Skip to main content

Recent polls indicate that Americans do not appear to be concerned about global climate change or national energy policy.  Understandably, most of us are worried about jobs, the economy, and gridlock in Washington.  America’s narrow focus is unfortunate, because the decisions we make about energy today will determine the quality of life for our descendants.

Every so often, President Obama talks about energy policy.  During this year’s State-of-the-Union address, he said:

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.  But for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change.

Nonetheless, little happened.  In October, after signing the bill that ended the government shutdown, the President spelled out his primary priorities for the remainder of the year: obtain a Federal budget agreement, farm bill, and comprehensive immigration reform.   There was no mention of energy policy or the challenge of climate change.

In many ways, the President’s energy policy has mirrored his handling of the Syrian civil war.  Perhaps because both Syria and global climate change appear to be intractable problems.  Recently, journalist Mark Danner wrote about Syria:

US policy, through a series of ill-advised, ad hoc, and often improvised words and actions… has come almost accidentally to focus on Syria’s chemical weapons program.

Until recently, the ghastly Syrian civil war didn’t get much attention.  That’s because, in the foreign policy arena, the Obama Administration has had only two objectives: remove American troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.  

During the past five years, the White House had three domestic policy objectives: the economic recovery, jobs, and homeland security.  On other important domestic issues – immigration reform, gun safety, education, infrastructure repair, and so forth – the Administration has not sponsored a major initiative.   With regards to global climate change, to paraphrase Mark Danner, “US energy policy has been a series of ill-advised, ad hoc, and often improvised words and actions.”

Writing in Forbes, energy scientist James Conca observed:

Let’s face it, we don’t have a rational long-term energy or climate plan. It’s just lucky that fracking emerged so quickly to give us an alternative to coal that could be implemented right now… The ideological embrace of renewables at all costs and the knee-jerk rejection of safe nuclear power, together with the new-found ease of hydraulic fracturing [fracking], has forced the President to move in the only direction he can to reduce CO2 emissions – ramp up natural gas and ramp down coal.

A decade ago, many progressives lauded natural gas as a bridge to the future, as a way to gracefully transition from petroleum and coal to renewable energy sources.  Now we see that natural gas is a bridge to nowhere, a bridge to the same set of problems from carbon-based fuels plus new vexing concerns resulting from the fracking process.  The miracle cure has turned out to have nasty side affects.

In his State-of-the-Union address Obama called upon Congress to come up with a “bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change.”  Then he indicated he would act independently:

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.

In September the Environmental Protection Agency issued new regulations capping emissions from new coal plants.  

But these regulations are just one of the executive actions Obama needs to take if he intends to combat climate change.  Earlier this year Sierra Club Executive Director Mike Brune enumerated five essential Presidential actions:

1.    Reject the toxic Keystone XL pipeline.
2.    Protect our water from coal plant pollution.
3.    Close loopholes on fracking and protect our wildlands from oil and gas development.
4.    Finalize strong standards for cleaner tailpipe emissions.
5.    Move forward with standards against industrial pollution.

But the most important thing the President should do is propose a real bridge to the future, propose an energy strategy that does not depend upon natural gas.  At the moment 84 percent of America’s energy usage is carbon based and only 8 percent is from renewable energy sources.  The White House needs to provide real leadership and address the tough questions at the heart of a responsible energy policy: How does America effect a massive shift towards renewables?  What’s our plan to protect quality of life for our children and grandchildren?

Bob Burnett is a Berkeley writer.  He can be reached at

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Seeing that renewables are growing at an (0+ / 0-)

    ever expanding pace, in part due to policies and mechanisms set by Democrats on the federal and state levels, I'm not really sure what your point is here.

    Yes, we need to do more and do it faster.... that's not exactly easy to do when the knuckledragger Republicans have gerrymandered their way into control of the House of Representatives.

    "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle" - Mohammed Nabbous, R.I.P.

    by Lawrence on Fri Nov 01, 2013 at 06:49:31 AM PDT

  •  I'd like to have the president de-classify all (0+ / 0-)

    of the transcripts of, and the members of, the Bush/Cheney Energy Policy team.  Then we could really see the agenda of the Bush/Cheney team as it related to things like the conservation of energy (not a word about conservation in the Bush/Cheney policy), reduction in offshore oil, coal, gas, fracking, discouragement of alternative renewable energy sources, etc.

    Just declassify the damn documents Mr. President!

    Republicans are like alligators. All mouth and no ears.

    by Ohiodem1 on Fri Nov 01, 2013 at 09:38:39 AM PDT

  •  In talking about renewables, we must beware. (0+ / 0-)

    All renewable not created equal.

    Thinking specifically of hydro-power which has destroyed and continues to destroy many health watersheds and wild fish stocks when we don't discriminate between good, well-sited, and generally smaller sized projects between bad, poorly-sited, and frequently way too huge mega-projects.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site