Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on August 2, 2015
Obama to Order Steeper Cuts for Power Plants
President Barack Obama will impose even steeper cuts on greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power plants than previously expected, senior administration officials said Sunday, in what the president called the most significant step the U.S. has ever taken to fight global warming.
A year after proposing unprecedented carbon dioxide limits, Obama was poised to finalize the rule at a White House event on Monday. In a video posted to Facebook, Obama said the limits were backed up by decades of data showing that without tough action, the world will face more extreme weather and escalating health problems like asthma.
“Climate change is not a problem for another generation,” Obama said. “Not anymore.”
Opponents vowed to sue immediately, and planned to ask the courts to put the rule on hold while legal challenges play out. Many states have threatened not to comply.
In his initial proposal, Obama had mandated a 30 percent nationwide cut in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030, compared to 2005 levels. The final version will require a 32 percent cut instead, said the officials, who weren’t authorized to comment by name and requested anonymity.
Environmental groups cheered the toughened rule, calling it a historic move that proves the global effort against climate change is beginning in earnest. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton vowed to defend Obama’s plan if she’s elected to replace him, and sought to use her support for the plan to draw a contrast with her GOP competitors.
“It will need defending. Because Republican doubters and defeatists — including every Republican candidate for president — won’t offer any credible solution,” Clinton said. “The truth is, they don’t want one.”
The final rule also gives states an additional two years — until 2022 — to comply, officials said, yielding to complaints that the original deadline was too soon. States will also have until 2018 instead of 2017 to submit their plans for how they’ll meet their targets.
But the administration will attempt to encourage states to take action earlier by offering credits those that boost renewable sources like wind and solar in 2020 and 2021, officials said.
The focus on renewables marks a significant shift from the earlier version that sought to accelerate the ongoing transition from coal-fired power to natural gas plants, which emit far less carbon dioxide. The revised rule aims to keep the share of natural gas in the nation’s power mix at current levels.
The stricter limits in the final plan were certain to incense energy industry advocates who had already balked at the more lenient limits in the proposed plan. But the Obama administration said its tweaks would cut energy costs and address concerns about power grid reliability.
The Obama administration previously predicted the emissions limits will cost up to $8.8 billion annually by 2030, although it said those costs would be far outweighed by health savings from fewer asthma attacks and other benefits. The actual price won’t be clear until states decide how they’ll reach their targets.
America’s largest source of greenhouse gases, power plants account for roughly one-third of all U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases blamed for global warming. Obama’s rule assigns customized targets to each state, then leaves it up to the state to determine how to meet them.
In the works for years, the power plant rule forms the cornerstone of Obama’s plan to curb U.S. emissions and keep global temperatures from climbing, and its success is pivotal to the legacy Obama hopes to leave on climate change. Never before has the U.S. sought to restrict carbon dioxide from existing power plants.
By clamping down on power plant emissions, Obama is also working to increase his leverage and credibility with other nations whose commitments he’s seeking for a global climate treaty to be finalized later this year in Paris. As its contribution to that treaty, the U.S. has pledged to cut overall emissions 26 percent to 28 percent by 2025, compared to 2005.
Even before the rule was finalized, more than a dozen states announced plans to fight it, setting up a near-certain confrontation with the Environmental Protection Agency, which by law can force its own plan on states that refuse to comply. Yet even in many of those states, power companies and local utility authorities have started planning to meet the targets in anticipation of being eventually forced to comply. Lawmakers in Congress were also expected to redouble efforts to use legislation to stop Obama’s regulation.
Yet the more serious threat to Obama’s rule will likely come in the courts. The Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, which represents energy companies, said 20 to 30 states were poised to join with industry in suing over the rule. The Obama administration has a mixed track record in fending off legal challenges to its climate rules.
39 Comments on "Obama to Order Steeper Cuts for Power Plants"
Boat on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 2:25 pm
Excellent news. This should put renewables on a faster path towards growth. Now the US needs a few Republicans to jump on the bandwagon.
Apneaman on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 2:38 pm
What Caused An Emissions Decline In The United States?
http://www.declineoftheempire.com/2015/08/what-caused-an-emissions-declline-in-the-united-states.html
Kenz300 on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 2:46 pm
If the world is to have an hope of dealing with Climate Change it needs to stop building any more coal fired power plants and begin shutting down the oldest and dirtiest ones.
Wind and solar are the future….safer, cleaner and cheaper…..
Plantagenet on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 3:03 pm
Its good that Obama is ordering US power plants to cut their emissions. Its bad that Obama is telling China and India they can increase their CO2 emission as much as they want.
AND, the fact of the matter is that most of the increase in CO2 emissions now is coming from India and China.
Mike989 on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 3:05 pm
Coal is going bankrupt as we speak. With China’s economic slowdown and it’s move to build 200 Gigawatts of Solar, India too.
The world is going to skip “Fracking-Natural-Gas* and go Straight to Solar and Wind.
This has caught the coal industry up short.
Because an industry that’s dead in 10 years, is effectively dead today.
There are no long term buyers.
This is a bold move by Obama, but 40 coal plants have already gone bankrupt, again the smart money is gone.
And it brings up the question, will this be enough? I fear it will not, not until you have a carbon tax and carbon credits.
And also a break-thru to suck excess carbon out of the atmosphere.
Mike989 on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 3:08 pm
Plantagenet, where do you get your “news”?
Plantagenet on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 3:26 pm
Mike
why don’t you know that China is the world’s largest emitter of CO2, and the CO2 emissions from China and India are the main cause of the growth in global CO2 output?
Perhaps you should read the “news” more often?
ghung on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 3:55 pm
Sure Plant. Let’s skip the part where the US outsourced much of its filthy manufacturing to China, or the part where US per capita CO2 emissions is more than double that of the average Chinese, second only to Australians (barely). When it comes to individual overall consumption and waste generation, the US is still number one.
Maybe China should move their manufacturing to Africa or some place, eh?
Plantagenet on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 4:04 pm
@ghung
Your suggestion that China should move their manufacturing to Africa to reduce their own CO2 footprint just shows how little people understand the problem of CO2 emissions and global warming.
You can’t just move the factories fro one country to another country to solve the problem. In order to stop global warming, overall GLOBAL emissions have to be reduced. That the means the US AND china AND Africa.
Get it now?
Cheers!
Davy on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 4:08 pm
Planter, geeze, G-man’s sarc blew right through your ears.
Plantagenet on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 4:17 pm
Davy, geeze, my src blew right through your ears.
Cheers!
Davy on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 4:25 pm
Planter, it wouldn’t be the first time that happened.
Plantagenet on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 4:38 pm
Davy—you made me lol
Have a great day!
Davy on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 4:41 pm
Watch your back planter I will get you when you are least expecting;)
peakyeast on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 7:04 pm
Its a comforting signal Obama is sending.. But it is no more than a comfort.
But it will not make an impact on any of our problems. Not even if the rest of world did the same.
Even with a first generation real fusion power plant functioning today – our future would be the same…
That is: No future. – Our wise religious and political leaders throughout time has made certain we face not one problem – but a perfect storm of a multitude of problems – each one severe enough to end civilisation as we know it.
Davy on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 7:24 pm
Peak, I am with you we are too far behind too many predicaments. It would be far better to come out and say we are screwed, blued and tatoo’d then offer a policy of adjustment and mitigation then Obama would deserve his Nobel Peace Prize.
Makati1 on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 7:30 pm
Co2 emissions will be only cut when the world economy collapses and most of the sources shut down for good. But it is already too late. Argue all you want and dream of a solar future if it floats your boat. Nothing is gonna change.
Jimmy on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 8:15 pm
@ Plant. we’re all well aware that China is the world’s largest emitter of CO2, and the CO2 emissions from China and India are the main cause of the growth in global CO2 output. What most us didn’t hear about was that Obama is telling China and India they can increase their CO2 emission as much as they want. Do you have a link to a sound bite or a source for that statement that you claim Obama made?
Makati1 on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 10:36 pm
In other energy news:
“As rivers and reservoirs shrink across the parched West, cheap sources of water-generated electricity are starting to dry up.”
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/flow-cheap-hydroelectricity-slows-parched-west-n401966
First the food crops and now the Air Conditioning.
Plantagenet on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 10:44 pm
@Jimmy
Did you miss this in the news? OK. no problem. I’m glad help you out.
Check this out: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/world/asia/climate-change-china-xi-jinping-obama-apec.html
This article in the NYT explains that the deal signed by obama and China in Nov. 2014 places ZERO limits on China until 2013, i.e. Obama says China can continue to increase their CO2 emissions as much as they want. And after 2030 China only agrees to consider lowering CO2 emisisons—i.e. there are NO FIRM TARGETS TO LOWER CHINESE CO2 Emissions.
Obviously, as the world is heating up due to CO2, it is madness for Obama to be agreeing that CO2 emissions can increase. They need to be capped and reduced immediately.
When Obama visited India the Indians said the Chinese deal sounded OK to them. They also want to increase their CO2 emisions without limit.
AND even worse the Obama-China agreement will form a model for the upcoming UN climate meeting in Paris. Thanks to Obama the whole idea of a UN climate treaty mandating reductions in CO2 is gone. Any agreement in Paris will be a sham—it will be voluntary only, with no firm targets for CO2 reductions and no penalties for countries that don’t meet targets.
Do you see the potential problems with the Obama-CHina deal now?
CHEERS!
Plantagenet on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 10:45 pm
FIXING TYPO ABOVE
@Jimmy
Did you miss this in the news? OK. no problem. I’m glad help you out.
Check this out: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/world/asia/climate-change-china-xi-jinping-obama-apec.html
This article in the NYT explains that the deal signed by obama and China in Nov. 2014 places ZERO limits on China until 2030……
Cheers!
Jimmy on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 11:05 pm
You need to learn the difference between a deal that allows someone to do something and a person telling someone to do something. You are a very unintelligent man Planty. Your stupidity and trollish post are childish.
agramante on Sun, 2nd Aug 2015 11:39 pm
Even helpful steps like Obama’s are way too little, too late. The time for the US government to act decisively was in the late 70’s and early 80’s, when global warming and realities of resource scarcity were becoming known. But the conservative patron saint of senility decided every day in perpetuity had to be Christmas and we ought to ignore that the planet might possibly have natural limits. From that time onward orthodoxy (even among liberals) has been a pathological fixation (Obama has it too) on growth, as if growth will solve anything. I welcome steps toward conservation of resources and preservation of the environment, but China’s and other countries’ use of coal (and dirtier, like coke) to fuel their own economic rises more than counteract our efficiencies (and also make possible our consumer excesses). It’s not even ironic–not sure I’d call it tragic, either–that the supposed “greening” of the US economy in the 90’s, accompanying the rise of microcomputers and the internet, was largely made possible precisely by our outsourcing of the dirty work.
Apneaman on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 12:08 am
agramante, we are just apes with a maladapted brain. At best it could have gone a little slower. When I was younger I blamed capitalism, but one day I realized it was not the cause, but rather the best system we could invent to degrade energy. Neo liberal capitalism puts it on steroids. We really are just like a cancer.
MEGACANCER ~ Exploring the pathology of industrial civilization.
http://megacancer.com/2015/07/18/the-beginning/
http://megacancer.com/2015/08/03/dual-systems-theory/
Jimmy on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 12:19 am
So the way Plant sees it is that China and India wouldn’t be burning all the CO2 they want to burn unless it was for the fact they both have Obama’s ‘permission’? LOL whatever. Plant is a moron. A scratched record. blah blah blah Obama blah blah blah oil glut. What a douchebag.
Ralph on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 2:05 am
A 30% cut in CO2 emissions would bring the US in line with European emissions today. By then European emissions will have fallen further.
This is a no brainer. USA is hopelessly inefficient in its use of energy and becoming more efficient will save trillions in $.
I personally generate about half the CO2 of the average European, in the aspects of my life that I can control (home, travel, food, purchases). My standard of living is very comfortable and I have access to excellent healthcare.
Dredd on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 5:59 am
There, there now.
We have cut your dose of POISON down so it will kill you more slowly.
Isn’t love grand (Oil-Qaeda & MOMCOM Conspire To Commit Depraved-Heart Murder).
peakyeast on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 8:38 am
@Davy: The funny thing I was in doubt wether you were sarcastic or not…
I think Nobel himself will feel ashamed of how his institution has been corrupted and perverted after his death.
But yes, it would actually be best if the world leaders would start taking these problems seriously.
We need a worldwide Manhattan project in order to have any remote chance of mitigating just some of the problems.
But as I have stated before: It will be next to impossible doing this – since it will be during the time of our descent. Just look at the recent past: People are so desperately happy that it seems like there is a little BAU now and uses it to get their fix or normalcy: I.e. excessive spending on stupid things like big cars and travel.
There is almost no understanding in the general population that this is just a small pause brought about in desperation using lousy unconventional resources.
ennui2 on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 8:54 am
“So the way Plant sees it is that China and India wouldn’t be burning all the CO2 they want to burn unless it was for the fact they both have Obama’s ‘permission’? LOL whatever. Plant is a moron. A scratched record. blah blah blah Obama blah blah blah oil glut. What a douchebag.”
Nice to know I’m not the only one who figured him out.
BobInget on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 9:46 am
Of course carbon emission limits are ‘too little too late’ nothing new here.
This move has less to do with AGW then pure politics. It’s really quite simple.
The Obama Administration is laying a fine trap for Republicans running for reelection to Congress. Republicans oppose this (puny) measure at their own risk. Most Americans understand dirty air, polluted waterways, climate changes.
similar traps;
Funding women’s reproductive rights.
Fifty two votes to kill “Obama Care”
Most of California and Oregon is blanketed by a thick layer of smoke. Let Republicans tell us climate changes have nothing to do with wild fires. I dare them.
agramante on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 10:22 am
Apneaman–I largely agree with you. As a species we have a pretty poor history of dialing back on technology and techniques we already have. In many ways reagan was nothing more than a visible symptom of the conservative forces of exploitation behind him. The term useful idiot is overused but it applies to him–he was a useful and highly charismatic idiot, but profiteering capitalists and eager consumers were only too happy to cosign his message. Even if Carter–politically inept but an accurate thinker–had stayed in office, things might not have been terribly different. They would’ve been different, but who’s to say how much?
Kenz300 on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 11:01 am
The world is in transition to safer, cleaner and cheaper alternative energy sources like wind and solar. The fossil fuel industry will go kicking and screaming but it will go……. the fossil fuel industry is doing all they can to hang on and undermine the competition from wind and solar. The sooner the world stops burning coal for electricity generation the better. The cost to the environment and health of people of is too high.
Climate Change is real….. we need to deal with the cause (fossil fuels)
penury on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 6:25 pm
I am sorry but I will celebrate a Presidential requirement when the time line is something which will be reached either while the incumbent is in office or we change the laws so that future Presidents or future Legislatures are not allowed to change the requirements except to make them stricter. This Pres will be gone before the first court cases are heard and the rest of us will be gone before the last one is heard.
Apneaman on Mon, 3rd Aug 2015 9:25 pm
Reducing emissions alone won’t stop climate change: new research
https://theconversation.com/reducing-emissions-alone-wont-stop-climate-change-new-research-45493
Dredd on Tue, 4th Aug 2015 6:06 am
Like the man said, “there is such a thing as too late.”
Sea Level Fall: The Forgotten Aspect of Sea Level Rise?
Kenz300 on Tue, 4th Aug 2015 7:21 am
We continue to take steps in a positive direction.
Progress is slow but we are making progress toward a safer, cleaner and cheaper alternative energy future.
World Moves Toward 100 Percent Renewable Energy – First Electricity, Then Heating/Cooling, and Finally Transportation – Renewable Energy World
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2015/07/world-moves-toward-100-percent-renewable-energy-first-electricity-then-heating-cooling-and-finally-transportation.html
Makati1 on Tue, 4th Aug 2015 9:55 am
Kenz, the world is not moving ahead in ‘renewables’. First, most ‘renewables’ require oil to exist and to be maintained/replaced. So, when oil goes, soon follow ALL ‘renewables’.
Second, the World still uses 150% more hydrocarbon energy sources than the total of all renewables. That number has not significantly changed in decades.
Don’t you ever get tired of your broken record rants? I seldom even read them. Repeating the same words do NOT make them true.
Makati1 on Tue, 4th Aug 2015 9:58 am
AH, Kenz! I just noticed the source of your ‘facts’. An advertising website for ‘renewable’ products and services. LOL
Davy on Tue, 4th Aug 2015 10:01 am
Yeap Mak, Kenny is annoying. He is nothing more than green corn porn. I have never been able to get Kenny to engage in discussions. In that respect I would call him a board coward.