Bill Becker's Climate Chronicles

Putting the President's Power Tools to Use

Putting the President's Power Tools to Use

On Capitol Hill, the ship of state is so bereft of rudder and sail that the crew is jumping overboard. The latest to abandon ship is Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, who minced no words about the dysfunctional Congress he is choosing to leave.

Forget for a moment about health care and financial reform. On national energy and environmental issues, which have been stalled in the congressional queue, we have a critical national security threat, a danger to public health and welfare, and national policy that encourages American families to inadvertently fund terrorists.

Those are among the reasons the paralyzing partisanship on Capitol Hill is so serious a dereliction of duty.

So what can the president of the United States do? Quite a lot if he’s willing to use the executive powers he’s been given by the Constitution, the courts and past Congresses.

Obama’s Rope-Line Debate on Coal

Obama’s Rope-Line Debate on Coal

If you suddenly came face to face with President Barack Obama, what would you say?

Gillian Caldwell found herself in that position earlier this month when she encountered the president on a rope-line. Caldwell — the leader of the climate-action group 1Sky — decided to debate the president over his position on coal.

As she shook Obama’s hand, Caldwell appealed to him to stop supporting federal investments in “clean coal” and to put the money instead into renewable energy. To his credit, Obama stopped long enough to engage. Here are excerpts of their exchange:

Obama 2.0: Tougher and Ready to Change the Game?

Obama 2.0: Tougher and Ready to Change the Game?

The second year of the Obama Era is young, but we may be seeing the emergence of Obama 2.0 — a president willing to do battle against the dark forces of stasis and negativity.

Obama 1.0 didn’t want to get ahead of Congress. Obama 2.0 appears ready to go head-to-head with Democrats who have the numbers to lead but lack the discipline, and Republicans whose only big idea is to make Democrats fail — a job that has turned out to be pretty easy so far.

After Copenhagen, Now What?

After Copenhagen, Now What?

After two weeks observing the climate negotiations in Copenhagen, I’ve taken my time reacting to the outcome. There has been a great deal to digest. But as the dust begins to settle, it’s clear Copenhagen has spawned two principal conversations around the world.

The first is a postmortem on what happened, or didn’t happen, at COP15, the long-anticipated United Nations 15th Conference of the Parties.

The second conversation is asking, “What now?”

Accepting Responsibility for a Role in Climate Change


Imagine you’re a well-to-do person attending a dinner of your peers. The food is top-rate and there’s plenty of it. Course after course is laid upon the table.

A group of less-advantaged people has been watching from the sidelines. When the dinner is done, you invite them to join you at the table. After the restaurant staff has served coffee, the bill comes. You and your rich peers insist that everyone now at the table must share in paying the entire bill.

If that seems unfair, then you have just understood the position of the delegates from emerging economies, now negotiating with their wealthier colleagues from the North over a climate deal at Copenhagen.

Congressional Climate Deniers Caucus Heads for Copenhagen

Congressional Climate Deniers Caucus Heads for Copenhagen

With the announcement that a delegation from the Congressional Republican Flat Earth Caucus will show up to embarrass President Obama in Copenhagen next week, I hope the White House finally decides to man up on climate change.

What "manning up" means in the present context is that the Obama administration must get serious about using its regulatory authority to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions well below the levels being considered on Capitol Hill.

So far, Obama has been scrupulous in not “getting out ahead” of Congress on climate change.

Road to Copenhagen: Money-Changers in Democracy’s Temple

Road to Copenhagen: Money-Changers in Democracy’s Temple

There is a scene in the New Testament where Jesus throws the money-changers out of the temple. We could use some of that in the halls of Congress.

While the U.S. Capitol is not the National Cathedral, members of Congress are the custodians of a sacred trust: to protect the vitality and integrity of the extraordinary experiment the founders began.

For example, the debate about climate change isn’t just about polar bears and energy prices. It’s about whether a free people will be a responsible people, a capitalist economy will be a caring economy and a democracy will protect the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for everyone, even those not yet born.

Some of this sacred trust is codified in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Some is unwritten and implied. And although the Constitution dictates that we keep government and religion separate, there are places in public policy where secular values and moral values overlap. Stewardship of nature and its resources — called “creation care” in religious circles — is one of those places.

Road to Copenhagen: Audacious Leadership vs. Nattering Nabobs of Negativism

Road to Copenhagen: Audacious Leadership vs. Nattering Nabobs of Negativism

Change your thoughts and you change your world.
—Norman Vincent Peale

We are only just beginning to scratch the surface of the power of a positive vision of an abundant future …
—Rob Hopkins, “The Transition Handbook”

During his 10 months in office, President Barack Obama and his team have assembled a respectable list of accomplishments on energy and climate policy. One might conclude the president has done about all he can do with the powers of his office.

One would be wrong. What energy and climate security require — what the future of the American Dream demands — is audacious big-picture ideas that capture the imagination, stir the emotions, speak to the souls, rally the support and win the involvement of the American people. That’s been lacking so far in the President’s climate leadership.

I don’t see evidence that the American people have reached a “yes, we can” moment on climate action. My bet is that most people are still asking “yes we can what?”

Road to Copenhagen: A New Social Contract

Road to Copenhagen: A New Social Contract

As we approach the climate conference in Copenhagen, politicians are balking and diplomats are burning the midnight oil, deprived of sleep. But we can take heart. Some unlikely new heroes may come to the rescue.

One prospective hero is The Citizen-Consumer. Consumers are not the first group that pops to my mind when I think about environmental leadership. Unbridled consumption without regard for consequences has much to do with the mess we’re in.

Then came a poll by TIME magazine over the summer. It found that nearly four of every 10 American consumers over age 18 regularly and deliberately choose products made by “socially responsible” companies. If conspicuous consumption got us into this mess, can it be that conscionable consumption will get us out? Maybe. Based on its poll and several other factors, TIME concludes:

"In America, we are recalibrating our sense of what it means to be a citizen, not just through voting or volunteering, but also through what we buy. … We are seeing the rise of the citizen consumer — and the beginnings of a responsibility revolution."

Road to Copenhagen: Re-Tooling Industry

Road to Copenhagen: Re-Tooling Industry

In case we need more evidence that an urgent economic transformation is required to avoid catastrophic climate change, it can be found in a new study commissioned by World Wildlife Fund International.

Conducted by Climate Risk Pty. Ltd. of Great Britain and Australia, the study concludes:

"Runaway climate change is almost inevitable without specific action to implement low-carbon re-industrialization over the next five years.

"World governments have a window that will close between now and 2014. In that time they must establish fully operational, low-carbon industrial architecture. This must drive a low-carbon re-industrialization that will be faster than any previous economic and industry transformation.

"Today, only three out of 20 industries are moving sufficiently fast enough."

By “low carbon re-industrialization”, the authors mean energy efficiency and clean generation technologies, low-carbon agriculture, and sustainable forestry. They have identified 24 critical resources and industries the world will need to develop quickly to avoid climate catastrophe. Among their conclusions: