IN TODAY'S RADIO REPORT: Green News Report Special Coverage: President Obama's EPA unveils historic new proposed standards to cut carbon pollution from power plants nationwide, to take action on climate change... All that and more in today's Green News Report!
Got comments, tips, love letters, hate mail? Drop us a line at GreenNews@BradBlog.com or right here at the comments link below. All GNRs are always archived at GreenNews.BradBlog.com.
IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Controlled burn planned after oil spill in Delta National Wildlife Refuge; Whales Saved by Ship Speed Limits; The implications of Google's self-driving car; WSJ’s shameful climate denial; Green Energy Investment Set To 'Explode'; Here’s How Much U.S. Summers Have Warmed Since 1970; IEA Report calls for huge investment in energy development; Solar Farmers in Japan to Harvest Electricity With Crops.... PLUS: Conservatives Searching for New Reasons Not to Save Planet ... and much, MUCH more! ...
STORIES DISCUSSED ON TODAY'S 'GREEN NEWS REPORT'...
- Obama Administration Proposes Historic Limits On Carbon Pollution:
- VIDEO: Carbon Emissions Reduction - EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy announces the ‘Clean Power Plan’ proposal for existing power plants. (C-SPAN)
- Obama unveils historic rules to reduce coal (Guardian UK):
The Obama administration unveiled historic environment rules cutting carbon pollution from power plants by 30% on Monday,spurring prospects for a global deal to end climate change but setting up an epic battle over the environment in this year's mid-term elections.
- Everything you need to know about the EPA’s proposed rule on coal plants: Why is the EPA regulating greenhouse-gas emissions from power plants? (Washington Post)
- Future Of New EPA Power Plant Rules Depends On The States (Huffington Post)
- President Obama gets serious on climate change (Guardian UK):
We finally have a president that understands science... We finally have a president who is charting a pathway that may lead us to bend the curve of emissions downward so that the most serious climate change consequences are avoided. Most importantly, we finally have a president who is a world leader.
- Taking Page From Health Care Act, Obama Climate Plan Relies on States (NY Times):
Rather than imposing a uniform standard for reducing power plant carbon emissions, the regulation unveiled on Monday offers the states flexibility to pick from a menu of policy options.
In assigning the cuts, E.P.A. officials said, they took into account state economies and current emission levels and what each could practically achieve without causing economic harm. The rule calls on a coal-dependent state like Kentucky to cut its plant emissions rate by 19 percent and one like West Virginia by 21 percent.
- Meeting renewable energy targets turns out to be inexpensive (Denver Post)
- White House Stresses Widespread Energy Progress Ahead of New Climate Rule (NY Times)
- Economic Benefits of the Clean Air Act (EPA.gov) [emphasis added]:
The study's central benefits estimate in 2020 exceeds costs by a factor of more than 30-to-1, and the high benefits estimate exceeds costs by 90-to-1.
- U.S. Power plants already reducing emissions: (The Hill) [emphasis added]:
The country's top 100 electricity producers have reduced emissions of major pollutants in recent years, showing that they could likely handle the new limits on carbon dioxide coming soon from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), according to a new report.
- Myths and Facts About EPA's Carbon Pollution Standards (Media Matters)
- The Wingnut Whining Begins: 'We Desperately Need to Pollute!':
- 'Keep Peeing in the Pool!' and Other Hilarious Responses from the Fossil Fuel-Funded 'Heartland Institute' to EPA's Proposed Emissions Standards (The BRADBLOG):
"Just because we declare that we won't pee in the pool, won't stop the others."... What she seems to be saying here is that everyone should always pee in the swimming pool unless and until it can be proven that everyone else has also stopped doing so.
- It's On: You can already hear the denialists screaming. And scheming. (DR Tucker, Washington Monthly) [emphasis added]:
The polluters have accused you of a “War on Coal.” Well, what about coal’s war on us?
- VIDEO: What Happened To The Republican Consensus On Climate Change? (Media Matters)
- The stage is set for climate showdown (MSNBC)
- The Legal Basis for the 111(d) Rule: EPA has structured the rules to protect against legal challenges. (Legal Planet)
- EPA’s Proposed Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rules Are Remarkably Business-friendly (Legal Planet)
- Debunking: Setting the Record Straight on the Chamber of Commerce’s Report (EPA.gov)
- U.S. Chamber of Commerce Uses Familiar Scare Tactic on Pollution Rules: New Report Twists Data to Exaggerate Cost of New Pollution Rules (EDF)
- Conservatives Are Missing the Point of Obama's Climate Change Plan (New Republic)
- The Chamber of Commerce is Wrong Again: Carbon Pollution Limits Will Lower Electricity Bills by Billions of Dollars, and Generate Hundreds of Thousands of Jobs (NRDC)
- Why Coal-Dependent Utilities Shouldn't Be So Scared of Carbon Regulations (GreenTech Media):
There are dozens of technologies that can fill in the gap left by coal plant closures. The biggest hurdle isn't cost-it's failure of imagination.
- GOP Demonizes Once Favored Cap-And-Trade Policy (NPR)
- Critics Rip Obama Plan on Pollution (AP)
- GOP Lawmakers Rush To Cite Study To Discredit New EPA Rule, But Study Assumed Epa Rule Would Be Tougher (Fact Checker/Washington Post)
- Reaction to Obama’s global warming plan (Washington Post):
“The president’s plan is nuts. There’s really no more succinct way to describe it.” — House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.
- 'Always Wrong': Will New Climate Regulations Destroy the Economy? (Hint: No.) (Peter Gleick, Huffington Post)
- Majority of Americans Support Pollution Cuts, Action on Climate Change:
- A huge majority of Americans support regulating carbon from power plants. And they’re even willing to pay for it. (Washington Post):
Fully 70 percent say the federal government should require limits to greenhouse gases from existing power plants, the focus of a new rule announced Monday by the Environmental Protection Agency. An identical 70 percent supports requiring states to limit the amount of greenhouse gas emissions within their borders.
- Health Experts See Benefits in Push to Cut Pollution (NY Times)
- Obama’s “War on Coal” Is Worth Fighting (The New Yorker)
- Obama heralds health benefits of climate plan to cut power plant emissions (Guardian UK) [emphasis added]:
“In just the first year that these standards go into effect, up to 100,000 asthma attacks and 2,100 heart attacks will be avoided – and those numbers will go up from there,” he said. He dismissed criticism of the plan from business lobbies and conservative groups as the “warnings of the cynics” who have generally opposed environmental protections. “They warned that doing something about the smog choking our cities, and acid rain poisoning our lakes, would kill business,” he said. “It didn't.”
- The World Is Watching for U.S. Leadership on Climate Change:
- China plan to cap CO2 emissions seen turning point in climate talks (Reuters)
- New Obama Climate Regulations Could Help U.S. Pressure China (TIME Magazine)
- UN climate change chief praises new US pollution regulations (Guardian UK):
Christiana Figueres, the UN's top climate change official, said she expects the new power plant rules could spur other big emitters – such as China and India – to begin taking action on climate change and move forward on reaching a deal by the 2015 deadline.
- AUSTRALIA: Barack Obama's climate change moves put heat on Tony Abbott (Sydney Morning Herald)
- Americans Support and WANT Emissions Reductions, Climate Change Action:
- Americans support limits on CO2 (Yale University Project on Climate Communication) [emphasis added]:
A national opinion survey we conducted in April of this year finds that – by nearly a two to one margin – Americans support setting strict limits on carbon dioxide emissions from existing coal-fired plants, even if the cost of electricity to consumers and companies increases.
- Major Companies Distance Themselves From U.S. Chamber Campaign Against Obama’s Climate Plan (Climate Progress)
- Americans care deeply about 'global warming' – but not 'climate change' (Guardian UK)
We found that the term "global warming" is associated with greater public understanding, emotional engagement, and support for personal and national action than the term "climate change."
- Northern hemisphere hits carbon dioxide milestone in April (Reuters):
Carbon dioxide levels throughout the northern hemisphere hit 400 parts per million (ppm) for the first time in human history in April, an ominous threshold for climate change, the World Meteorological Organization said on Monday.
'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (Stuff we didn't have time for in today's audio report)...
- Conservatives Searching for New Reasons Not to Save Planet (New York Magazine)
- The implications of the google self-driving car are huge (Treehugger):
The key thing to remember here is that what Google has made here is not a car. It’s a robot. A robot who’s primary mission is to take you from one place to another, within a very specific set of circumstances.
- Fish and millipedes inspire the winners of Biomimicry 3.8 Student Design Challenge (Treehugger)
- WSJ’s shameful climate denial: The scientific consensus is not a myth (Salon) [emphasis added]:
What they’re really trying to do is keep us from moving on to the actual debate, which is no longer about whether scientists agree that climate change is happening: it’s about whether the world should continue to barrel down the highway at breakneck speeds without the benefit of seat belts. Bast and Spencer believe we should.
- Whales Saved by Ship Speed Limits (Scientific American): The federal government has been sued to expand right whale conservation efforts in the North Atlantic
- Cops and Firefighters Could Soon Be Charged for Disclosing Fracking Chemicals in North Carolina (Mother Jones)
- Green Energy Investment Set To 'Explode' After Obama Unveils Carbon Cuts (Aljazeera America)
- Here’s How Much U.S. Summers Have Warmed Since 1970 (Climate Central)
- Controlled burn planned after oil spill in Delta National Wildlife Refuge: (New Orleans Times-Picayune):
Officials from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Coast Guard announced Monday they were working to mitigate damage from a spill of crude oil within the Delta National Wildlife Refuge.
- IEA Report calls for huge investment in energy development (NY Times):
Enormous amounts of capital investment - up to $2.5 trillion a year - will be needed to supply the world's energy needs through 2035, according to a report released Monday by the International Energy Agency, the intergovernmental organization based in Paris.
- Exxon CEO: “No viable pathway” to reduce carbon emissions (Dallas Morning News):
“My view on this is that achieving certain emissions levels that someone’s model says will make a difference, but there’s no one that has a viable pathway to achieve that,” he said. “What if everything I’m doing doesn’t work. Or the reasons for all this happening aren’t what we thought.”
- Solar Farmers in Japan to Harvest Electricity With Crops (Bloomberg News):
Makoto Takazawa and his father Yukio earned 1.7 million yen ($16,700) last fiscal year selling electricity from solar panels that hang in a giant canopy above their farm east of Tokyo. The cash was almost nine times more than they made from the crops growing in the soil below.
- End fossil fuel burning, save $71 trillion - and preserve civilization as we know it (Grist) [emphasis added]:
It would cost the world $44 trillion to end our fossil fuel addiction by 2050 and switch to clean energy. Worse, this figure is $8 trillion higher than the IEA's last estimate, published two years ago.... And now the good news: We can save $115 trillion in fuel costs by 2050 if we move away from dirty energy, making for net savings of $71 trillion.
FOR MORE on Climate Science and Climate Change, go to our Green News Report: Essential Background Page
- Skeptical Science: Database with FULL DEBUNKING of ALL Climate Science Denier Myths
- Warning: Even in the best-case scenario, climate change will kick our asses (Grist)
- NASA Video: Warming over the last 130 years, and into the next 100 years:
- Video Proof That Global Warming is a 'Hoax'!: NASA Temperature Data 1888-2011 (The BRAD BLOG):
- NASA climate change video: This is the U.S. in 2100 (NASA).
- Northern hemisphere hits carbon dioxide milestone in April (Reuters):
READER COMMENTS ON
"'Green News Report' - June 3, 2014"
(One Response so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
... Alex said on 6/4/2014 @ 3:51 pm PT...
Wisconsin is supposed to reduce emissions by 35%. If we are to reduce our carbon emissions to meet new the EPA standards that would probably mean that bringing any coal fired plants back online would have a negative effect on meeting EPA goals. There is a proposed iron mine in northern Wisconsin, that is getting a lot of press. There's been a bunch of arguing about its environmental effects from the acidification of the waters which will destroy the wild rice paddies at the mouth of the Bad River as well as asbestos laddened rocks that will be pulverized to extract the low grade iron ore from them, releasing a potential carcinogen to the winds. But no one has mentioned that to run this iron mine it will require a lot more CO2 pollution because of the extra electrical power.
To run the GTAC mine the mining company (whose parent is a coal company) would need to bring back several coal fired plants into use that have been shut down in the past decade or so because of the reduction of mining and other high energy interests in the northern tier of the state. Besides being a questionable venture financially, it is now less fortuitous for the Wisconsin to have to compensate for a highly polluting activity both in the water and now in the air as we are trying to meet new standards. Will the Walker administration make other parts of the state meet stricter pollution regulations so that an unpopular iron mine will start polluting our air and water? GTAC is not a good idea for the state. With the new EPA rules it is becoming even less so. Hooray for the new standards which will hopefully encourage our state decision makers that the mine is a very bad choice. The standards are not strong enough but if they stop GTAC then they will be a good start.