greenhouse gases

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson isn't wasting any time as she begins untangling the Bush administration's corporate-protectionist policies on greenhouse gases.

This morning, Jackson filed a notice with the Federal Register that she would reconsider the Bush administration's refusal to let California set higher state standards for auto emissions. Once the Federal Register gets that notice down in ink, supporters and opponents will have 60 days to comment, and then Jackson will make her decision.

Jackson promised an impartial review, saying:

It is imperative that we get this decision right, and base it on the best available science and a thorough understanding of the law.

The new EPA administrator is widely expected to approve California’s long-delayed waiver. Last week, President Obama urged his administration to begin taking action to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

The administration also today dropped a Bush-era appeal of a ruling in New Jersey v. EPA. The court found that the EPA violated the Clean Air Act when it exempted coal-fired power plants from strict mercury emission controls. Jackson's EPA now plans to develop "appropriate standards" consistent with the ruling.

Next up: The EPA needs to act on a nearly two-year-old U.S. Supreme Court requirement that the Bush administration swept under the rug – making an official determination under the Clean Air Act that greenhouse gases are endangering the public health and welfare.

The attorneys general of 18 states sent a letter to Jackson yesterday asking her to act quickly and decisively on the case. Action could be swift. The attorneys general say the leg work required for advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) is finished and all that remains is the official determination:

Late last month, Andreas Troge, the head of Germany's federal environmental agency, made a bold statement: He told people to stop eating so much meat—not on behalf of their cholesterol count, but on behalf of the planet.

Troge suggested in an interview with Germany’s Berliner Zeitung that Germans should stick with the "European tradition of the 'Sunday roast'" and reorient their consumption patterns to imitate those of Mediterranean countries—"more fish and vegetables"—to reduce their contribution to global warming.

The suggestion was stunning coming from a high government official, particularly in a country with a meat-heavy diet.

Eating less beef has long been fashionable among food cognoscenti, but now it's going to be in vogue for another reason – beef production is a massive driver of global warming through greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In the two weeks since Troge spoke up, officials in Australia and Cincinnati, Ohio, have been emboldened to publicly discuss the need for planet-conscious diets with less meat.

Do the 535 elected leaders in the United States Congress have what it takes to help America solve its energy and climate crises?

Apparently not. Congress flunked a crucial test on climate change earlier this year when the Senate failed to bring a cap-and-trade bill to a vote. The House hasn’t even brought a bill to the floor.

Another crucial test took place this week on a proposal to extend tax incentives for renewable energy industries. The incentives are critical to the rapid development of wind and solar systems in the United States, technologies that are essential to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. But the US Senate failed to pass a key procedural vote on the incentives for the fourth time this summer, shelving the bill again. Unless Congress votes to extend them, the incentives will expire at the end of the year.

How much science does it take; how many droughts, wildfires and natural disasters; how many energy crises; how many entreaties from world leaders before Congress does the right thing?