Climate Change, Energy, and the State of the Union
Quite a focus on climate change, this time around.
“Look, if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it. You’ll 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.
“But even if the planet wasn’t at stake; even if 2014 wasn’t the warmest year on record – until 2015 turned out even hotter – why would we want to pass up the chance for American businesses to produce and sell the energy of the future?
“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 environmentalists and Tea Partiers have teamed up to support. Meanwhile, we’ve cut our imports of foreign oil by nearly sixty percent, and cut carbon pollution more than any other country on Earth.
“Gas under two bucks a gallon ain’t bad, either.
“Now we’ve got to accelerate the transition away from dirty energy. Rather than subsidize the past, we should invest in the future – especially in communities that rely on fossil fuels. 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. That way, we put money back into those communities and put tens of thousands of Americans to work building a 21st century transportation system.
“None of this will 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, and the planet we’ll preserve – that’s the kind of future our kids and grandkids deserve.”
Bravo!
Reader Comments
4 Replies to “Climate Change, Energy, and the State of the Union”
Comments are closed.
About Dan
Dan Farber has written and taught on environmental and constitutional law as well as about contracts, jurisprudence and legislation. Currently at Berkeley Law, he has al…
READ more
Obama said;
“….Look, if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it. You’ll be pretty lonely….”
Dear Obama lovers everywhere;
The California Environmental Bar knows good and well that us so-called “deniers” are far from lonely, reasonable people do not take our President seriously. Deniers have made remarkable progress in advancing the truth and fighting back against the harm and destruction caused by climate change activists. Obama’s remarks in the SOTU give credence and credibility to the progress we have made under his administration. There is no action that Obama can undertake to effectively implement the Paris climate agreement. His Clean Power Plan is withering away in the fog of forgotten drivel. Obama and his minions are almost gone. Hurry November.
Bravo indeed. It’s great to see solar jobs surpass coal jobs. Thanks for the reprint– it was good to hear, and to read.
Kirk said;
“…..It’s great to see solar jobs surpass coal jobs…..”
Dear Kirk,
All of the solar jobs in America are dependent on federal subsidies. Solar energy cannot compete in a free market against lower cost energy sources such as natural gas and coal. When Obama is gone, these subsidies will decline and solar jobs will quickly fade away (along with the Clean Power Plan and Paris climate agreement). Obama has never been truthful about energy and climate, he has mislead many good citizens, he is not an honest man.
Why don’t you have a Nobel Prize for Climate Change, especially since we must prevent consequences that can destroy our civilization?
No wonder the deniers are winning, when scientists don’t even give it a highest priority.