<div dir="ltr"><div>Too little too late... <br><br>But the plans Obama outlined, if they can be implemented, which is doubtful, are at least a start to mitigate the most catastrophic long term (over centuries) impacts of anthropogenic climate change... Of course China, India, Europe et al also need to cooperate with the effort. But even with China or India not taking substantial action, the US should lead the way by example. After all, the US has put more CO2 into our atmosphere in absolute amounts than any nation on Earth by a long margin: <br>
World Resource Institute data: Total Historical CO2 Emissions by nation, 1900-2004: <br><a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AonYZs4MzlZbdGxwVlFJZzdDbm03QU5TaTBLWWU5bFE#gid=0">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AonYZs4MzlZbdGxwVlFJZzdDbm03QU5TaTBLWWU5bFE#gid=0</a><br>
<br>The argument we will only hurt our economy if we lower our emissions, and not stop climate change, while other nations continue massive emissions, I find morally indefensible. The impacts of climate change will be a grave burden for future generations that present economic comfort does not justify, and there are opportunities to develop non carbon or lower carbon energy options that can offer economic benefits.<br>
<br></div>The options we as a species are now facing are along the lines of, do we have 2 meters, 6 meters or 20 meters of sea level rise, do we lose 20 percent or 40 percent of species, and so forth... Those numbers are not meant to be precise stages or predictions, just a rough way of phrasing the choices we are facing at this moment in time.<br>
<br>The claim we can stop significant climate change at this point is not scientifically feasible, unless adopting extreme and risky geo-engineering.<br><div><div><div>-----------------------------------------<br><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-25/-we-need-to-act-transcript-of-obama-s-climate-change-speech.html" target="_blank">http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-25/-we-need-to-act-transcript-of-obama-s-climate-change-speech.html</a><br>
<h1>'We Need to Act': Transcript of Obama's Climate Change Speech</h1><cite>By
<span>Tom Randall</span>
</cite>
<cite>
<span style="display:inline">Jun 25, 2013 2:40 PM PT<br><br></span></cite><div>
<p><i>Transcript of President Barack Obama's speech at Georgetown University announcing his new climate-change policy:</i></p><p>On
Christmas Eve, 1968, the astronauts of Apollo 8 did a live broadcast
from lunar orbit. So Frank Borman, Jim Lovell, William Anders -- the
first humans to orbit the moon -- described what they saw, and they read
Scripture from the Book of Genesis to the rest of us back here. And
later that night, they took a photo that would change the way we see and
think about our world.</p><p>It was an image of Earth -- beautiful;
breathtaking; a glowing marble of blue oceans, and green forests, and
brown mountains brushed with white clouds, rising over the surface of
the moon. </p><p>And while the sight of our planet from space might seem
routine today, imagine what it looked like to those of us seeing our
home, our planet, for the first time. Imagine what it looked like to
children like me. Even the astronauts were amazed. “It makes you
realize,” Lovell would say, “just what you have back there on Earth.”</p><p>And
around the same time we began exploring space, scientists were studying
changes taking place in the Earth’s atmosphere. Now, scientists had
known since the 1800s that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide trap
heat, and that burning fossil fuels release those gases into the air.
That wasn’t news. But in the late 1950s, the National Weather Service
began measuring the levels of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, with the
worry that rising levels might someday disrupt the fragile balance that
makes our planet so hospitable. And what they’ve found, year after
year, is that the levels of carbon pollution in our atmosphere have
increased dramatically. </p><p>That science, accumulated and reviewed
over decades, tells us that our planet is changing in ways that will
have profound impacts on all of humankind. </p><p>The 12 warmest years
in recorded history have all come in the last 15 years. Last year,
temperatures in some areas of the ocean reached record highs, and ice in
the Arctic shrank to its smallest size on record -- faster than most
models had predicted it would. These are facts. </p><p>Now, we know that
no single weather event is caused solely by climate change. Droughts
and fires and floods, they go back to ancient times. But we also know
that in a world that’s warmer than it used to be, all weather events are
affected by a warming planet. The fact that sea level in New York, in
New York Harbor, are now a foot higher than a century ago -- that didn’t
cause Hurricane Sandy, but it certainly contributed to the destruction
that left large parts of our mightiest city dark and underwater.</p><p>The
potential impacts go beyond rising sea levels. Here at home, 2012 was
the warmest year in our history. Midwest farms were parched by the worst
drought since the Dust Bowl, and then drenched by the wettest spring on
record. Western wildfires scorched an area larger than the state of
Maryland. Just last week, a heat wave in Alaska shot temperatures into
the 90s. </p><p>And we know that the costs of these events can be
measured in lost lives and lost livelihoods, lost homes, lost
businesses, hundreds of billions of dollars in emergency services and
disaster relief. In fact, those who are already feeling the effects of
climate change don’t have time to deny it -- they’re busy dealing with
it. Firefighters are braving longer wildfire seasons, and states and
federal governments have to figure out how to budget for that. I had to
sit on a meeting with the Department of Interior and Agriculture and
some of the rest of my team just to figure out how we're going to pay
for more and more expensive fire seasons.</p><p>Farmers see crops wilted
one year, washed away the next; and the higher food prices get passed
on to you, the American consumer. Mountain communities worry about what
smaller snowpacks will mean for tourism -- and then, families at the
bottom of the mountains wonder what it will mean for their drinking
water. Americans across the country are already paying the price of
inaction in insurance premiums, state and local taxes, and the costs of
rebuilding and disaster relief.</p><p>So the question is not whether we
need to act. The overwhelming judgment of science -- of chemistry and
physics and millions of measurements -- has put all that to rest.
Ninety-seven percent of scientists, including, by the way, some who
originally disputed the data, have now put that to rest. They've
acknowledged the planet is warming and human activity is contributing to
it. </p><p>So the question now is whether we will have the courage to
act before it’s too late. And how we answer will have a profound impact
on the world that we leave behind not just to you, but to your children
and to your grandchildren.</p><p>As a President, as a father, and as an American, I’m here to say we need to act. </p><p>I
refuse to condemn your generation and future generations to a planet
that’s beyond fixing. And that’s why, today, I'm announcing a new
national climate action plan, and I'm here to enlist your generation's
help in keeping the United States of America a leader -- a global leader
-- in the fight against climate change. </p><p>This plan builds on
progress that we've already made. Last year, I took office -- the year
that I took office, my administration pledged to reduce America's
greenhouse gas emissions by about 17 percent from their 2005 levels by
the end of this decade. And we rolled up our sleeves and we got to work.
We doubled the electricity we generated from wind and the sun. We
doubled the mileage our cars will get on a gallon of gas by the middle
of the next decade. </p><p>Here at Georgetown, I unveiled my strategy
for a secure energy future. And thanks to the ingenuity of our
businesses, we're starting to produce much more of our own energy. We're
building the first nuclear power plants in more than three decades --
in Georgia and South Carolina. For the first time in 18 years, America
is poised to produce more of our own oil than we buy from other nations.
And today, we produce more natural gas than anybody else. So we're
producing energy. And these advances have grown our economy, they've
created new jobs, they can't be shipped overseas -- and, by the way,
they've also helped drive our carbon pollution to its lowest levels in
nearly 20 years. Since 2006, no country on Earth has reduced its total
carbon pollution by as much as the United States of America. </p><p>So it's a good start. But the reason we're all here in the heat today is because we know we've got more to do. </p><p>In
my State of the Union address, I urged Congress to come up with a
bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one that
Republican and Democratic senators worked on together a few years ago.
And I still want to see that happen. I'm willing to work with anyone to
make that happen. </p><p>But this is a challenge that does not pause for
partisan gridlock. It demands our attention now. And this is my plan to
meet it -- a plan to cut carbon pollution; a plan to protect our
country from the impacts of climate change; and a plan to lead the world
in a coordinated assault on a changing climate. </p><p>This plan begins
with cutting carbon pollution by changing the way we use energy --
using less dirty energy, using more clean energy, wasting less energy
throughout our economy.</p><p>Forty-three years ago, Congress passed a
law called the Clean Air Act of 1970. It was a good law. The reasoning
behind it was simple: New technology can protect our health by
protecting the air we breathe from harmful pollution. And that law
passed the Senate unanimously. Think about that -- it passed the Senate
unanimously. It passed the House of Representatives 375 to 1. I don’t
know who the one guy was -- I haven’t looked that up. You can barely get
that many votes to name a post office these days. </p><p>It was signed
into law by a Republican President. It was later strengthened by another
Republican President. This used to be a bipartisan issue.</p><p>Six
years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gases are pollutants
covered by that same Clean Air Act. And they required the Environmental
Protection Agency, the EPA, to determine whether they’re a threat to our
health and welfare. In 2009, the EPA determined that they are a threat
to both our health and our welfare in many different ways -- from
dirtier air to more common heat waves -- and, therefore, subject to
regulation.</p><p>Today, about 40 percent of America’s carbon pollution
comes from our power plants. But here’s the thing: Right now, there are
no federal limits to the amount of carbon pollution that those plants
can pump into our air. None. Zero. We limit the amount of toxic
chemicals like mercury and sulfur and arsenic in our air or our water,
but power plants can still dump unlimited amounts of carbon pollution
into the air for free. That’s not right, that’s not safe, and it needs
to stop. </p><p>So today, for the sake of our children, and the health
and safety of all Americans, I’m directing the Environmental Protection
Agency to put an end to the limitless dumping of carbon pollution from
our power plants, and complete new pollution standards for both new and
existing power plants. </p><p>I’m also directing the EPA to develop
these standards in an open and transparent way, to provide flexibility
to different states with different needs, and build on the leadership
that many states, and cities, and companies have already shown. In fact,
many power companies have already begun modernizing their plants, and
creating new jobs in the process. Others have shifted to burning cleaner
natural gas instead of dirtier fuel sources. </p><p>Nearly a dozen
states have already implemented or are implementing their own
market-based programs to reduce carbon pollution. More than 25 have set
energy efficiency targets. More than 35 have set renewable energy
targets. Over 1,000 mayors have signed agreements to cut carbon
pollution. So the idea of setting higher pollution standards for our
power plants is not new. It’s just time for Washington to catch up with
the rest of the country. And that's what we intend to do. </p><p>Now,
what you’ll hear from the special interests and their allies in Congress
is that this will kill jobs and crush the economy, and basically end
American free enterprise as we know it. And the reason I know you'll
hear those things is because that's what they said every time America
sets clear rules and better standards for our air and our water and our
children’s health. And every time, they've been wrong.</p><p>For
example, in 1970, when we decided through the Clean Air Act to do
something about the smog that was choking our cities -- and, by the way,
most young people here aren't old enough to remember what it was like,
but when I was going to school in 1979-1980 in Los Angeles, there were
days where folks couldn't go outside. And the sunsets were spectacular
because of all the pollution in the air. </p><p>But at the time when we
passed the Clean Air Act to try to get rid of some of this smog, some of
the same doomsayers were saying new pollution standards will decimate
the auto industry. Guess what -- it didn’t happen. Our air got cleaner.</p><p>In
1990, when we decided to do something about acid rain, they said our
electricity bills would go up, the lights would go off, businesses
around the country would suffer -- I quote -- “a quiet death.” None of
it happened, except we cut acid rain dramatically.</p><p>See, the
problem with all these tired excuses for inaction is that it suggests a
fundamental lack of faith in American business and American ingenuity.
These critics seem to think that when we ask our businesses to innovate
and reduce pollution and lead, they can't or they won't do it. They'll
just kind of give up and quit. But in America, we know that’s not true.
Look at our history. </p><p>When we restricted cancer-causing chemicals
in plastics and leaded fuel in our cars, it didn’t end the plastics
industry or the oil industry. American chemists came up with better
substitutes. When we phased out CFCs -- the gases that were depleting
the ozone layer -- it didn’t kill off refrigerators or air-conditioners
or deodorant. American workers and businesses figured out how to do it
better without harming the environment as much. </p><p>The fuel
standards that we put in place just a few years ago didn’t cripple
automakers. The American auto industry retooled, and today, our
automakers are selling the best cars in the world at a faster rate than
they have in five years -- with more hybrid, more plug-in, more
fuel-efficient cars for everybody to choose from. </p><p>So the point
is, if you look at our history, don’t bet against American industry.
Don’t bet against American workers. Don’t tell folks that we have to
choose between the health of our children or the health of our economy. </p><p>The
old rules may say we can’t protect our environment and promote economic
growth at the same time, but in America, we’ve always used new
technologies -- we’ve used science; we’ve used research and development
and discovery to make the old rules obsolete. </p><p>Today, we use more
clean energy -- more renewables and natural gas -- which is supporting
hundreds of thousands of good jobs. We waste less energy, which saves
you money at the pump and in your pocketbooks. And guess what -- our
economy is 60 percent bigger than it was 20 years ago, while our carbon
emissions are roughly back to where they were 20 years ago. </p><p>So,
obviously, we can figure this out. It’s not an either/or; it’s a
both/and. We’ve got to look after our children; we have to look after
our future; and we have to grow the economy and create jobs. We can do
all of that as long as we don’t fear the future; instead we seize it. </p><p>And,
by the way, don’t take my word for it -- recently, more than 500
businesses, including giants like GM and Nike, issued a Climate
Declaration, calling action on climate change “one of the great economic
opportunities of the 21st century.” Walmart is working to cut its
carbon pollution by 20 percent and transition completely to renewable
energy. Walmart deserves a cheer for that. But think about it. Would the
biggest company, the biggest retailer in America -- would they really
do that if it weren’t good for business, if it weren’t good for their
shareholders? </p><p>A low-carbon, clean energy economy can be an engine
of growth for decades to come. And I want America to build that engine.
I want America to build that future -- right here in the United States
of America. That’s our task. </p><p>Now, one thing I want to make sure
everybody understands -- this does not mean that we’re going to suddenly
stop producing fossil fuels. Our economy wouldn’t run very well if it
did. And transitioning to a clean energy economy takes time. But when
the doomsayers trot out the old warnings that these ambitions will
somehow hurt our energy supply, just remind them that America produced
more oil than we have in 15 years. What is true is that we can’t just
drill our way out of the energy and climate challenge that we face.
That’s not possible. </p><p>I put forward in the past an
all-of-the-above energy strategy, but our energy strategy must be about
more than just producing more oil. And, by the way, it’s certainly got
to be about more than just building one pipeline. </p><p>Now, I know
there’s been, for example, a lot of controversy surrounding the proposal
to build a pipeline, the Keystone pipeline, that would carry oil from
Canadian tar sands down to refineries in the Gulf. And the State
Department is going through the final stages of evaluating the proposal.
That’s how it’s always been done. But I do want to be clear: Allowing
the Keystone pipeline to be built requires a finding that doing so would
be in our nation’s interest. And our national interest will be served
only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of
carbon pollution. The net effects of the pipeline’s impact on our
climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project
is allowed to go forward. It’s relevant.</p><p>Now, even as we’re
producing more domestic oil, we’re also producing more cleaner-burning
natural gas than any other country on Earth. And, again, sometimes there
are disputes about natural gas, but let me say this: We should
strengthen our position as the top natural gas producer because, in the
medium term at least, it not only can provide safe, cheap power, but it
can also help reduce our carbon emissions. </p><p>Federally supported
technology has helped our businesses drill more effectively and extract
more gas. And now, we'll keep working with the industry to make drilling
safer and cleaner, to make sure that we're not seeing methane
emissions, and to put people to work modernizing our natural gas
infrastructure so that we can power more homes and businesses with
cleaner energy.</p><p>The bottom line is natural gas is creating jobs.
It's lowering many families' heat and power bills. And it's the
transition fuel that can power our economy with less carbon pollution
even as our businesses work to develop and then deploy more of the
technology required for the even cleaner energy economy of the future. </p><p>And
that brings me to the second way that we're going to reduce carbon
pollution -- by using more clean energy. Over the past four years, we've
doubled the electricity that we generate from zero-carbon wind and
solar power. And that means jobs -- jobs manufacturing the wind turbines
that now generate enough electricity to power nearly 15 million homes;
jobs installing the solar panels that now generate more than four times
the power at less cost than just a few years ago. </p><p>I know some
Republicans in Washington dismiss these jobs, but those who do need to
call home -- because 75 percent of all wind energy in this country is
generated in Republican districts. And that may explain why last year,
Republican governors in Kansas and Oklahoma and Iowa -- Iowa, by the
way, a state that harnesses almost 25 percent of its electricity from
the wind -- helped us in the fight to extend tax credits for wind energy
manufacturers and producers. Tens of thousands good jobs were on the
line, and those jobs were worth the fight. </p><p>And countries like
China and Germany are going all in in the race for clean energy. I
believe Americans build things better than anybody else. I want America
to win that race, but we can't win it if we're not in it. </p><p>So the
plan I'm announcing today will help us double again our energy from wind
and sun. Today, I'm directing the Interior Department to green light
enough private, renewable energy capacity on public lands to power more
than 6 million homes by 2020. </p><p>The Department of Defense -- the
biggest energy consumer in America -- will install 3 gigawatts of
renewable power on its bases, generating about the same amount of
electricity each year as you'd get from burning 3 million tons of coal. </p><p>And
because billions of your tax dollars continue to still subsidize some
of the most profitable corporations in the history of the world, my
budget once again calls for Congress to end the tax breaks for big oil
companies, and invest in the clean-energy companies that will fuel our
future. </p><p>Now, the third way to reduce carbon pollution is to waste
less energy -- in our cars, our homes, our businesses. The fuel
standards we set over the past few years mean that by the middle of the
next decade, the cars and trucks we buy will go twice as far on a gallon
of gas. That means you’ll have to fill up half as often; we’ll all
reduce carbon pollution. And we built on that success by setting the
first-ever standards for heavy-duty trucks and buses and vans. And in
the coming months, we’ll partner with truck makers to do it again for
the next generation of vehicles.</p><p>Meanwhile, the energy we use in
our homes and our businesses and our factories, our schools, our
hospitals -- that’s responsible for about one-third of our greenhouse
gases. The good news is simple upgrades don’t just cut that pollution;
they put people to work -- manufacturing and installing smarter lights
and windows and sensors and appliances. And the savings show up in our
electricity bills every month -- forever. That’s why we’ve set new
energy standards for appliances like refrigerators and dishwashers. And
today, our businesses are building better ones that will also cut carbon
pollution and cut consumers’ electricity bills by hundreds of billions
of dollars. </p><p>That means, by the way, that our federal government
also has to lead by example. I’m proud that federal agencies have
reduced their greenhouse gas emissions by more than 15 percent since I
took office. But we can do even better than that. So today, I’m setting a
new goal: Your federal government will consume 20 percent of its
electricity from renewable sources within the next seven years. We are
going to set that goal. </p><p>We’ll also encourage private capital to
get off the sidelines and get into these energy-saving investments. And
by the end of the next decade, these combined efficiency standards for
appliances and federal buildings will reduce carbon pollution by at
least three billion tons. That’s an amount equal to what our entire
energy sector emits in nearly half a year. </p><p>So I know these
standards don’t sound all that sexy, but think of it this way: That’s
the equivalent of planting 7.6 billion trees and letting them grow for
10 years -- all while doing the dishes. It is a great deal and we need
to be doing it. </p><p>So using less dirty energy, transitioning to
cleaner sources of energy, wasting less energy through our economy is
where we need to go. And this plan will get us there faster. But I want
to be honest -- this will not get us there overnight. The hard truth is
carbon pollution has built up in our atmosphere for decades now. And
even if we Americans do our part, the planet will slowly keep warming
for some time to come. The seas will slowly keep rising and storms will
get more severe, based on the science. It's like tapping the brakes of a
car before you come to a complete stop and then can shift into reverse.
It's going to take time for carbon emissions to stabilize. </p><p>So in
the meantime, we're going to need to get prepared. And that’s why this
plan will also protect critical sectors of our economy and prepare the
United States for the impacts of climate change that we cannot avoid.
States and cities across the country are already taking it upon
themselves to get ready. Miami Beach is hardening its water supply
against seeping saltwater. We’re partnering with the state of Florida to
restore Florida’s natural clean water delivery system -- the
Everglades. </p><p>The overwhelmingly Republican legislature in Texas
voted to spend money on a new water development bank as a long-running
drought cost jobs and forced a town to truck in water from the outside. </p><p>New
York City is fortifying its 520 miles of coastline as an insurance
policy against more frequent and costly storms. And what we’ve learned
from Hurricane Sandy and other disasters is that we’ve got to build
smarter, more resilient infrastructure that can protect our homes and
businesses, and withstand more powerful storms. That means stronger
seawalls, natural barriers, hardened power grids, hardened water
systems, hardened fuel supplies. </p><p>So the budget I sent Congress
includes funding to support communities that build these projects, and
this plan directs federal agencies to make sure that any new project
funded with taxpayer dollars is built to withstand increased flood
risks. </p><p>And we’ll partner with communities seeking help to prepare
for droughts and floods, reduce the risk of wildfires, protect the
dunes and wetlands that pull double duty as green space and as natural
storm barriers. And we'll also open our climate data and NASA climate
imagery to the public, to make sure that cities and states assess risk
under different climate scenarios, so that we don’t waste money building
structures that don’t withstand the next storm. </p><p>So that's what
my administration will do to support the work already underway across
America, not only to cut carbon pollution, but also to protect ourselves
from climate change. But as I think everybody here understands, no
nation can solve this challenge alone -- not even one as powerful as
ours. And that’s why the final part of our plan calls on America to lead
-- lead international efforts to combat a changing climate. </p><p>And
make no mistake -- the world still looks to America to lead. When I
spoke to young people in Turkey a few years ago, the first question I
got wasn't about the challenges that part of the world faces. It was
about the climate challenge that we all face, and America's role in
addressing it. And it was a fair question, because as the world's
largest economy and second-largest carbon emitter, as a country with
unsurpassed ability to drive innovation and scientific breakthroughs, as
the country that people around the world continue to look to in times
of crisis, we've got a vital role to play. We can't stand on the
sidelines. We've got a unique responsibility. And the steps that I've
outlined today prove that we're willing to meet that responsibility. </p><p>Though
all America's carbon pollution fell last year, global carbon pollution
rose to a record high. That’s a problem. Developing countries are using
more and more energy, and tens of millions of people entering a global
middle class naturally want to buy cars and air-conditioners of their
own, just like us. Can't blame them for that. And when you have
conversations with poor countries, they'll say, well, you went through
these stages of development -- why can't we?</p><p>But what we also have
to recognize is these same countries are also more vulnerable to the
effects of climate change than we are. They don’t just have as much to
lose, they probably have more to lose. </p><p>Developing nations with
some of the fastest-rising levels of carbon pollution are going to have
to take action to meet this challenge alongside us. They're watching
what we do, but we've got to make sure that they're stepping up to the
plate as well. We compete for business with them, but we also share a
planet. And we have to all shoulder the responsibility for keeping the
planet habitable, or we're going to suffer the consequences -- together.</p><p>So
to help more countries transitioning to cleaner sources of energy and
to help them do it faster, we're going to partner with our private
sector to apply private sector technological know-how in countries that
transition to natural gas. We’ve mobilized billions of dollars in
private capital for clean energy projects around the world. </p><p>Today,
I'm calling for an end of public financing for new coal plants overseas
-- unless they deploy carbon-capture technologies, or there's no other
viable way for the poorest countries to generate electricity. And I urge
other countries to join this effort. </p><p>And I'm directing my
administration to launch negotiations toward global free trade in
environmental goods and services, including clean energy technology, to
help more countries skip past the dirty phase of development and join a
global low-carbon economy. They don’t have to repeat all the same
mistakes that we made. </p><p>We've also intensified our climate
cooperation with major emerging economies like India and Brazil, and
China -- the world’s largest emitter. So, for example, earlier this
month, President Xi of China and I reached an important agreement to
jointly phase down our production and consumption of dangerous
hydrofluorocarbons, and we intend to take more steps together in the
months to come. It will make a difference. It’s a significant step in
the reduction of carbon emissions. </p><p>And finally, my administration
will redouble our efforts to engage our international partners in
reaching a new global agreement to reduce carbon pollution through
concrete action. </p><p>Four years ago, in Copenhagen, every major
country agreed, for the first time, to limit carbon pollution by 2020.
Two years ago, we decided to forge a new agreement beyond 2020 that
would apply to all countries, not just developed countries. </p><p>What
we need is an agreement that’s ambitious -- because that’s what the
scale of the challenge demands. We need an inclusive agreement --
because every country has to play its part. And we need an agreement
that’s flexible -- because different nations have different needs. And
if we can come together and get this right, we can define a sustainable
future for your generation. </p><p>So that’s my plan. The actions I’ve
announced today should send a strong signal to the world that America
intends to take bold action to reduce carbon pollution. We will continue
to lead by the power of our example, because that’s what the United
States of America has always done.</p><p>I am convinced this is the
fight America can, and will, lead in the 21st century. And I’m convinced
this is a fight that America must lead. But it will require all of us
to do our part. We’ll need scientists to design new fuels, and we’ll
need farmers to grow new fuels. We’ll need engineers to devise new
technologies, and we’ll need businesses to make and sell those
technologies. We’ll need workers to operate assembly lines that hum with
high-tech, zero-carbon components, but we’ll also need builders to
hammer into place the foundations for a new clean energy era. </p><p>We’re
going to need to give special care to people and communities that are
unsettled by this transition -- not just here in the United States but
around the world. And those of us in positions of responsibility, we’ll
need to be less concerned with the judgment of special interests and
well-connected donors, and more concerned with the judgment of
posterity. Because you and your children, and your children’s children,
will have to live with the consequences of our decisions. </p><p>As I
said before, climate change has become a partisan issue, but it hasn’t
always been. It wasn’t that long ago that Republicans led the way on new
and innovative policies to tackle these issues. Richard Nixon opened
the EPA. George H.W. Bush declared -- first U.S. President to declare --
“human activities are changing the atmosphere in unexpected and
unprecedented ways.” Someone who never shies away from a challenge, John
McCain, introduced a market-based cap-and-trade bill to slow carbon
pollution. </p><p>The woman that I’ve chosen to head up the EPA, Gina
McCarthy, she’s worked -- she’s terrific. Gina has worked for the EPA in
my administration, but she’s also worked for five Republican governors.
She’s got a long track record of working with industry and business
leaders to forge common-sense solutions. Unfortunately, she’s being held
up in the Senate. She’s been held up for months, forced to jump through
hoops no Cabinet nominee should ever have to -- not because she lacks
qualifications, but because there are too many in the Republican Party
right now who think that the Environmental Protection Agency has no
business protecting our environment from carbon pollution. The Senate
should confirm her without any further obstruction or delay. </p><p>But
more broadly, we’ve got to move beyond partisan politics on this issue. I
want to be clear -- I am willing to work with anybody -- Republicans,
Democrats, independents, libertarians, greens -- anybody -- to combat
this threat on behalf of our kids. I am open to all sorts of new ideas,
maybe better ideas, to make sure that we deal with climate change in a
way that promotes jobs and growth. </p><p>Nobody has a monopoly on what
is a very hard problem, but I don’t have much patience for anyone who
denies that this challenge is real. We don’t have time for a meeting of
the Flat Earth Society. Sticking your head in the sand might make you
feel safer, but it’s not going to protect you from the coming storm. And
ultimately, we will be judged as a people, and as a society, and as a
country on where we go from here. </p><p>Our founders believed that
those of us in positions of power are elected not just to serve as
custodians of the present, but as caretakers of the future. And they
charged us to make decisions with an eye on a longer horizon than the
arc of our own political careers. That’s what the American people
expect. That’s what they deserve.</p><p>And someday, our children, and
our children’s children, will look at us in the eye and they'll ask us,
did we do all that we could when we had the chance to deal with this
problem and leave them a cleaner, safer, more stable world? And I want
to be able to say, yes, we did. Don’t you want that?</p><p>Americans are
not a people who look backwards; we're a people who look forward. We're
not a people who fear what the future holds; we shape it. What we need
in this fight are citizens who will stand up, and speak up, and compel
us to do what this moment demands. </p><p>Understand this is not just a
job for politicians. So I'm going to need all of you to educate your
classmates, your colleagues, your parents, your friends. Tell them
what’s at stake. Speak up at town halls, church groups, PTA meetings.
Push back on misinformation. Speak up for the facts. Broaden the circle
of those who are willing to stand up for our future. </p><p>Convince
those in power to reduce our carbon pollution. Push your own communities
to adopt smarter practices. Invest. Divest. Remind folks there's no
contradiction between a sound environment and strong economic growth.
And remind everyone who represents you at every level of government that
sheltering future generations against the ravages of climate change is a
prerequisite for your vote. Make yourself heard on this issue. </p><p>I
understand the politics will be tough. The challenge we must accept
will not reward us with a clear moment of victory. There’s no gathering
army to defeat. There's no peace treaty to sign. When President Kennedy
said we’d go to the moon within the decade, we knew we’d build a
spaceship and we’d meet the goal. Our progress here will be measured
differently -- in crises averted, in a planet preserved. But can we
imagine a more worthy goal? For while we may not live to see the full
realization of our ambition, we will have the satisfaction of knowing
that the world we leave to our children will be better off for what we
did. </p><p>“It makes you realize,” that astronaut said all those years
ago, “just what you have back there on Earth.” And that image in the
photograph, that bright blue ball rising over the moon’s surface,
containing everything we hold dear -- the laughter of children, a quiet
sunset, all the hopes and dreams of posterity -- that’s what’s at stake.
That’s what we’re fighting for. And if we remember that, I’m absolutely
sure we'll succeed. </p><p>Thank you. God bless you. God bless the United States of America. </p>
------------------------------------------<br></div><div>Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett<br></div><br></div></div></div></div>