Obama's SOTU speech to 'spotlight' the issue Americans care about the least: Climate Change

Obama's State of the Union address tonight is expected to serve as a "spotlight" for his single-handed dictatorial push to bankrupt the coal industry and make electricity prices "necessarily skyrocket," despite polling results indicating that addressing climate change is the dead-last, lowest priority issue for Americans. 

State of the Union: Obama expected to move forward with climate plan

President will use spotlight to try to get the public behind new rules to cut carbon dioxide emissions from power plants

Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent, The Guardian


Barack Obama removes his jacket before he speaks about climate change at Georgetown University in Washington, 25 June 2013. [He won't be able to pull the same theatrics tonight during perhaps the coldest SOTU speech in history.]

Campaigners are looking to Barack Obama to expand his use of executive powers to deliver action on climate change in Tuesday night's State of the Union address.

Obama unveiled a sweeping climate plan last June, after warning in last year's State of the Union address that if Congress did not act on climate change, he would.

The president is expected to reaffirm his commitment to that plan in Tuesday night's address, defending his decision to direct the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to cut carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.

He is also expected to offer details on actions by other federal government agencies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote wind and solar energy, and prepare for a future under climate change.

"I am sure it will be part of his comments in the State of the Union," Carol Browner, who served as White House climate adviser in Obama's first term, told a conference call with reporters. "What we see is a real commitment to moving us forward."

The core of Obama's climate plan remains the EPA's proposed rules for power plants, the largest single source of carbon dioxide emissions.

The agency plans to release the next set of proposed rules, which would limit emissions from existing plants, by June of this year.

Obama was widely expected to use the spotlight on Tuesday night to try to get the public behind the new power plant rules, that are at the core of his climate plan.

But Heather Zichal, another former Obama climate adviser, said she expected other federal government agencies to take up climate change.

Zichal said last week she expected the president to press for further tax credits and other incentives to promote renewable energy.

But campaigners will be looking for Obama to expand even more on his climate plan.

They are also unlikely to be happy with Obama's continued promotion of oil and gas drilling, somthing they say is incompatible with action on climate change.

Obama was widely expected to talk up domestic oil production in the speech. "I expect we will hear a message that is consistent with the 'all of the above' message we have heard before," Jason Bordoff, director of Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy, said.

Last year was the fourth hottest year on record, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency. Despite Obama's directive to the EPA, US carbon dioxide emissions rose 2% in 2013, because power plants burned more coal. 

Related: It's Official: 2013 was the 4th7th10th107th... warmest year since the Little Ice Age

Without additional measures, America will fail to meet its commitment to cut emissions by 17% from 2005 by 2020...

Related: UN says 'climate protection' may cut world GDP 4% by 2030, more than the 'Great Recession'

Addressing climate change was the lowest priority issue by far of the 13 domestic and foreign issues polled

California could feel Spain's pain

This article from the Orange County Register is by Dr. Gabriel Calzada, professor of applied environmental economics in Spain and lead author of a 2009 study detailing the economic costs of Spain's experiment with the green economy.

Barring voter intervention, Californians will soon suffer under full-blown European-style energy policies. These include mandated greenhouse gas emission reductions of a sort achieved to date only through economic collapse, and fantastic mandates for renewable energy that so far have caused economic hardship elsewhere.

Oddly, despite these policies having been tried throughout Western Europe at great cost and for no discernible environmental benefit, Californians are told their laws are the "world's first".

It is not because policies similar to those in Assembly Bill 32 have yet to be tried that you hear no shining examples of their success. The "world's first" pretense is likely employed to avoid discussing the harm the policies have already caused elsewhere.

A similarly odd phrase, "California must be a leader," is now invoked against Proposition 23, the Nov. 2 ballot measure to delay these policies until the state's economy significantly recovers.

Yet while promoting similar steps at the national level, President Barack Obama had serially directed Americans to examine several European experiments in orchestrating the "green economy." Chief among his examples was Spain. Whether or not related to what I and two other researchers found after taking this advice, Mr. Obama no longer directs Americans to gaze at our economic wonder.

In Spain we found that the economy, in fact, lost a net 2.2 jobs for every "green job" the state claimed credit for, just in an opportunity cost. That is, the private sector creates jobs much more efficiently than the state – less expensively and dedicated to produce goods and services that people really demand. We found the private section would have created that many more "real" jobs had the money not been removed and put toward politically divined ends. Think "stimulus jobs."

A Power Point presentation leaked from the Spain's socialist Zapatero government earlier this year actually suggests that the loss in terms of jobs is currently even higher.

In Spain we also found that green jobs mostly (9 out of 10) were temporary. That is, they are principally installation jobs. In Italy, researchers found that 4.8 jobs were lost for each green job created.