Considering a Green New Deal

Will 2019 bring a "Green New Deal" for the U.S. or individual states?

President Franklin D. Roosevelt championed the original "New Deal" in the 1930s, as a series of federal reforms and measures designed to lift the U.S. economy out of the Great Depression. The First New Deal included banking and securities law reforms, funding for emergency relief operations by states and cities, and a Civil Works Administration. Later in the Roosevelt administration, a Second New Deal included labor law reforms, significantly increased federal employment through the Works Progress Administration jobs relief program, and the Social Security Act, among other measures.

More recently, the notion of a "Green New Deal" has emerged from a variety of sources. While the details of what constitutes a Green New Deal vary depending on the proponent, the basic concept most proposals have in common is a significant investment in clean energy to spur employment and revenue. For example:

• Mark Hertsgaard's 1998 book Earth Odyssey culminated with his vision of a "Global Green Deal" to transform global economies based on the New Deal.
• New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has been credited with coining the "Green New Deal" phrase in a pair of opinion pieces in 2007. At the time, Friedman envisioned the government as "not funding projects, as in the original New Deal, but seeding basic research, providing loan guarantees where needed, and setting standards, taxes and incentives" to spawn business opportunities in clean power.
• In his 2008 presidential campaign, President Obama proposed addressing the nation's economic crisis by using green investments to promote new jobs, and the 2009 stimulus act included substantial measures along these lines which have been called a Green New Deal.
• In 2009, a United Nations program published a report calling for a "Global Green New Deal," again seeking transformation of global economies through investment in clean energy, systems and infrastructure.

The idea of a Green New Deal has again found some traction in 2019, although the details of what might be included remain unclear, as does the likelihood of its adoption. In 2018, as part of her successful campaign, now-Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez proposed a federal "Green New Deal" to address climate change. While the concept does not appear to have been fully embraced by Congress, state legislation proposing state-level Green New Deals has started to arise. For example, Maine state Representative Chloe Maxmin has proposed a bill whose title has been published as LR 1034, "An Act To Establish a Green New Deal for Maine."

Whatever ultimate fate these proposals meet, the concept of stimulating the economy and improving environmental performance through investment in clean energy and other green infrastructure projects will likely remain on the table for the foreseeable future. Legislatures and policymakers will be faced with challenges and opportunities in crafting measures that will succeed, in terms of both enactment and actually making a difference. If nothing else, 2019 will bring continued discussion across all levels of government about how best to move the U.S. and individual states forward.

Energy policy in the 2018 State of the Union

U.S. President Donald Trump delivered the 2018 edition of the State of the Union speech on January 30, 2018. Unlike many previous such addresses, this one barely covered energy policy, focusing instead on a variety of other matters. But the speech offers insight into the Trump administration's view of the national situation, as well as into its priorities.

Energy policy and resources have often featured prominently in previous State of the Union addresses, and in remarks in 2017 President Trump advocated for a national strategy of "energy dominance." By contrast, President Trump's 2018 State of the Union speech mentioned U.S. regulation, production, and trade in energy only briefly, emphasizing his deregulatory agenda and pro-export philosophy.

The Trump administration posted an online version of his 2018 remarks as prepared for delivery. In that version, only two sentences use the word "energy":

We have ended the war on American Energy — and we have ended the war on clean coal.  We are now an exporter of energy to the world.

A transcript released by the U.K. media source The Independent suggests President Trump stuck close to his script on this (and other points):

We have ended the war on American energy, and we have ended the war on beautiful clean coal. We are now very proudly an exporter of energy to the world. 

These statements appear to relate to announcements made over the last year. Back in March 2017, President Trump signed an executive order which he described as "putting an end to the war on coal. We’re going to have clean coal — really clean coal." The U.S. does export a significant amount of energy -- and last year the Energy Information Administration projected that the U.S. would likely become a net exporter of energy within several years "as petroleum liquid imports fall and natural gas exports rise." Subsequent developments over the last year have lent preliminary support to this prediction.

President Trump's 2018 State of the Union speech did not otherwise directly address energy policy. That said, he did emphasize policy goals and achievements with respect to economic factors, such as tax cuts, job creation in manufacturing and other sectors, and improved small business confidence, as well as matters like national defense and immigration.

It can be tempting to infer administrative priorities from what is or isn't covered in a speech like this. At the same time, any leader has limited time to cover a host of important topics. With respect to energy matters, the speech emphasizes the Trump administration's focus on reducing regulations and increasing exports of America-produced energy resources.

Trump executive order on domestic energy policy

U.S. President Donald Trump has signed an executive order affecting domestic energy policy.  His March 28, 2017 Presidential Executive Order on Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth includes a variety of directives, generally aimed at reducing federal regulations affecting domestic energy production.  Here's a look at his Executive Order targeting Obama-administration climate regulations and other agency actions that potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources.

The Executive Order includes 8 operative sections.  One provides policy statements; six call for regulatory reviews that could lead to rule changes or revocations, or directly revoke and rescind Obama-era actions.  The final section includes general provisions.

Section 1 includes five policy statements, such as that "is in the national interest to promote clean and safe development of our Nation's vast energy resources, while at the same time avoiding regulatory burdens that unnecessarily encumber energy production, constrain economic growth, and prevent job creation."  It also sets a federal policy "that executive departments and agencies (agencies) immediately review existing regulations that potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources and appropriately suspend, revise, or rescind those that unduly burden the development of domestic energy resources beyond the degree necessary to protect the public interest or otherwise comply with the law."

Section 2 calls for an immediate review of all agency actions that potentially burden the safe, efficient development of domestic energy resources, "with particular attention to oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy resources."  It directs agency heads to submit a memorandum to the Office of Management and Budget detailing such potentially burdensome actions, and including "specific recommendations that, to the extent permitted by law, could alleviate or eliminate aspects of agency actions that burden domestic energy production."  With respect to actions targeted with specific recommendations in a final report, agency heads are directed to "as soon as practicable, suspend, revise, or rescind, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding, those actions, as appropriate and consistent with law."

Section 3 rescinds or revokes a variety of Presidential actions and reports, including several of President Obama's executive orders regarding climate change, the President's 2013 Climate Action Plan, and the Council on Environmental Quality's 2016 final guidance for federal agencies on consideration of greenhouse gas and climate issues in performing reviews of agency actions under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Section 4 calls for the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to "immediately take all steps necessary to review" the Clean Power Plan governing electricity-sector emissions and related rules "for consistency with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order and, if appropriate, shall, as soon as practicable, suspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules."

Section 5 disbands a working group on the social cost of greenhouse gas emissions, and restricts the ways agencies may account for the monetary value of changes in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from regulations.

Section 6 calls for the Secretary of Interior to lift moratoria on federal land coal leasing activities imposed under a 2015 order, and to commence federal coal leasing activities.

Section 7 calls for review of federal regulations affecting emissions from the oil and gas sector, including 2016 emissions standards for new, reconstructed and modified sources, and a 2015 rule governing hydraulic fracturing on federal and Indian lands, among others.

Section 8 includes general provisions, generally similar to those found in other executive orders.

BLM rule for renewable energy leasing of federal lands

The federal Bureau of Land Management has issued a final rule establishing a competitive process for leasing federal lands for renewable energy development.  The Obama administration describes the rule as strengthening the agency's existing "Smart from the Start" leasing program, consistent with the president's Climate Action Plan.  But following the 2016 election, the future Trump administration could change the agency's course.

Part of the Department of the Interior, the BLM manages federal lands across the U.S.  While BLM lands have been used for mining for years, under the Obama administration BLM took steps to open up federal lands for leasing for renewable energy projects.  Under federal laws including the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and the Mineral Leasing Act (MLA), BLM is authorized to issue what it calls "grants" -- easements, leases, licenses, and permits to occupy, use or traverse public lands for particular purposes -- for facilities for the generation, transmission, and distribution of electric energy, and oil and gas pipelines.

On November 10, BLM released its final rule, "Competitive Processes, Terms, and Conditions for Leasing Public Lands for Solar and WindEnergy Development and Technical Changes and Corrections for 43 CFR Parts 2800and 2880.”  It amends BLM's regulations governing rights-of-way issued under two federal laws.  BLM described the amendments as necessary to "facilitate responsible solar and wind energy development on BLM-managed public lands and to ensure that the American taxpayer receives fair market value for such development."

The final rule includes provisions to promote the use of preferred areas for solar and wind energy development.  These areas, called “designated leasing areas” (DLAs), are defined parcels of land with specific boundaries identified by the BLM land use planning process as being a preferred location for solar or wind energy that can be leased competitively for energy development.

The rule expands BLM's existing regulations, allowing BLM to offer lands competitively on its own initiative, both inside and outside DLAs, even in the absence of identified competition. Within DLAs, the rule will require competitive leasing procedures except in certain circumstances, when applications could be consider ed outside the competitive process. Outside DLAs, the BLM will have discretion whether to utilize competitive leasing procedures.

The final rule also updates payments charged by BLM, to ensure that it obtains fair market value for the use of public lands.  Updated fee structures include both an acreage rent and a megawatt-capacity fee.

Given the November 8 election results, it is unclear whether the Trump administration will continue in this direction.  While campaigning, President-elect Trump emphasized leasing more federal land for fossil fuel production.  The BLM renewable energy rule's future is thus in question.

U.S., China ratify Paris climate agreement

The U.S. has formally ratified the global climate change agreement reached in Paris last year, as has China.  This moves the Paris climate agreement closer to legal effectiveness -- but more nations must accept the pact before it can enter into force.

At issue is the Paris Agreement, an agreement brokered at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  In December 2015, over 190 countries meeting under UNFCCC adopted the Paris Agreement agreement to limit global warming.  The Paris Agreement describes climate change as an "urgent threat" and a "common concern of humankind."  The agreement's aim is to strengthen global response to this threat, through a variety of means.  These include the creation of individual national commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increased adaptation to climate change, and assistance for developing nations.

But the Paris Agreement has not yet taken its full legal force, because it contains a provision limiting its effectiveness until enough nations agree to comply.  As is common for multilateral international agreements, the Paris Agreement calls for parties to express their consent to be bound by the agreement, by depositing instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the depositary established by the convention.  In this way, the agreement draws a distinction between Parties -- those signing the Agreement -- and those nations which have deposited their ratification instruments. 

Under its Article 21, the Paris Agreement "shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least 55 Parties to the Convention accounting in total for at least an estimated 55 percent of the total global greenhouse gas emissions have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession."  Practically speaking, this means that as new countries submit their ratifications, the convention's secretariat must calculate the total greenhouse gas emissions of Parties that have ratified the Paris Agreement, as a percentage of global greenhouse gas emissions.  Once the 55 percent threshold is hit, the Paris Agreement will become legally effective and operational.  The UNFCCC has said that while it cannot predict when this will occur, "it is conceivable that the Agreement may enter into force before 2020."

On April 22, 2016, the Paris Agreement was opened for signature.  At the opening ceremony, 15 states deposited instruments of ratification.  By September 1, reportedly 24 states accounting for just over 1% of global greenhouse gas emissions had ratified the agreement.

The Paris Agreement's path to effectiveness advanced on September 3, when President Obama announced that the U.S. and China had formally joined the Paris agreement in a ceremony in China.  In recent years, these nations have been among the world's top emitters of carbon dioxide.  As described by the White House, "Both leaders expressed satisfaction with jointly joining the Paris climate agreement and pledged to work together and with other parties to bring the Paris agreement into force as early as possible."  The Obama administration also noted other recent U.S. climate actions taken jointly with China, including support for a proposed amendment to the Montreal Protocol to phase down the consumption and production of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) globally, and efforts to address international aviation emissions.

Following the U.S.-China announcement, the convention secretariat announced that as of September 7, 27 states had deposited instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval accounting in total for 39.08% of the total global greenhouse gas emissions.

Climate and energy in 2016 State of the Union

President Obama delivered his final State of the Union address on January 12, 2016.  The White House has posted his remarks as prepared for delivery to Congress.  Climate change, and related energy and environmental issues, formed a prominent theme in this year's speech.

The White House.

Climate change first surfaced in the 2016 State of the Union as part of one of four "big questions" President Obama posed for the nation.

Second, how do we make technology work for us, and not against us -- especially when it comes to solving urgent challenges like climate change?

After announcing a "moonshot" medical research effort to cure cancer to be led by Vice President Joe Biden, President Obama said, "We need the same level of commitment when it comes to developing clean energy sources."

He then spent several minutes addressing climate change directly.  First, he noted effective consensus that climate change is a topic worth tackling:

Look, if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it. You will be pretty lonely, because you’ll be debating our military, most of America’s business leaders, the majority of the American people, almost the entire scientific community, and 200 nations around the world who agree it’s a problem and intend to solve it.

He then touted the economic and environmental effects of investment in renewable and distributed generation and energy storage:

But even if -- even if the planet wasn’t at stake, even if 2014 wasn’t the warmest year on record -- until 2015 turned out to be even hotter -- why would we want to pass up the chance for American businesses to produce and sell the energy of the future?

Listen, seven years ago, we made the single biggest investment in clean energy in our history. Here are the results. In fields from Iowa to Texas, wind power is now cheaper than dirtier, conventional power. On rooftops from Arizona to New York, solar is saving Americans tens of millions of dollars a year on their energy bills, and employs more Americans than coal -- in jobs that pay better than average. We’re taking steps to give homeowners the freedom to generate and store their own energy -- something, by the way, that environmentalists and Tea Partiers have teamed up to support. And meanwhile, we’ve cut our imports of foreign oil by nearly 60 percent, and cut carbon pollution more than any other country on Earth.

Gas under two bucks a gallon ain’t bad, either.

President Obama then called for changes to transition to clean energy sources:

Now we’ve got to accelerate the transition away from old, dirtier energy sources. Rather than subsidize the past, we should invest in the future -- especially in communities that rely on fossil fuels. We do them no favor when we don't show them where the trends are going. That’s why I’m going to push to change the way we manage our oil and coal resources, so that they better reflect the costs they impose on taxpayers and our planet. And that way, we put money back into those communities, and put tens of thousands of Americans to work building a 21st century transportation system.

Now, none of this is going to happen overnight. And, yes, there are plenty of entrenched interests who want to protect the status quo. But the jobs we’ll create, the money we’ll save, the planet we’ll preserve -- that is the kind of future our kids and our grandkids deserve. And it's within our grasp.

Climate change is just one of many issues where our security is linked to the rest of the world.

His final reference to climate change came while discussing international engagement, and "seeing our foreign assistance as a part of our national security":

When we lead nearly 200 nations to the most ambitious agreement in history to fight climate change, yes, that helps vulnerable countries, but it also protects our kids.

Climate, energy, and environmental issues thus featured prominently in the 2016 State of the Union speech.  Over the coming year, these themes -- domestic and international action on climate change, investment in renewable energy and distributed generation, transition away from oil and coal -- will likely continue to play out at the federal level.

Previewing climate and energy in 2016 State of the Union

President Obama is scheduled to deliver his final State of the Union address tonight. As in previous years, he is likely to address climate change, energy and environmental issues.  What will the 2016 State of the Union have to say about these topics?

We know from previous years' State of the Union speeches (2013, 2014, 2015) that energy, the environment, and climate change have played an increasing role in the Obama administration's priorities. While the administration released a "preview" video on Youtube for the 2016 address,  the brief clip doesn't include any substantive remarks about climate, energy, or the environment.

However, the Obama administration has been active on climate, energy and environmental issues, with key developments in the past year such as the adoption of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan regulations limiting power plant emissions of carbon dioxide and the denial of the Keystone XL pipeline's Presidential Permit application.  Indeed, President Obama has said that "no challenge poses a greater threat to our children, our planet, and future generations than climate change — and that no other country on Earth is better equipped to lead the world towards a solution."

Climate change, energy, and the environment are likely to be mentioned along with other administration priorities such as international relations, national security, gun violence, and the economy.  Indeed, the White House's State of the Union website features sections titled Economic Progress, Acting on Climate, Engagement in the World, Health Care Reform, and Social Progress and Equality.

Under the "Acting on Climate" heading, the administration website for this year's address notes the December 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, reduced domestic emissions, the largest investment in renewable energy in U.S. history, and associated job creation.  The website also provides a "Record on Climate Change", listing details of the administration's actions to address climate change.

President Obama's final State of the Union address to Congress will be streamed live at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sotu on January 12, 2016 at 9PM ET.

EPA proposes methane rules for oil and gas

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a suite of new and modified rules affecting the oil and natural gas industry.  Collectively, the proposed rules released on August 18 are designed to reduce methane emissions from oil and natural-gas drilling activities.

As the world tackles climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, methane plays a dual role.  As the key constituent of natural gas, methane offers society an abundant and efficient fuel that can displace reliance on costlier and more carbon-polluting fuels like coal and oil.  At the same time, methane in the atmosphere can act as a greenhouse gas itself, with a global warming potential more than 25 times greater than that of carbon dioxide.  According to EPA, methane is the second most prevalent greenhouse gas emitted in the United States from human activities, and nearly 30 percent of those emissions come from oil production and the production, transmission and distribution of natural gas.  At the same time, U.S. production of oil and natural gas has increased, giving the sector important economic and domestic security impacts.

To address this dynamic, yesterday EPA proposed a series of rules affecting the oil and natural gas sector.  EPA has described the new rules as a "key component" of the Obama administration's Climate Action Plan.  They follow a January announcement of a new goal to cut methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40 to 45 percent of 2012 levels by 2025.  Under the administration's view, a key tool supporting that goal is the implementation of standards for methane and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from new and modified oil and gas production sources, and natural gas processing and transmission sources.

The rules EPA proposed yesterday include such standards, along with supporting materials.  EPA has described its collective proposal as "a suite of commonsense requirements that together will help combat climate change, reduce air pollution that harms public health, and provide greater certainty about Clean Air Act permitting requirements for the oil and natural gas industry."

EPA's proposed package of rules includes:

• Updates to New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) (PDF, 591 pages) setting methane and VOC requirements for additional new and modified sources in the oil and gas industry. 
• Draft Control Techniques Guidelines (PDF, 310 pages) for reducing VOC emissions from existing oil and gas sources in certain ozone nonattainment areas and states in the Ozone Transport Region.
• A Source Determination Rule (PDF, 54 pages) to clarify EPA’s air permitting rules as they apply to the oil and natural gas industry.

According to EPA, the proposed rule will reduce methane emissions by between 340,000 and 400,000 short tons in 2025,  on top of reductions of 170,000 to 180,000 tons of other VOCs and 1,900 to 2,500 tons of hazardous air pollutants.  But industry trade group American Petroleum Institute has called additional regulation "unnecessary for reducing emissions."  Debate over EPA's proposal is likely to be vigorous, before EPA as it considers its proposed rulemaking, as well as before Congress and possibly even federal courts, before the dust settles.

EPA will take public comment on the proposals for 60 days after they are published in the Federal Register.  According to the January announcement, the administration expects the final rule will follow in 2016.  This action on oil and natural gas production follows closely on the heels of EPA's adoption of the Clean Power Plan rules, regulating carbon emissions associated with the electric power industry.

Resources on Clean Power Plan

Yesterday President Obama announced his administration's "Clean Power Plan," the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's new regulations limiting power plant carbon emissions under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act.

EPA's final Clean Power Plan rule establishes emission guidelines for states to follow in developing plans to reduce greenhouse gas  emissions from existing fossil fuel-fired electric generating units. 

Here are some quick resources I've compiled as a guide to the Clean Power Plan and its release:

• Clean Power Plan Final Rule (PDF) (1560 pages)
• EPA's Regulatory Impact Analysis of the final rule 
• EPA's press release,  "Obama Administration Takes Historic Action on Climate Change/Clean Power Plan to protect public health, spur clean energy investments and strengthen U.S. leadership."
• EPA's overall Clean Power Plan website
• EPA's "key topics" handout
• EPA, DOE, FERC memorandum on coordination in implementing the Clean Power Plan
• EPA fact sheets:
• Overview of the Clean Power Plan: Cutting Carbon Pollution from Power Plants 
• Clean Power Plan: Key Changes and Improvements
• By the Numbers: Cutting Carbon Pollution from Power Plants
• Benefits of a Cleaner, More Efficient Power Sector
• Components of the Clean Power Plan: Setting State Goals to Cut Carbon Pollution
• The Role of States: States Decide How to Meet Their Goal
• Built on a Solid Legal and Scientific Foundation
• Clean Energy Now and in the Future
• Clean Energy Incentive Program
• Keeping Energy Affordable and Reliable
• Resources about the 2014 draft Clean Power Plan:
• A look at EPA's cost/benefit analysis
• Early questions about the Clean Power Plan
• FERC plans conferences about the Clean Power Plan
  

US Clean Power Plan adopted

President Obama will formally unveil the Clean Power Plan today, a set of regulations by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reduce carbon emissions associated with the electric power industry.  A blog post by EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy emphasizes the Clean Power Plan's protection of health and the environment, states' rights to choose their own implementation paths, reduction of future energy costs, and leadership on climate issues.  But some politicians, utilities and states have expressed concern about the regulations' impact, and could launch legal challenges -- or states might refuse to comply.  What's in store for the Clean Power Plan?

It has been just over a year since EPA first released its draft Clean Power Plan in June 2014.  These regulations under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act are designed to reduce the carbon intensity of the U.S. electric power sector -- essentially, how many pounds of carbon are emitted per megawatt-hour of electric energy produced.  Under the draft Clean Power Plan, EPA sets carbon intensity limits for each state, collectively designed to reduce carbon emissions by 30% below 2005 levels.  Each state then designs its own compliance plan using any combination of "building blocks": types of measures like improving the efficiency of fossil fuel power plants, switching out coal- and oil-fired power plants in favor of natural gas, and increasing low- and zero-carbon generation.

While the final Clean Power Plan's basic structure remains much the same, EPA has made some modifications in reaction to concerns about the greenhouse gas regulations' costs and impacts to grid reliability.

Changes from the 2014 draft include:

• Two extra years (until 2022) for states to meet their targets, and greater flexibility for states to form regional pacts to facilitate emissions-cutting projects across state lines, such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
• A new “safety valve” feature, to let states appeal for extensions and other relief if complying with the regulations causes disruptions to power supply.
• Increased social justice incentives for utilities to construct renewable energy projects in poorer neighborhoods, reducing pollution-related illness and eventually lowering electricity rates.
• Energy efficiency is still encouraged, but has been eliminated as one of the rule’s "building blocks” for states to use in building their own carbon-reduction plans.

How will the Clean Power Plan story continue to play out?  Will it be challenged in court?  Will states comply?  What impacts will it have on the U.S. electric power industry?

Obama links climate and health

President Obama has issued a Presidential Proclamation declaring this week, April 6-12, 2015, as National Public Health Week.  Climate change, and its impacts on human and environmental health, figure prominently in his proclamation.

The Obama administration has focused on climate change since taking office in 2009.  In 2013, President Obama released his administration's Climate Action Plan, calling for reductions in U.S. emissions of carbon and greenhouse gases, adoption of mitigation and adaptation measures, and global action.  He has also addressed climate change in his State of the Union speeches to Congress, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued its proposed Clean Power Plan to reduce the carbon intensity of the nation's electric power sector.

While interest in addressing climate change arises from a broad range of factors, health plays an important role in the Obama administration's action on climate issues.  In this week's Presidential Proclamation on health, President Obama noted the interdependence of climate, environment, and human health:

America's public health is deeply tied to the health of our environment. As our planet becomes more interconnected and our climate continues to warm, we face new threats to our safety and well-being. In the past three decades, the percentage of Americans with asthma has more than doubled, and climate change is putting these individuals and many other vulnerable populations at greater risk of landing in the hospital. Rising temperatures can lead to more smog, longer allergy seasons, and an increased incidence of extreme-weather-related injuries and illnesses.

My Administration is dedicated to combating the health impacts of climate change. As part of my Climate Action Plan, we have proposed the first-ever carbon pollution limits for existing power plants -- standards that would help Americans live longer, healthier lives. And as we continue to ensure the resilience of our health care system, we are working to prepare our health care facilities to handle the effects of a changing planet. Climate change is no longer a distant threat. Its effects are felt today, and its costs can be measured in human lives. Every person, every community, and every nation has a duty to protect the health of all our children and grandchildren, and my Administration is committed to leading this effort.

This week the Obama administration announced further actions to protect communities against the impacts of climate change.  These actions include convening stakeholders to prepare for a White House Climate Change and Health Summit later this spring that will feature the Surgeon General, and an Adaptation in Action Report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The Obama administration also announced an expansion of its Climate Data Initiative to include more than 150 health-relevant datasets on climate.data.gov.  President Obama unveiled the Climate Data Initiative in 2014 to host data related to climate change that can help inform and prepare businesses and citizens for the impacts of extreme weather.  The newly released datasets are designed to help the public answer questions, including:

• In what ways does the changing climate affect public health where I live?
• What risk factors make individuals or communities more vulnerable to climate-related health effects?
• How can public health agencies, communities, and individuals plan for uncertain future conditions?

2014: natural gas, wind, solar led new projects

Natural gas, wind, and solar power projects dominated the rankings of new U.S. electric generation placed in service in 2014.

According to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission staff's December 2014 Energy Infrastructure Update, developers placed in service 15,384 megawatts of new utility-scale electric generation capacity in 2014.  This new capacity buildout is within 4% of 2013's figure (15,886 megawatts).

Of 2014's new generating capacity, nearly half (7,485 megawatts, or 49%) is powered by natural gas.  U.S. production of natural gas has increased significantly in recent years, and natural gas prices have decreased in most regions of the country.  At the same time, new environmental regulations have made historically dominant coal relatively more expensive as a fuel source, while relatively low carbon emissions have made natural gas more attractive.  2014 thus continued the trends of coal-fired power plant retirement and the construction of new natural gas-fired generating capacity.

Wind represents the next largest category of new U.S. electric generating capacity placed in service in 2014.  Nearly 27% of 2014's new capacity, or 4,080 megawatts, is powered by wind.  As President Obama noted in his 2015 State of the Union address, the U.S. has more wind energy supplying its electrical grid than any other country.

Solar energy represents the third largest category of new generation placed in service last year.  Over 20% of new 2014 capacity, or 3,139 megawatts, is powered by solar energy.  The rapid growth of solar energy in the U.S. was also featured in President Obama's 2015 State of the Union speech, in which he noted, "Every three weeks, we bring online as much solar power as we did in all of 2008."

Combined, these three energy sources (natural gas, wind, and solar) account for over 95% of all new utility-scale generation capacity placed in service in 2014. Of the remaining capacity, biomass took the largest share (1.6% of total new capacity), with a diverse mix of other sources including water power, coal, and nuclear rounding out the list.  Notably, renewable sources including wind, solar, biomass, and hydropower account for nearly half of all new capacity placed in service in 2014.

What will 2015 bring?

Natural Gas Pipeline Permitting Reform Act

Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass a bill to expedite federal review of some spects of proposed natural gas pipelines.  Known as H.R. 161, the Natural Gas Pipeline Permitting Reform Act is officially summarized as providing for the "timely consideration of all licenses, permits, and approvals required under Federal law with respect to the siting, construction, expansion, or operation of any natural gas pipeline projects."  If enacted into law, what would H.R. 161 do?

Congress debates proposed reforms to the natural gas pipeline permitting process.

Relatively brief for federal legislation, the printed draft of H.R. 161 comes in at just 3 pages.  Overall, it defines and accelerates the timelines for federal approvals of some proposed natural gas pipelines.  If enacted, the bill would give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission one year to decide whether or not to issue a pipeline permit, following which other federal agencies would have 90 days to issue any ancillary permits.

The pipelines that would benefit from this bill are those that have applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717f) for a certificate of public convenience and necessity, and have used the Commission's "prefiling" process.

First, H.R. 161 amends Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to approve or deny an application for a certificate of public convenience and necessity for a prefiled project not later than 12 months after receiving a complete application that is ready to be processed.

Second, H.R. 161 requires any agency responsible for issuing any license, permit, or approval required under Federal law in connection with a prefiled project for which a certificate of public convenience and necessity is sought under the Natural Gas Act to approve or deny the issuance of the license, permit, or approval not later than 90 days after the Commission issues its final environmental document relating to the project.  Generally speaking, if such as agency cannot complete its review process within this timeline, it is compelled to deny the license, permit, or approval, but H.R. 161 would allow the Commission to extend the 90 day deadline by an additional 30 days.  H.R. 161 also changes federal law to provide that in the case of agency inaction within the 90 day time period or extra 30 day period, the requested license, permit, or approval shall take effect upon the expiration of 30 days after the end of such period.

On January 22, the House voted 253-169 in favor of the bill.  It now goes before the Senate.  But on January 20, the Executive Office of the President issued a statement of administrative policy stating, "If the President were presented with H.R. 161, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill."  In that administrative policy statement, the administration acknowledged the need for additional energy infrastructure and supports the timely consideration of project applications, but notes risks from that H.R. 161.  These risks include effective limits on public participation in pipeline review processes, and that agencies may be forced to make decisions based on incomplete information or information that may not be available.  The executive branch's statement also cites a FERC report that since Fiscal Year 2009, FERC has completed action on 91 percent (512 out of 563) of all pipeline applications that it has received within one year of receipt, with the remaining decisions involving complex proposals that merit additional review and consideration.

Will the Natural Gas Pipeline Permitting Reform Act be enacted into law?  How will its enactment -- or non-enactment -- affect proposed new natural gas pipelines, and the customers they would serve?

Energy and State of the Union 2015

President Obama delivered his 2015 State of the Union address on January 20, 2015.  In his remarks as prepared for delivery, he addressed energy-related themes including the growth of U.S. energy resource production and climate change.

As in his 2013 and 2014 addresses, increased domestic production of energy resources featured prominently in the 2015 State of the Union speech, for its economic, political, and national security benefits:

At this moment – with a growing economy, shrinking deficits, bustling industry, and booming energy production – we have risen from recession freer to write our own future than any other nation on Earth.  It’s now up to us to choose who we want to be over the next fifteen years, and for decades to come...

We believed we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil and protect our planet.  And today, America is number one in oil and gas.  America is number one in wind power.  Every three weeks, we bring online as much solar power as we did in all of 2008.  And thanks to lower gas prices and higher fuel standards, the typical family this year should save $750 at the pump.

During the past several years, U.S. production of oil and natural gas has increased significantly.  According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, total U.S. crude oil production averaged an estimated 9.2 million barrels per day (bbl/d) in December 2014, and forecasts for oil productino continue to grow.  EIA predicts that projected crude oil production will reach 9.5 million bbl/d in 2016, constituting the second-highest annual average level of production in U.S. history (after 9.6 million bbl/d in 1970.)

EIA also predicts continued growth in the use of renewable energy resources to produce electricity and heat. In 2014, 6.4% of electric generation came from hydropower and 6.7% from nonhydropower renewables. EIA projects continued growth of nonhydropower renewables, reaching an electricity generation share of 7.9% by 2016.  Wind is the largest source of nonhydropower renewable generation, and it is projected to contribute 5.3% of total electricity generation in 2016.

President Obama also addressed climate change in this year's State of the Union address, and his administration's efforts to combat and mitigate its effects:

2014 was the planet’s warmest year on record.  Now, one year doesn’t make a trend, but this does – 14 of the 15 warmest years on record have all fallen in the first 15 years of this century. 

I’ve heard some folks try to dodge the evidence by saying they’re not scientists; that we don’t have enough information to act.  Well, I’m not a scientist, either.  But you know what – I know a lot of really good scientists at NASA, and NOAA, and at our major universities.  The best scientists in the world are all telling us that our activities are changing the climate, and if we do not act forcefully, we’ll continue to see rising oceans, longer, hotter heat waves, dangerous droughts and floods, and massive disruptions that can trigger greater migration, conflict, and hunger around the globe.  The Pentagon says that climate change poses immediate risks to our national security.  We should act like it.

That’s why, over the past six years, we’ve done more than ever before to combat climate change, from the way we produce energy, to the way we use it.  That’s why we’ve set aside more public lands and waters than any administration in history.  And that’s why I will not let this Congress endanger the health of our children by turning back the clock on our efforts.  I am determined to make sure American leadership drives international action.  In Beijing, we made an historic announcement – the United States will double the pace at which we cut carbon pollution, and China committed, for the first time, to limiting their emissions.  And because the world’s two largest economies came together, other nations are now stepping up, and offering hope that, this year, the world will finally reach an agreement to protect the one planet we’ve got.

His 2015 remarks on climate change reflect a belief or fear that Congress will not act on the issue, or will act to frustrate the Obama administration's efforts on climate change.  In 2013, President Obama asked Congress to develop a market-based solution to climate change, but said he would take executive action if Congress failed to act.  In 2014, he noted Congress's apparent unwillingness to act, and highlighted his administration's proposed new standards on power plant emissions of carbon.  This year's remarks continue the trend of featuring executive-branch solutions, and downplaying the likelihood of near-term legislative support.

Will U.S. production of energy continue to grow?  What economic, political, and national security impacts will flow from the shifts in and growth of the U.S. energy sector?  Will the U.S. continue to act -- or take more serious action -- on climate change?  The remainder of 2015 -- and of President Obama's term in office, which runs into January 2017 -- will show how these themes evolve.

EPA proposes carbon goals for power plants

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed its plan to reduce carbon emissions from the nation's power plants by 30% below 2005 levels.

Stacks rise from the coal-fired Salem Harbor Station power plant, which closed on June 1, 2014.

Formally known as "Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units", EPA's proposed rule spans 645 pages (PDF).  The so-called Clean Power Plan builds on President Obama's 2013 Climate Action Plan, relying on the agency's authority under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act.  Generally, Section 111 provides for the establishment of nationwide emission standards for major stationary sources of air pollution such as power plants.  Current regulations limit power plants' emissions of arsenic, mercury, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particle pollution, but there are currently no national limits on carbon pollution levels.

EPA's Clean Power Plan would, for the first time, provide federal regulation of power plants' carbon emissions.  EPA envisions a collaborative process through which federal limits are established for each state, but where states have the flexibility to identify their own path forward using either current or new electricity production and pollution control policies to meet the goals of the proposed program.  Each state's carbon emissions limit would be stated as a rate of allowable pounds of carbon emissions per megawatt-hour of electric energy generated.  EPA would set these rates based on a case-by-case evaluation of each state's energy mix -- including its portfolio of generation resources -- and EPA's evaluation of opportunities to reduce carbon emissions.

States would then be free to design a program to achieve those rates in a way that makes the most sense for each state's unique situation, combining diverse fuels, energy efficiency and demand-side management to create a tailored solution for each state. EPA also envisions collaboration among states, including the development of multi-state plans.  Some states have already organized collaborative programs to reduce the electric power sector's carbon emissions -- for example, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) program in the eastern states. 

If adopted, EPA's rule would require states to submit their plans to EPA for review in June 2016.  But EPA's plan is not yet final.  It first faces public comment through the summer, including public hearings during the week of July 28 in Denver, Atlanta, Washington, DC and Pittsburgh.  EPA anticipates finalizing its standards in June 2015.

Additional materials, including fact sheets and a regulatory analysis, are posted on the EPA's Clean Power Plan program website.

Obama administration releases National Climate Assessment

The Obama administration has released its third National Climate Assessment, a document designed as a public presentation of the administration's comprehensive scientific assessment of how climate change is impacting the U.S. people and economy.

A view from the Lincoln Memorial to U.S. Capitol, in Washington, D.C.

The National Climate Assessment summarizes the impacts of climate change on the United States, now and in the future.  Produced as a collaboration between over 300 experts guided by the 60-member National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee, the report was extensively reviewed by the public and experts, including federal agencies and a panel of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Climate Assessment has a broad scope, in terms of both types of impacts and regions covered.  Thematically, it analyzes impacts on seven sectors – human health, water, energy, transportation, agriculture, forests, and ecosystems – and on the bigger-picture interactions between these sectors.  Geographically, the report also assesses key impacts on all U.S. regions: Northeast, Southeast and Caribbean, Midwest, Great Plains, Southwest, Northwest, Alaska, Hawai'i and Pacific Islands, as well as a more general look at coasts and oceans.

The report states that that increased scientific scrutiny has led to "increased certainty that we are now seeing impacts associated with human-induced climate change":

While scientists continue to refine projections of the future, observations unequivocally show that climate is changing and that the warming of the past 50 years is primarily due to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from burning coal, oil, and gas, with additional contributions from forest clearing and some agricultural practices.

Outcomes predicted under possible future scenarios include continued increases in average air and water temperatures, changes in rainfall and precipitation patterns, air quality decreases, sea level rise, and ocean acidification.  These changes can disrupt systems for food production, harm human health, or damage property and risk safety through flooding.

The National Climate Assessment also summarizes options for responding to climate change.  These include mitigation: reducing the amount and speed of future climate change by reducing emissions of heat-trapping gases or removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.  Efforts to limit emissions or promote carbon sequestration are considered mitigation efforts.  Other possible responses focus on adaptation: preparing for and adjusting to new conditions -- for example, building levees and seawalls, or promoting farmers' growth of crops more suitable to the changing conditions.

In all, the report provides insight into the Administration’s approach to addressing climate change, and can help people and businesses both minimize risks and identify new opportunities.

The full National Climate Assessment can be explored on the government's climate change website globalchange.gov, or can be downloaded.  The entire report, downloaded in print quality resolution, clocks in at over 170 megabytes.

Report: climate change poses risks to US energy sector

Climate change poses significant risks to U.S. energy infrastructure, and the reliability and cost of the services it enables, according to a report released yesterday by the U.S. Department of Energy.

The report - U.S. Energy Sector Vulnerabilities to Climate Change and Extreme Weather Report (4.2MB PDF) was developed as part of the Obama Administration’s efforts to support national climate change adaptation planning and to advance the U.S. Department of Energy’s goal of promoting energy security. These efforts are embodied by the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force and Strategic Sustainability Planning process established under Executive Order 13514.

The report is predicated on the findings that the U.S. climate is changing, and that these changes impact energy resources and infrastructure. As the report states, "Climatic conditions are already affecting energy production and delivery in the United States, causing supply disruptions of varying lengths and magnitude and affecting infrastructure and operations dependent upon energy supply." The report provides over 30 recent examples of energy infrastructure adversely impacted by climate change-related events such as power plant outages due to high temperatures or low water availability, storm damage to transmission lines, oil wells, pipelines and generators, and flooding-related disruption of fuel transportation systems.

Building on these findings, the report identifies a broad set of risks posed by climate trends, including increasing temperatures, decreasing water availability, and increasing storms, sea level rise, and flooding, as well as the current and potential future impacts of these climate trends on the U.S. energy sector. According to the report, each of these trends will independently, and in some cases in combination, affect the ability of the United States to produce and transmit electricity from fossil, nuclear, and existing and emerging renewable energy sources. These changes are also projected to affect the nation’s demand for energy and its ability to access, produce, and distribute oil and natural gas.

In particular, significant risks identified include:

• Thermoelectric power generation facilities are at risk from decreasing water availability and increasing ambient air and water temperatures, which reduce the efficiency of cooling, increase the likelihood of exceeding water thermal intake or effluent limits that protect local ecology, and increase the risk of partial or full shutdowns of generation facilities
• Energy infrastructure located along the coast is at risk from sea level rise, increasing intensity of storms, and higher storm surge and flooding, potentially disrupting oil and gas production, refining, and distribution, as well as electricity generation and distribution
• Oil and gas production, including unconventional oil and gas production (which constitutes an expanding share of the nation’s energy supply) is vulnerable to decreasing water availability given the volumes of water required for enhanced oil recovery, hydraulic fracturing, and refining
• Renewable energy resources, particularly hydropower, bioenergy, and concentrating solar power can be affected by changing precipitation patterns, increasing frequency and intensity of droughts, and increasing temperatures
• Electricity transmission and distribution systems carry less current and operate less efficiently when ambient air temperatures are higher, and they may face increasing risks of physical damage from more intense and frequent storm events or wildfires
• Fuel transport by rail and barge is susceptible to increased interruption and delay during more frequent periods of drought and flooding that affect water levels in rivers and ports
• Onshore oil and gas operations in Arctic Alaska are vulnerable to thawing permafrost, which may cause damage to existing infrastructure and restrict seasonal access, while offshore operations could benefit from a longer sea ice-free season
• Increasing temperatures will likely increase electricity demand for cooling and decrease fuel oil and natural gas demand for heating

Looking on the brighter side, the report notes that while climate change will, on balance, create challenges and costs for the energy sector, there are potential benefits to the energy sector as well. Examples include reduced average heating loads during the winter in parts of the United States, such as New England, and the opening of new regions to offshore oil and gas exploration due to shrinking sea ice cover in the Arctic. The report also covers adaptation actions underway, as well as other major opportunities to prepare for climate change through adaptation. Nevertheless, on balance, the report finds that the magnitude of the challenge posed by climate change on an aging and already stressed U.S. energy system could outpace current adaptation efforts, unless a more comprehensive and accelerated approach is adopted. Will the U.S. follow that path? What measures will it include? Will it make a difference?

Obama's climate action plan

Today President Obama unveiled his climate change action plan.  The outline of his plan was set forth in a 21-page written document, couldpled with a speech delivered at Georgetown University and broadcast online at whitehouse.gov/live, presents his vision for a unilateral approach to controlling carbon emissions and mitigating the effects of climate change.

The Washington Monument.

President Obama's plan has three main focuses.  First, he proposed measures to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from domestic industry.  These measures include strict standards for carbon emissions from new and existing power plants, promoting investment in renewable energy, and improving energy efficiency in homes, businesses, and industry.  The plan calls for accelerated permitting and development of renewable electricity generation projects on federal lands ranging from Department of Defense properties to lands managed by the Department of the Interior.

Second, he proposed measures to prepare the country for the effects of climate change.  These measures include infrastructure improvements, such as preparing buildings and communities for sea level rise and more intense storms.  These measures are also designed to protect the economy and natural resources, for example conserving land and water resources, preparing for floods and drought, and managing agricultural sustainability.

Third, he called for the U.S. to lead international efforts to address global climate change.  Measures in this category include expanding international use of clean energy and energy efficiency technologies, negotiating global free trade in environmental services and goods, and strengthening global resilience to climate change.

While some of the measures are likely to find widespread support, others such as the power plant emissions standards are controversial.  The plan states that President Obama will issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to "work expeditiously to complete carbon pollution standards for both new and existing power plants.”  The standards, which may be put into place by mid 2015, are likely to hit coal-fired power plants hardest. If they are imposed, the effect may be to force power plants with marginal economics to close or convert to other fuels such as natural gas.  Some fear the impact of new EPA regulations on the cost of electricity, while some proponents of climate action support efforts to price the cost of carbon emissions into electricity produced from coal to encourage a switch to natural gas and other lower-carbon fuels.  Indeed, the plan calls for promoting natural gas as a “bridge fuel” to help domestic and international markets move away from coal and oil, calling for the U.S. to "promote fuel-switching from coal to gas for electricity production and encourage the development of a global market for gas."

Notably, some elements that observers had speculated might be included in the plan were omitted.  For example, the plan does not call for taxing carbon emissions or imposing a federal cap-and-trade regime for carbon.  Likewise, the plan outline does not conclusively address current issues such as whether or not the Keystone XL pipeline or coal export terminals will be approved.  Rather, the outline is relatively bullish about the opportunities to help foreign nations develop projects featuring natural gas, nuclear power, clean coal, and energy efficiency without mentioning the U.S.'s role as importer or exporter.  That said, in his oral remarks, President Obama said that Keystone XL can only be approved if it is found to be in the national interest, including whether or not it exacerbates climate change-related problems.

All eyes are watching whether President Obama is able to implement his plan effectively.  In the coming months, we can expect the federal administration to roll out significant new policies outlined in the plan.  Whether the policies can be put into action, their impacts, and whether they are able to achieve his goals, remains to be seen.

Obama to unveil climate change plan

President Obama is expected to unveil his second-term plan to address climate change tomorrow.  In a video released this past weekend, President Obama announced that he will speak at Georgetown University on Tuesday to present his plan "for the steps we need to take to prepare our country for the impacts of climate change and lead the global effort to fight it."  While the details of his plan are not yet public, its scope and specifics may have a significant impact on both the environment and the economy.

The U.S. House of Representatives.

This is not the first time President Obama has spoken about climate change.  In his second inaugural address, he vowed to "respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations."  Similarly, in his 2013 State of the Union address, he asked Congress to develop a market-based solution, but vowed to take executive action if necessary.

Potential elements of his plan range in scope and impact.  President Obama has already issued an executive order promoting industrial energy efficiency; increasing support for energy efficiency is relatively likely to garner widespread support.  Potentially more impactful -- both in terms of potential to reduce carbon emissions and to increase costs -- are proposals to revise the rules for carbon emissions from existing power plants.  Some Republican Congressional leaders, like House Speaker John Boehner, have already called the climate change plans "absolutely crazy" and certain to increase the cost of energy, driving manufacturing and jobs overseas.

Tomorrow's speech will give us a better sense of Obama's policy direction on carbon emissions and climate change.  It is certain to be followed up a significant dialogue about both the importance of issue and the balancing of costs and benefits that is fundamental to policymaking.  Whether Congress acts, the president uses his executive powers to change policy, or both, remains to be seen.

What the 2013 State of the Union said about energy

Tonight President Obama delivered the 2013 State of the Union address.  Energy figured heavily in his remarks, with emphasis on energy efficiency, natural gas production, and renewable energy.  His newly proposed policies, some of which require congressional approval, aim to boost the economy while protecting the environment.  Here's a look at what he said, relying on the text released online by the New York Times as text as prepared for delivery, as provided by the White House.

The State of the Union is a key opportunity for a president to speak his mind to the public and to Congress.  Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution directs the president to "from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient."  Presidents since Woodrow Wilson have delivered oral addresses to Congress.

President Obama's 2013 State of the Union address presented a number of energy issues and policies.  He criticized federal budget sequestration orders as disrupting priority programs including the energy sector:

In 2011, Congress passed a law saying that if both parties couldn’t agree on a plan to reach our deficit goal, about a trillion dollars’ worth of budget cuts would automatically go into effect this year. These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness. They’d devastate priorities like education, energy, and medical research. They would certainly slow our recovery, and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs. That’s why Democrats, Republicans, business leaders, and economists have already said that these cuts, known here in Washington as “the sequester,” are a really bad idea.

Energy security and sovereignty also figured prominently.  He cited advances in transportation fuel economy, renewable energy, natural gas, and reductions in carbon emissions:

After years of talking about it, we are finally poised to control our own energy future. We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years. We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas, and the amount of renewable energy we generate from sources like wind and solar – with tens of thousands of good, American jobs to show for it. We produce more natural gas than ever before – and nearly everyone’s energy bill is lower because of it. And over the last four years, our emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that threatens our planet have actually fallen.

Climate change also returned as a key area of focus, as it had in President Obama's second inaugural speech last month:

But for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change. Yes, it’s true that no single event makes a trend. But the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15. Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, and floods – all are now more frequent and intense. We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen were all just a freak coincidence. Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science – and act before it’s too late.

To address climate change, President Obama asked Congress to develop a market-based solution, but vowed to take executive action if necessary:

The good news is, we can make meaningful progress on this issue while driving strong economic growth. I urge this Congress to pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago. But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.

Clean energy continues to draw attention, while the development of economically-recoverable natural gas supplies is the latest energy revolution:

Four years ago, other countries dominated the clean energy market and the jobs that came with it. We’ve begun to change that. Last year, wind energy added nearly half of all new power capacity in America. So let’s generate even more. Solar energy gets cheaper by the year – so let’s drive costs down even further. As long as countries like China keep going all-in on clean energy, so must we.

In the meantime, the natural gas boom has led to cleaner power and greater energy independence. That’s why my Administration will keep cutting red tape and speeding up new oil and gas permits. But I also want to work with this Congress to encourage the research and technology that helps natural gas burn even cleaner and protects our air and water.

President Obama also promoted energy efficiency, from getting the transportation sector off oil to improving residential, business and industrial energy efficiency.  He proposed to create a trust funded by oil and gas leases and royalties to help fund some of these shifts:

Indeed, much of our new-found energy is drawn from lands and waters that we, the public, own together. So tonight, I propose we use some of our oil and gas revenues to fund an Energy Security Trust that will drive new research and technology to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good. If a non-partisan coalition of CEOs and retired generals and admirals can get behind this idea, then so can we. Let’s take their advice and free our families and businesses from the painful spikes in gas prices we’ve put up with for far too long. I’m also issuing a new goal for America: let’s cut in half the energy wasted by our homes and businesses over the next twenty years. The states with the best ideas to create jobs and lower energy bills by constructing more efficient buildings will receive federal support to help make it happen.

Infrastructure investment was another point, including the electric power grid and pipeline networks:

America’s energy sector is just one part of an aging infrastructure badly in need of repair. Ask any CEO where they’d rather locate and hire: a country with deteriorating roads and bridges, or one with high-speed rail and internet; high-tech schools and self-healing power grids. The CEO of Siemens America – a company that brought hundreds of new jobs to North Carolina – has said that if we upgrade our infrastructure, they’ll bring even more jobs. And I know that you want these job-creating projects in your districts. I’ve seen you all at the ribbon-cuttings.

Tonight, I propose a “Fix-It-First” program to put people to work as soon as possible on our most urgent repairs, like the nearly 70,000 structurally deficient bridges across the country. And to make sure taxpayers don’t shoulder the whole burden, I’m also proposing a Partnership to Rebuild America that attracts private capital to upgrade what our businesses need most: modern ports to move our goods; modern pipelines to withstand a storm; modern schools worthy of our children. Let’s prove that there is no better place to do business than the United States of America. And let’s start right away.

The 2013 State of the Union address suggests continued growth in U.S. sectors such as energy efficiency, alternative transportation fuels, renewable energy, and infrastructure development and maintenance.  Carbon emissions may also be examined, with a national market-based carbon cap and trade program possible such as now exists in California and the northeastern Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative member states.  How Congress and the public react to these remarks remains to be seen, as does how and to what extent President Obama's proposed policy shifts are implemented.