphere.
Furthermore, there's a real risk that Congressional action, even if it comes, will be inadequate. Although the House of Representatives may be moving (slowly) toward passing a climate bill that constitutes a good first step, it still falls somewhat short of what scientists say is necessary. And it's difficult to imagine this Senate, overstuffed as it is with polluter sympathizers, getting sixty votes for anything that reduces emissions to a level even close to what climatologists say gives us a real shot of avoiding a planetary emergency.
But if President Obama learns from the mistakes of his predecessors and quickly establishes aggressive targets, he will set the bar for Congress to meet. If senators want to lower costs for polluters by passing a more efficient system specifically tailored to global warming, they can do so. But to persuade President Obama to sign it, they'll have to make it strong enough so that it at least equals what he does through executive action.
Make no mistake: this is hardball. But for better or worse, hardball is what it's going to take to solve the climate crisis, create a green economy and meet the president's healthcare goals. At the end of the day, President Obama can't afford to let Congress set the schedule--or unilaterally decide the fate of the planet.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
21 Comments so far
Show AllThe planet is a big ball of hot iron. It's that smear of life on the surface that is going to be f@#ked. (para-George Carlin)
Anybody following trends in grain production vs. consumption and oil production per capita will understand that we aren't heading in a good direction. If this flu scare was something more potent and got it's start in Mumbai instead of Mexico City we'd be watching the planet's population dive right now.
There are no laws of physics that demand human survival. Most of the universe is a vacuum. We'd better take care of the little bit of living space we have.
dumddown
By the time that the problems of 6,700,000,000 population are dealt with, there will be 9,000,000,000 people to deal with.
the only likely revolution capable of actually lowering world CO2 levels is the one ensuring that most humans die off suddenly, or where radically reduced cuotas of per capita CO2 production were instigated.....by an all-powerful international institution of some kind.
since most of us are far from being able to even imagine either of these events, i simply say "may the big (hydrocarbon heaven) party go on and on and on" . although we all have (for what its worth) the responsibility to speak out and demand change from our public servants on this issue!!
The US government executive is faced with many difficulties, from financial crises, ongoing war, bloated military budget, threatening climate crazies, and a money entrenched congress, an unsupportable population with few jobs and no means of making a living, and a unsupportable lifestyle for the rich.
If the administration is to achieve anything positive at all, it must concentrate on achieving a single goal, which is supporting the scientific and material basis for ongoing civilisation, and how much of that is going to be sustainable.
At the moment the World Domination gamblers ongoing war on the Baddy-stans is turning into a "going for broke" escalated throw of the dice. Pakistan is to be invaded in force. The rural Afghani population is going to be genocidally cleansed. And the US going broke is only good thing that will be achieved.
The war of humans vs climate is the impossible task the administration should be focussed on. The administration should aim for a Cuban-like democracy and austerity, with as much green solar technology as possible. Nothing else is remotely sustainable or healthy. The delusion of clean coal stems from a total climate change denial and pretence that a carbon exploitative lifestyle can continue on forever as before.
I feel like I just read a story from disney's fantasyland.
""proposed Endangerment Finding--a formal declaration by the Environmental Protection Agency that global warming indeed threatens human health and welfare.""
If, IF, this happened, do you want to bet what obama will do?
For another thing, this whole article, for all its hoitytoity high hopes, dances around with everything that will NOT fix the problem of the 6,700,000,000 people on this planet. And yet this piece is leading us to believe that those eventual discretionary decisions will allow this planet to resume a fantasyland of life and all corporate and political intrigue will fall in lock step with this? Obviously, someone has been watching much too much corporate advertizing and razzle dazzle.
The issue of the ecological footprint of 6,700,000,000 people will have to be addressed and dealt with for any improvement to this period of life, for any living thing to get better. And if the 'intelligent' people don't do so, NATURE damn sure will and NATURE may be doing that now.
Neo Malthusians. You can find them both on the left and the right.
Dick Cheney, eat your bionic heart out. The unitary executive has arrived!(Not really.)
This is good stuff for the administration. Congress is encouraged to nail down the Waxman bill, but if they don't, the admin simply enforces the Clean Air Act, and it can only be stopped by legislation or court decisions.
We have to be the change we want to see.
so the only way to get the right thing done is to take the decision away from congress?
The human species is to big and it is failing.
Cap and trade solutions cannot be expected to actually reduce carbon emissions, but they will legitimate the carbon output of industries able to pay.
If the goal is to cut emissions, then we must cut emissions without the cap and trade shell game.
I agree. Check out some blogs on Climate Progress. Joe Romm calls them "rip-offsets".
I already pay carbon tax on gasoline and natural gas for home heating, both of which are scheduled to have sharp increases over the next few years. The tax on natural gas amounts to an additional 8.3%. This promotes conservation whereas cap and trade will simply produce another derivatives market.
Don't wait for politicians. Join the free transit movement.
http://freepublictransit.org
"That tool is the proposed Endangerment Finding--a formal declaration by the Environmental Protection Agency that global warming indeed threatens human health and welfare."
Brilliant!
"A generation is going, and a generation is coming; but the earth is standing even to time indefinite." Ecclesiastes 1:4
The climate crisis certainly isn't going to be solved with capitalist "solutions".
Right on, Struggle...
Obama's economic policies (including health care) are on a trajectory that will result in a level of insolvency that will render stillborn all of the socially beneficial programs he proposes.
Is Radford talking about the same Obama who can't seem to pronounce the word "coal" without first saying "clean?"
I trust you'll pardon my skepticism.
Unfortunately, no pardon is necessary.
Just commute your sentence... It is easier than getting a pardon...