Showing posts with label president. Show all posts
Showing posts with label president. Show all posts

US withdrawal from Paris climate agreement resources

Friday, June 2, 2017

President Donald Trump has announced that the U.S. will withdraw from the Paris climate agreement reached in 2015.  Here is a quick roundup of relevant resources.

On December 12, 2015, the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted Decision 1/CP.21, adopting the Paris Agreement under that convention.  The Paris climate accord calls for signatories to limit the increase in the global average temperature to "well below" 2 °C above pre-industrial levels (and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels), to support adaptation and resilience to climate change's impacts, and to align finance flows with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.

Since its adoption, 195 countries have signed off, including the U.S.  President Obama announced U.S. ratification of the Paris agreement in September 2016, along with China.  Among members of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, only Syria and Nicaragua are are not parties to the Paris Agreement.

But President Trump had criticized the deal, and on June 1, 2017, announced that "the United States will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord... but begin negotiations to reenter either the Paris Accord or a really entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers."

According to President Trump's statement, "the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris Accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country.  This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund which is costing the United States a vast fortune."

President Trump also addressed the integration of renewable energy sources into the grid, expressing skepticism that renewables could suffice in an era of increased U.S. economic expansion:
At 1 percent growth, renewable sources of energy can meet some of our domestic demand, but at 3 or 4 percent growth, which I expect, we need all forms of available American energy, or our country ... will be at grave risk of brownouts and blackouts, our businesses will come to a halt in many cases, and the American family will suffer the consequences in the form of lost jobs and a very diminished quality of life.
At several times, the President expressed interest in renegotiating the terms of the Paris Agreement or some "new deal":
I’m willing to immediately work with Democratic leaders to either negotiate our way back into Paris, under the terms that are fair to the United States and its workers, or to negotiate a new deal that protects our country and its taxpayers... And we’ll sit down with the Democrats and all of the people that represent either the Paris Accord or something that we can do that's much better than the Paris Accord.   
A White House press release provided additional information from the administration's perspective.  It calls the U.S. "already the world's energy leader," and cites an analysis prepared by NERA for the American Council for Capital Formation and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for 21st Century Energy which found that "meeting President Obama’s commitment under the Paris Climate Accord would cost the United States nearly $3 trillion by 2040".  The press release notes that under the Paris agreement "the United States would carry the burden while other countries would get the benefits," and that full international compliance with the Paris agreement "would barely impact the climate."

What the 2013 State of the Union said about energy

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

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.

How Election 2012 affects energy policy

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Today voters across the United States cast ballots in the 2012 general election. At stake are a broad range of political offices, ranging from the presidency to local municipal roles. How will the election's outcomes affect energy policy, energy-related businesses, and consumers?

The presidential contest has drawn the greatest attention over the past year. Whether President Obama will retain his office or Governor Romney will take the White House is the largest question. Based on the candidates' past actions and current campaign platforms, voters have some sense of how each would exercise his presidential powers. On energy issues, both candidates appear to favor increased domestic production of natural gas and oil. The candidates differ in their philosophies on the role of governmental incentives and subsidies -- whether for fossil fuel production or for renewable electricity generation -- and on emissions regulations for coal-fired and other power plants. The candidates also disagree on specific energy projects and programs ranging from the Keystone XL pipeline to the Navy's Great Green Fleet biofuels initiative.

Beyond the presidency, federal elections will determine the composition of Congress. While energy policy is more sensitive to presidential changes than to individual congressional elections, the makeup of Congress drives federal energy policy in the aggregate. All seats in the House of Representatives are up for grabs, as are a third of Senate seats. Of the 33 Senate seats, Democrats need to win 21 seats to retain their majority while Republicans need to win 14 seats to take control. The senators elected in 2012 will participate in setting any national energy policy.

State elections will also shape energy policy for the coming years. Voters will select governors in 11 states, and state legislative offices are widely contested. While federal energy policy draws the most attention, the U.S. federalist system leaves significant authority to individual states to set their own policies on energy issues. For example, states may establish electric renewable portfolio standards or otherwise regulate the resource mix used to produce usable energy. The outcomes of state elections will also affect policies on energy efficiency, smart meters and smart grid infrastructure.

Voters in some states will also cast ballots on measures directly affecting energy policy, such as the Michigan citizens' initiative seeking to increase utilities' use of electricity produced by renewable resources.

It may be some time until all the ballots are finally counted, but by tomorrow night we will have a better understanding of the results for most of the races and ballot questions. Those who can translate the election results into an understanding of future policies - and business opportunities - will have a leg up on the competition.