Wouldn’t it be an intriguing turn of events if the rest of the world got sick and tired of U.S. inaction on climate change and initiated sanctions against us?
While the US government and its citizenry deny the reality of climate change, the rest of the world is living with it.
2010 is officially the hottest year on record thus far. On the US east coast, it’s been depressing to see the curling, drooped leaves in forests enduring weeks of 98 degree heat without rain. But that pales in comparison to China’s torrential rains and the heaviest monsoons on record in Pakistan, where millions of people have been displaced and over a thousand are dead. Russia, the UK, Israel and Thailand are suffering through searing drought, the worst on record or close to that. Arctic sea ice has melted to its thinnest state yet, not to mention the recent calving of the largest ice sheet in Greenland since 1962.
All these "worst ever" events – including the intense snow we saw last winter – are exactly what climate scientists have long predicted as hallmarks of climate change. Yet, even with the tailwind of the catastrophic BP oil spill, our Congress gave up hope for passing even the most watered down energy and climate legislation without ever bringing it to a vote.
The U.S. is now the only major industrialized nation that hasn’t legislated carbon emissions caps. ClimateWire reports that leaders from Europe to Africa are questioning whether it’s time to give up on the U.S.
At the recent session in Bonn, Germany, where countries are continuing to forge a global climate change treaty, Christiana Figueres, Secretariat of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change said, "What is clear is that at an international level the United States needs to participate in a meaningful way, and in a way that is commensurate with its responsibility."
I believe that further inaction from the US, which was trumped by China this year as the world’s largest polluter and energy consumer, could eventually move the rest of the world from questioning to forcing US action through sanctions.
Shortly after taking office, President Obama warned that if Congress couldn’t pass climate change legislation, Plan B would be EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act.
In June, Senator Murkowski (R-AK) led a failed attempt to remove EPA’s right to regulate greenhouse gases. Had her resolution passed, it also would have turned back the clock by eliminating new fuel economy standards for cars and light-duty trucks, which finally went into effect this April.
The first phase of greenhouse gas regulation begins January 2, 2011and targets only the very biggest polluters, such as utilities and cement manufacturers.
Even this very limited regulation doesn’t work for America – the EPA’s right to regulate is being challenged through dozens of lawsuits by states and big business, largely through the Chamber of Commerce. A judge could stop the EPA in its tracks simply by making the agency wait until the cases are resolved.
Because utilities have more confidence they won’t be regulated, they’re constructing 30 coal plants across the country, the largest build-out in 20 years.
Beyond the increasing uneasiness in how the world views the US on this issue, inaction is harming our economy and deteriorating our ability to lead in clean energy industries. US wind installations are down to 2007 levels. Clean energy investments are going overseas.
We must allow the EPA to regulate.
++++
Rona Fried, Ph.D. is CEO of SustainableBusiness.com
Loading...