Return to: Home | Politics | Environment

A new green era is already unfolding

Mark Lynas

Published 15 January 2009

Obama and the environment

Obama has assembled a “green dream team” at the heart of his administration, but will the polar bears of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge feel the benefits?

A new green era is already unfolding

For America's League of Conservation Voters, it's like Christmas every day. The long night of the Bush administration is drawing to a close, and a new dawn is already heralded by birdsong and sweet-smelling air. Eight out of ten of its Senate endorsements won their seats (assuming Al Franken in Minnesota holds his razor-thin recount victory), while in the House 41 out of 54 LCV-endorsed candidates won their races. And then there is the new president. The league can barely contain its enthusiasm for Barack Obama - in a recent web advert it portrays him in superhero garb battling the moustachioed "special interests" of coal, oil and nuclear power.

Surely it's got to be downhill from here. But the signs so far are extraordinarily good. Obama's picks for his new administration have been almost universally welcomed by American greens. The former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack, Obama's choice for agriculture secretary, has a perfect 100 per cent score on the 2008 LCV scorecard - an unusual feat even for a progressive Democrat. Obama's energy pick, Steven Chu, is a Nobel Prize-winning professor of physics and a strong believer in clean energy, light years away from Bush's prolonged war on science. And the president-elect has even created a new post of "energy tsar", where Carol Browner (who headed the Environmental Protection Agency during Clinton's two terms) will have a broad brief to begin the decarbonisation of the US economy.

To call this a "green dream team" would not be putting it too strongly. But what about actual policies? With the fiscal crisis intensifying into an unemployment crisis (two million jobs lost so far) and threatening an era of prolonged depression, Obama has made it clear that everything has to be subsumed into the urgent task of rebooting the economy. Accordingly, all eyes were on the draft Obama-Biden stimulus package circulating on Capitol Hill earlier this month. The plan makes it clear that the US car industry will indeed be bailed out, not just to save jobs but to "ensure that the next generation of clean vehicles is built in the United States". Although most of the document deals with the nitty-gritty of tax credits, mortgage assistance and the like, a section on "Manufacturing and Green Jobs" restates the campaign-trail commitment to spend $150bn over ten years on clean-energy technologies, and commits to 25 per cent of electricity being generated from renewable sources by 2025.

But there is much, much more that needs to be done - and the danger is that a single-minded focus on the economy (even with the greenish-tinged stimulus package) will distract the new administration from other urgent tasks. The first of these has to be the creation of a US-wide "cap-and-trade" plan to limit carbon emissions across the American economy - something that Obama has repeatedly promised, but may run into problems delivering given the shakiness of the economy. "Special interests" provide jobs, too, after all, and existing lobbies always fight harder than fledgling ones. Recent EU experience is salutary - Europe's own cap-and-trade scheme has run into the sand because of industry lobbying, with the cement, car and coal industries using the credit crunch as a reason to demand - and win - a further round of free carbon giveaways. The European carbon cap is now so weak that the latest estimates suggest industry will be able to avoid any emissions cuts until 2017 simply by buying cheap overseas offsets.

Now the EU has dropped the ball on climate, America has to lead the way. After years of inaction, Obama really is our last hope. If the US gets serious about cutting its own emissions and speeding the transition to a clean-energy economy, then China too may feel impelled to move, breaking the international political deadlock. But the US has a long way to go - its own emissions have soared since Bush repudiated Kyoto back in 2001.

For its part, the US environmental movement is not short of demands. At the end of November, a coalition of 29 green NGOs published a 390-page document for the Obama transition team, requesting a 35 per cent domestic carbon emissions cut by 2020, better protection for the Arctic against oil drilling, policies to promote organic farming, a stronger focus on wildlife conservation and the restoration of science as the basis for environmental policymaking, as well as a whole host of other reforms. The problem will be balancing all these competing demands at a time when presidential attention is constantly demanded elsewhere - as the economy continues to slide and the war in Afghanistan intensifies, not to mention the crisis in Palestine.

But if even a small proportion of Obama's rhetoric is translated into concrete action, then a new era really is unfolding. George Bush will be history. It's a delicious prospect.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

7 comments from readers

Keith Young
15 January 2009 at 11:07

http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=143

But the world is getting cooler - official.

Carl Jones
15 January 2009 at 11:29

Lynas, you are in the middle of a "delicious" dream.LOL I suppose the dead-line for dead-earth has been extended from 2030, to 2130????LOL

Its all down hill from now on and that includes global temperatures.LOL

writeon
18 January 2009 at 10:23

Mark,

Don't go over the top. Obviously after the terror of the Bush years people are straining at the leash in desparation and expectancy, people want change, we have to have change, we don't have a choice, we change or we die, or at least the environment does.

Unfortuanately, the American political system wasn't and isn't built for change. It's main characteristic is continuity and slowness, not rapid or radical change from one system to another. The entire system of checks and balances mitigates against change.

Obama is has effectively, de facto, created a government of national unity, but their is still a massive conservative block in Congress, made up of conservative Republicans and conservative Democrats that can block his more 'radical' proposals. This consevative block, is arguably a permanent feature of the system, and is loyal to the interests of business, not the people who nominally voted for them.

Unfortunately those people who voted for Obama and support him, believing their is going to be fundamental structural change, are going to be bitterly disappointed, and I take absolutely no pleasure in saying this believe me. It is just the way the system works. It was built for stability not speed.

Carl Jones
18 January 2009 at 16:57

Here`s a story that been happening all over the world during the past 12 months.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-freezes-...

Camus
20 January 2009 at 08:21

Carl - welcome back! What's your point? No warming?

Carl Jones
21 January 2009 at 10:46

Camus

"Welcome back"...I never went away, unless of course, the SIS had me posting on a fake NS website and that wouldn`t supprise me.LOL

"No warming", of course there is "warming" and cooling. There is one thing we do KNOW about our Earth, it is never constant. As proved in a British court, Amerikas warmest summer was in the 50`s and not in the 90`s, as claimed by NASA.

The last 18 months have seen global temperatures tumble...in respect of the 0.7 degree rise over the last centuary. We simply don`t know enough about all the cycles which affect the Earth`s condition...geothremal, axis, planetary and solar. It appears that we are going into a prolonged period of "relative" cold, "if" this is so, the population of Earth will have serious problems feeding its-self....there you go, another CYCLE.

When BIG business (mainly banks), backs Obama with $1 billion, you know sham climate change is a corporate cash cow.

BTW, I`m all for a cleaner world and a sustainable population, but now that capitalism has died for at least 20 years....6.5 billion people aren`t required, they won`t be factored into the recovery equation. :)

Martin
23 March 2009 at 21:47

We are talking about global average temperature over a century, not a single US summer. Do not muddle weather with climate.

A single colder year does not set aside the temperature trend over the past century:

"Every year since 1992 has been warmer than 1992

The ten hottest years on record occurred in the last 15

Every year since 1976 has been warmer than 1976

The 20 hottest years on record occurred in the last 25

Every year since 1964 has been warmer than 1956

Every year since 1917 has been warmer than 1917

Record warmth in 2005 is notable, because global temperature has not received any boost from a tropical El Niño this year. The prior record year, 1998, on the contrary, was lifted 0.2°C above the trend line by the strongest El Niño of the past century.”

http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/01/one-or-two-war...

To say that global warming has stopped is to state a belief without proof.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

About the writer

Mark Lynas

Mark Lynas has is an environmental activist and a climate change specialist. His books on the subject include High Tide: News from a warming world and Six Degree: Our future on a hotter planet.

Read More

Vote!

Was the government wrong to sack David Nutt?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker