August 2015 Climate Change Summary Report

“Climate change legislation approaches pivotal showdown with oil industry”

August 31, 2015: The Guardian reports: “With only a few days left in the current session of the California legislature, an aggressive political and public relations fight between the oil industry and top lawmakers over climate change legislation is moving into a final round. At stake is the passage of far-reaching environmental bills that would fundamentally alter the way the state does business and deals with planet-warming pollution – but would likely also change the way everyday Californians travel, live and consume.”

“Big Solar’s Subsidy Bubble”

August 31, 2015: An editorial in The Wall Street Journal states: “The Department of Energy’s Inspector General revealed last week that the legendary solar-panel manufacturer Solyndra—a poster baby of the Obama stimulus—lied to the feds to get a $535 million loan guarantee before going bust in 2011. Solyndra is a cautionary tale, but the Obama Administration is still throwing caution to the sun. The IG report, which follows a four-year investigation by the IG and FBI, describes how Solyndra engaged in a “pattern of false and misleading assertions,” including inflating the value of corporate contracts and sales, to win a giant loan guarantee in 2009. All evidence suggests that DOE was a willing victim. The IG notes that DOE loan officers felt “tremendous pressure” from the White House and Congress to rush through loan-guarantee applications.”

“EPA Chief Says ‘Tremendous’ Chance Offered for Carbon Capture”

August 26, 2015: Bloomberg reports: “Gina McCarthy, the head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, said the need to reduce carbon emissions offers a chance to push ahead with low-carbon technology such as carbon capture and storage. ‘In the U.S. even with our Clean Power Plan, every fuel will still continue to play a part’ including coal and gas, she said at a town hall meeting in Tokyo Wednesday. The Clean Power Plan, an initiative announced earlier this month, would require the American power sector to cut carbon pollution 32 percent by 2030 from 2005 levels. ‘There’s a tremendous opportunity today to accelerate our progress on cleaner combustion and carbon capture and storage,’ McCarthy said.”

“Obama pushing for more clean energy choices for consumers”

August 24, 2015: Associated Press reports: “Pushing back against fossil fuel interests, President Barack Obama is pressing to give ordinary Americans more power to choose what kind of power they use. The president, in a speech at a clean energy conference in Las Vegas on Monday night, planned to announce new executive actions and other efforts aimed at making it easier for homeowners and businesses to invest in green energy improvements that in the past may have been impractical or unaffordable. The moves are designed to build on the clean power plant rules that the president announced earlier in the month to cut carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants by a third. They all feed into Obama’s goal of cutting overall U.S. emissions by 26 percent to 28 percent over the next decade to combat climate change and encourage other countries to do likewise.”

 

“Energy secretary optimistic for climate pact”

August 24, 2015: The Hill reports: “Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said on Monday he is optimistic that world leaders will come to an agreement to fight climate change and that technology will play a key role in the effort. Moniz said advances in technology are the main reason that he is optimistic about the results of the December meeting in Paris hosted by the United Nations, where world leaders hope to come to a deal on reducing greenhouse gases. Technology sets the Paris meeting apart from previous attempts at a deal, including the 2009 U.N. meeting in Copenhagen that did not yield a deal, Moniz said at the National Clean Energy Summit 8.0 in Las Vegas.”

“Wind energy gets blown away by shifting patterns in the West”

August 21, 2015: The Washington Examiner reports: “Wind energy is butting up against the effects of sluggish weather in the West, where wind patterns have changed and renewable energy production is at a near five-year low. The government’s Energy Information Administration detailed the findings earlier this month in a study that showed falling wind energy production in California, Oregon and Washington state — typically known as a bastion for clean energy development. The agency didn’t say how the wind energy slump would affect the electric grid, but it did say it could hinder wind farms from taking advantage of a key federal tax subsidy and harm their economic viability. Clean energy companies rely on the subsidy to fund projects.”

“Colorado Tried Methane Caps on Drillers, And They Worked”

August 21, 2015: Bloomberg reports: “For an idea of how the U.S. government’s proposed methane rules will affect drillers, look no further than Colorado. The state became a test case for similar controls last year when a coalition of energy companies and environmental groups agreed on measures to cut the pollution. In a bid to address smog, regulators there adopted the nation’s first requirements for oil and natural gas companies to find and fix methane leaks. Drillers who were already voluntarily curbing emissions accepted Colorado’s rules with little opposition. Gas production in May was up 1.5 percent from the same period two years earlier, Energy Information Administration data show. A state analysis estimated that the rules cost drillers about 0.4 percent of their annual revenues. ‘Methane is a product we sell, so it’s in our business interest as well as in our general interest as environmental stewards to make sure every molecule goes into the sales line,’ John Christiansen, a spokesman for Anadarko Petroleum Corp., said by phone Tuesday. Industry groups such as the American Petroleum Institute criticized rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday to curb methane emissions in the country, saying they would exacerbate an already painful price crash. Crude oil has slumped by about half in a year, while gas prices have dropped 30 percent.”

“Clinton seeks distance from Obama on climate change issues”

August 20, 2015: Associated Press reports: “Hillary Rodham Clinton is opposing President Barack Obama’s authorization for oil drilling in the Alaska Arctic and his delays on the Keystone XL pipeline, in some of the clearest signs of the Democratic front-runner distancing herself from the president. Having agreed with him on most issues so far in her 2016 race, Clinton edged to Obama’s left on climate change on Tuesday. In the course of a few hours, she announced her disapproval of his move to allow Royal Dutch Shell to drill in the Arctic Ocean and her impatience for a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline Alberta in Canada to Texas. Clinton remains the overwhelming favorite for the Democratic presidential nomination but growing enthusiasm for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has been pushing her further to the left in recent weeks in an attempt to widen her appeal with the party’s liberal base. Sanders and other primary opponents are opposed to Keystone, Arctic drilling and other projects deemed risky for the environment.”

“Greens: End federal fossil fuel production to cut emissions”

August 20, 2015: The Hill reports: “Ending fossil fuel production on federal lands in the United States would prevent up to 450 billion tons of greenhouse gases from entering the atmosphere, according to a study released Wednesday. The analysis, from the group EcoShift and commissioned by the Center for Biological Diversity and Friends of the Earth, found that the untapped supply of fossil fuels on U.S. federal lands represents between 349 and 492 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, or about half the potential emissions from all U.S. fossil fuels. By contrast, the U.S. emitted more than 6.6 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2013, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.”

“Obama’s Wind-Energy Lobby Gets Blown Away”

August 19, 2015: An op-ed in the Wall Street Journal by Robert Bryce, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute states: “Chalk one up for the bald eagle. The avian symbol of American freedom has beaten the Obama administration and the wind industry in court, though the majestic birds still don’t stand a chance when flying near the subsidy-fueled blades of green-energy production. On Aug. 11, a federal judge in the Northern District of California shot down a rule proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) that would have allowed the wind industry to legally kill bald eagles and golden eagles for up to three decades. The ruling is a setback for the wind industry and President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which depends on tripling domestic wind-energy capacity to meet the plan’s projected cuts in carbon-dioxide emissions by 2030. The ruling also exposes the Obama administration’s cozy relationship with the wind industry and the danger to wildlife posed by a major expansion of wind-energy capacity.”

“Calif. program subsidized more efficient energy use for both rich and poor. Guess whose habits didn’t change?”

August 18, 2015: Climatewire reports: “A 2005 subsidy to encourage more efficient energy use in sunny California worked remarkably well to reduce energy usage in lower-income communities, a new study determined. But the program had little effect on people’s behavior in cooler and wealthier coastal residences, so the study raises questions about the program’s overall cost-effectiveness. Because substantial rebates were paid to the richer, coast-dwelling participants in the program, which is no longer in effect, the study’s author concludes that it was not as cost-efficient at reducing carbon emissions as it may have been. The paper was produced by the Energy Policy Institute at Chicago, the research group that was behind another recent, controversial study questioning the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency to cut carbon emissions.”

“Can John Kasich Find Sunlight On Clean Energy?”

August 17, 2015: National Journal reports: “When it comes to energy, John Kasich seems to like living in the murky middle. But he can’t stay there forever. Unlike his Republican presidential challengers, the Ohio governor hasn’t been virulently in denial of climate-change science, nor has he fully embraced the scientific consensus that it is caused by man. He has said he sees a role for clean energy, but he hasn’t defined how the government should (or shouldn’t) support it. He’s touted emissions reductions, but also spouted concerns about job losses from climate action. When it comes to President Obama’s climate rules for power plants, Kasich has been critical and his state attorney general has sued the Environmental Protection Agency seeking a stay. But Kasich hasn’t said his state will try to skip the rules entirely, unlike other Republican governors and presidential contenders Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal and Wisconsin’s Scott Walker.”

“Can an Islamic climate change declaration inspire 1.6B Muslims?”

August 17, 2015: Climatewire reports: “Islamic leaders from around the globe tomorrow will unveil a declaration calling on the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims to embrace climate change action as part of their religious duty. Activists gathering in Istanbul for the event said that just as Pope Francis declared climate change essential to the Catholic faith, they hope Islamic religious scholars can inspire Muslim communities to make the issue a priority. ‘Islam is very strong on environmental protection,’ said Wael Hmaidan, director of Climate Action Network International, who is helping to organize the declaration. ‘From the Quran to the hadiths [sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad], it really says it is a human responsibility … that we are tasked with protecting creation and it is part of our duties as Muslims,’ he said.”

“The EPA’s Gina McCarthy on climate change and picking a better job title”

August 17, 2015: An interview with EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy in The Washington Post states: “I think for a long time climate change was presented as a doomsday situation, and there’s no question that the climate has changed, and it will present challenges. But I’m focused on it now because I don’t think it is a doomsday scenario. I actually think we have the solutions now, which is why I think we have a better chance than ever to make that big leap forward. That’s why I spend all of my time on it.”

“States Move to Block Obama Administration’s New Carbon Rules”

August 14, 2015: The Wall Street Journal reports: “Fifteen states asked a federal court Thursday to temporarily block Obama administration carbon regulations while they mount a full legal challenge to the rules. The move is the first step in what is expected to be a yearslong court battle over recently completed Environmental Protection Agency rules that call for carbon emissions from power plants to be cut 32% by 2030 from 2005 levels. The rules are the cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s climate agenda. The states asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to issue an emergency stay blocking the rules, noting that they would be required ‘to spend significant and irrevocable sovereign resources now’ to be in a position to meet the initial deadline of Sept. 6, 2016 for states to submit compliance plans to the EPA.”

“Obama Climate-Change Rules Fought as States Seek Delay”

August 14, 2015: Bloomberg reports: “Fifteen states led by coal-rich West Virginia asked a federal court to stall Obama administration rules intended to cut the fossil fuel’s use and slow climate change. The request on Thursday is the first move by states to block President Barack Obama’s landmark initiative. It would freeze current regulations as they work to undo the new rules. The Obama initiative, dubbed the ‘Clean Power Plan,’ aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from U.S. power plants by 32 percent by 2030, based on 2005 emission levels, by requiring states and utilities to use less coal and more solar power, wind power and natural gas.”

“The Green Scare Problem”

August 14, 2015: An op-ed in The Wall Street Journal by Matt Ridley, author of ‘The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves’ and a member of the British House of Lords states: “‘We’ve heard these same stale arguments before,’ said President Obama in his speech on climate change last week, referring to those who worry that the Environmental Protection Agency’s carbon-reduction plan may do more harm than good. The trouble is, we’ve heard his stale argument before, too: that we’re doomed if we don’t do what the environmental pressure groups tell us, and saved if we do. And it has frequently turned out to be really bad advice. Making dire predictions is what environmental groups do for a living, and it’s a competitive market, so they exaggerate. Virtually every environmental threat of the past few decades has been greatly exaggerated at some point.”

“Study questions climate benefits of corn ethanol”

August 13, 2015: Greenwire reports: “University of Michigan researchers today raised questions about the greenhouse gas benefits of producing ethanol from corn. In a study, the researchers looked at how carbon dioxide moves between land and the air and found that, in a best-case scenario, substituting ethanol for gasoline produces no significant net changes in emissions. The authors used ‘annual basis carbon’ accounting to examine the greenhouse gas emissions associated with growing corn for producing and using ethanol. They say the method is more accurate for measuring the carbon footprint of biofuels than the life-cycle assessments used in regulatory decisions.”

“The Untold Story Behind the Clean Power Rule”

August 12, 2015: A blog post in The Huffington Post from former Sierra Club executive director and chairman Carl Pope states: “The media missed the real story on the Obama Clean Power Plan. Most outlets, like the NYT, hail it as a ground-breaking major new initiative, which ‘could lead to the closing of hundreds of polluting coal-fired power plants, freeze future construction of such plants and lead to an explosion in production of wind and solar energy,’ while Republicans blasted it as a huge example of Presidential hubris — precisely because it would accomplish those goals. Political insiders like Politico and Slate claim it isn’t such a big deal. And at first blush the numbers seem to support the skeptics. The new rule will require reductions in carbon pollution from the power sector by 770 million tons — 32% against a 2005 baseline. But by the end of 2014, utilities had already cleaned up 350 million tons, and emissions were cut by another 15% in the first four months of 2015.”

“To protect the climate, repeal the biofuel mandate”

August 11, 2015: An op-ed in The Hill by John DeCicco, a research professor at the University of Michigan Energy Institute, states: “Ten years ago, the federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was signed into law with the promise that biofuels – corn ethanol in particular – would set the country on a cleaner, greener and more energy secure path. Has the policy, ten years into its tenure, delivered on its promises? Has it helped the environment? The clear and short answer: No. The ecological harm caused by the RFS is reason enough to repeal this ill-considered policy. What about the claims that renewable fuels help the environment and slow global warming? Unfortunately, in the real-world of commercial biofuel production as opposed to an imaginary world of fantasy fuels advocated by special interests, those claims are untrue. After a decade of expansion, the facts on the ground reveal that biofuels – far from being cleaner-burning alternatives as promised – are worsening greenhouse gas emissions and harming the environment in many other ways.”

“A mighty optimistic wind estimate fuels EPA rule”

August 10, 2015: Energywire reports: “A strong, sustained growth of U.S. wind power, a cornerstone of the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan, is achievable but faces stiff economic and political headwinds, according to government and private analyses. The plan issued Monday predicts that zero-carbon renewable energy — primarily wind and solar power — will supply 28 percent of total generation capacity in 2030, the compliance period’s end year. The draft rule a year ago projected 22 percent as the estimated renewable power capacity share, and the higher contribution from renewables is key to the deeper cut in greenhouse gas emissions that the new plan requires. The expansion of wind power in the United States has hinged on a crucial federal tax incentive that Congress has not renewed. The federal production tax credit (PTC) has allowed wind generation to compete with fossil fuels and nuclear power.”

“Republican Voters Generally Support Clean Power Plan Fundamentals”

August 10, 2015: Morning Consult reports: “In the first GOP presidential primary debate Thursday, Fox News moderator Bill Hemmer kicked things off with a question to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) stating that combatting climate change is ‘extremely unpopular with conservative Republicans.’ Hemmer wasn’t necessarily off base. For Republicans, it’s been a long-held notion that supporting action on climate change is bad politics, particularly in the primary season that favors ultra-conservative voters. Yet while it’s true that taking action on climate change is not popular with Republicans in Washington, those bad feelings resonate less strongly with the Republican electorate.”

“The Religion of Climate Change”

August 7, 2015: An op-ed in The Wall Street Journal by Nicholas G. Hahn III, editor of RealClearReligion.org, states: “When President Obama on Monday announced new ‘Clean Power Plan regulations to help mitigate climate change, more than a few religious leaders were quick to offer their blessing. Some 170 evangelicals – pastors, religion professors, nonprofit directors and others – sent an open letter to the president ‘to offer our support and encouragement for you efforts to overcome the climate challenge.’ The Evangelical Environmental Network, as the group calls itself, would ‘prefer that Congress act to reduce carbon pollution through a market-based approach, such as a revenue-neutral carbon tax swap that cuts other taxes,’ but is nonetheless ‘grateful’ for the president’s executive action. Mr. Obama also seemed to indicate that his proposed rules have the imprimatur of another faith leader. ‘As Pope Francis made clear in his encyclical this summer,’ the president said in his speech, ‘taking a stand against climate change is a moral obligation.'”

“Obama admin launches jobs program for climate rule”

August 7, 2015: The Hill reports: “The Obama administration is teaming up with three major unions to encourage creation of jobs that will be needed to implement the new climate rule for power plants. The Department of Energy (DOE) said Thursday that it will provide technical assistance and similar help to the Utility Workers Union of America, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the United Steelworkers, and other unions that want to join. The program is aimed at pushing states and others to comply with the climate rule in ways that maximum preservation and creation of jobs like upgrading power plants, installing renewable energy and building energy infrastructure, the DOE said.”

“Senate Dems call for vote on pope’s climate statement”

August 6, 2015: The Hill reports: “A group of Senate Democrats wants to vote on Pope Francis’s climate change pronouncement. The lawmakers, led by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), introduced a resolution on Wednesday stating that the Senate agrees with the pope’s June encyclical declaring climate change a man-made problem and calling on world leaders to take steps to fix it. The resolution states that ‘the Senate stands with Pope Francis and the scientific consensus that human activity is the primary driver of climate change, present climate trends are unsustainable and immediate action must be taken to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to limit the deleterious effects of human-induced climate change.’”

“Rural utilities struggle to be optimistic about EPA climate rules”

August 6, 2015: The Washington Examiner reports: “Rural utilities are cautiously optimistic about the changes made to the final version of the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan, but they don’t know if it will be a win or lose for them. The rural cooperatives make up the large swath of the nation’s electric system that lies in between the densely populated areas of the nation. They are consumer-owned and serve some of the poorest areas in America, and therefore are the most sensitive to policies such as the power plan, which is expected to drive up costs and require new investments to comply. The Environmental Protection Agency plan places states on the hook to reduce emissions from power plants beginning in 2022, with the goal of a 32 percent emission reduction by 2030. Many rural utilities use coal-fired generation, which the EPA plan would seek to limit.”

“Will the Clean Power Plan make every state look more like California?”

August 6, 2015: The Christian Science Monitor reports: “President Obama’s Clean Power Plan is about 1,500 pages long, but it can be summed up succinctly: Mr. Obama wants the United States to be more like California. The Clean Power Plan aims to replace most coal-fired power plants with renewable sources of energy like wind and solar, and California has almost completely eliminated coal as a source of energy already, the LA Times reported. In his announcement of the regulations, Obama recalled arriving as a student at Occidental College in 1979, when ‘Los Angeles still was so full of smog that there were days where people who were vulnerable just could not go outside.'”

“5 ways the EPA’s new power plant rules will affect business”

August 5, 2015: Business Journals  reports: “The nation’s power plants will be required to reduce their carbon emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 under final rules being issued Monday by the Environmental Protection Agency. To meet this target, power plants will have to sharply reduce their use of coal as fuel. Many business groups, as well as states, contend this would be bad for the economy. They plan to challenge the EPA’s Clean Power Plan with lawsuits that most likely will end up at the U.S. Supreme Court.”

“Business’ split personality on climate change”

August 5, 2015: Dallas Morning News reports: “Everyone has a stake in the environment, but American business is deeply divided over what comes next. Many leading companies endorse efforts to reverse climate change and are stepping forward voluntarily. Last week, Apple, Google, Goldman Sachs and Wal-Mart were among 13 market leaders that pledged to invest at least $140 billion in low-carbon initiatives. An additional 365 companies signed letters of support for the EPA’s clean power plan released Monday. …Yet many industry trade groups don’t accept the science and oppose mandatory changes. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce called the clean power plan a ‘bad deal for America.’ It’s among several groups and states that plan to sue the government. Opponents say the new emission rules would drive up electricity prices, harm coal and other industries, and hurt national competitiveness.”

“Climate-Change Putsch”

August 5, 2015: Wall Street Journal editorial reports: “Rarely do American Presidents display the raw willfulness that President Obama did Monday in rolling out his plan to reorganize the economy in the name of climate change. Without a vote in Congress or even much public debate, Mr. Obama is using his last 18 months to dictate U.S. energy choices for the next 20 or 30 years. This abuse of power is regulation without representation. …This plan is essentially a tax on the livelihood of every American, which makes it all the more extraordinary that it is essentially one man’s order. Mr. Obama’s argument is that climate change is too important to abide by relics like the rule of law or self-government. It is an important test of the American political system to prove that he is wrong.”

Obama takes on carbon rule critics, as opponents plan next steps

August 4, 2015: Energy Guardian reports: “President Barack Obama on Monday said efforts to block the newly finalized Clean Power Plan would only amount to excuses for inaction,’ but the coal industry, states and Congress moved quickly to lay out their next steps for legal and legislative efforts to bring down the long-awaited climate policy. Obama — at a White House ceremony to formally unveil the final rules — said critics were ‘scaremongering’ with warnings of economic disaster, higher energy costs and increased risk of electric blackouts. ‘The kinds of criticism that you’re going to hear are simply excuses for inaction,’ he said. ‘Every time we’ve made progress, it’s been despite these types of claims. Whenever America’s set clearer rules and smarter standards for our air, our water and our children’s health, we get the same scary stories about killing jobs and businesses and freedom.’”

“States to sue Obama administration over climate rules” 

August 4, 2015: The Hill reports: “A coalition of conservative states wasted little time Monday in promising to sue the Obama administration to stop its climate rules for power plants. The states, led by West Virginia, believe the rules are “fundamentally flawed and illegal” and intend to go to court to prove their case. ‘The final rule announced Monday blatantly disregards the rule of law and will severely harm West Virginia and the U.S. economy,’ Patrick Morrisey, attorney general of West Virginia, said in a statement. ‘This rule represents the most far-reaching energy regulation in this nation’s history, drawn up by radical bureaucrats and based upon an obscure, rarely used provision of the Clean Air Act,’ he said. ‘We intend to challenge it in court vigorously.’ Morrisey, a Republican, did not say which states would join him in his lawsuit. The attorneys general of 13 other states joined Morrisey in his unsuccessful attempt to get the rule overturned before it was made final, and some political leaders in more than 30 states have expressed opposition to it.”

“GOP leaders hammer new Obama climate rule”

August 4, 2015: The Hill reports: “President Obama’s new power plant emissions rules are ‘another blow to the economy and the middle class,’ and ‘regressive regulations that are set to harm struggling workers and families,’ Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on Monday. McConnell, a long-time foe of the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan rule for power plants, questioned the legality of the rule in a floor speech and said the rule wouldn’t help the environment because companies will move jobs in the energy sector to countries with poor environmental records, like India and China. ‘The administration is now trying to impose these deeply regressive regulations — regulations that may be illegal, that won’t meaningfully impact a global environment, and that are likely to harm middle- and lower-class Americans the most — all done by executive fiat,’ McConnell said on the Senate floor. ‘It represents a triumph of blind ideology over sound policy and honest compassion.’”

“Why Obama’s epic climate plan isn’t such a big deal”

August 4, 2015: Politico reports: “The carbon regulations that President Obama is unveiling today sound like they’ll be a bit stronger than the toothless draft rules he unveiled last year. That doesn’t mean they’ll be strong. And it certainly doesn’t mean they’ll be ‘the strongest action ever taken to combat climate change,’ as The New York Times breathlessly referred to them in its news pages yesterday morning. It’s not yet clear exactly what they’ll be, because so far the Obama administration has only revealed some non-binding national goals, not the hard emissions targets that states will be required to meet. But the early leaks suggest that the Clean Power Plan will require the electricity sector to decarbonize slightly more than it would have under the draft plan… That’s nice, but by the end of this year, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, the power sector’s emissions will already be down 15.4 percent from 2005 levels — about half the anticipated reductions in just a decade, and before the plan goes into effect.” (Editor’s note: this article was published Mon., Aug. 3)

“Three lines of attack against Obama’s climate rule”

August 4, 2015: The Hill reports: “Opponents of the Obama administration’s sweeping new standards for power plant emissions have identified three avenues of attack, as they formulate a strategy to beat back the central pillar of the president’s climate change initiative. States, industry groups and congressional Republicans are vowing an all-out resistance campaign aimed at weakening, delaying or altogether blocking the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new carbon limits… The top threats to the rule come from each branch of government: the federal courts, Congress and, potentially, the Oval Office.”

“Obama’s New Climate-Change Regulations to Alter, Challenge Industry”

August 3, 2015: The Wall Street Journal reports: “A new rule mandating the first-ever federal limits on power-plant carbon emissions aims to change the way Americans make and consume electricity, accelerating a shift already under way toward cleaner fuels, renewable energy and consumer-generated power. The regulations, which will be unveiled by President Barack Obama at a White House event Monday, are part of a broader push by the administration to position the U.S. as a leader in tackling climate change. The Environmental Protection Agency regulations are central to the administration’s submission to an international climate conference set for December in Paris. White House officials say Mr. Obama views addressing climate change as part of his legacy.”

“White House insists tough new carbon restrictions are legal under Clean Air Act”

August 3, 2015: The Guardian reports: “The White House insisted on Sunday it was on strong legal footing as it unveiled details of ambitious carbon reduction plans that are likely to be fiercely opposed by coal-burning Republican states. The president will announce a 32% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 in what he calls America’s biggest ever step against climate change. …But the Obama administration’s decision to tackle climate change by introducing new rules through amending pollution regulation rather than an attempt to pass so-called ‘cap and trade’ legislation or implement a carbon tax has been attacked by several states, who plan a series of legal challenges.”