Two articles recently caught my eye. The first was Joshua Green’s at The Atlantic has an interesting article on Obama’s “Stealth Green Revolution“, connecting a number of key decisions has been the hard work the White House has been putting in behind the scenes to start transforming the very roots of the US energy structure. The Second was by Dream Harder’s at Grist.org on how a few selective changes to the way energy prices work can collapse what at present seems to be a near insurmountable barrier of powerful oil and coal lobbyist on both sides.
As Green points out, the US has already come a long way since the days of George W Bush. Obama has not been slow in his move towards Climate change goals, perhaps because in his mind they are tightly wrapped in with America’s geo-political security.
What has he done?
First up, he changed the staff, yes it sounds obvious but by bringing Dr Stephen Chu, a nobel winning physicist to head the Department of Energy, he’s put someone who understand the importance of the industry as whole, including research and funding issues.
Second, Obama included Lisa Jackson to head the EPA – critically the EPA recently ruled that Carbon Dioxide is a hazardous gas – entitling a degree of regulation that won’t have legislation to get thigns done. Obama will still head down that route but the EPA’s return to independence is crucial. Under Bush the agency was made impotent with immense dissatisfaction at the lower levels as Bush appointed bureacrats stifled Science and reports to suit Bush’s worldview – from everything to toxins in the water system, to waste regulation in urban areas
Obama’s first move:
Obama cannily used the stimulus to push through the first part of his plan. Though it was sold as a “jobs” package to goose the economy, it was also a massive down payment on his energy agenda, since it included $38 billion in grants and $127 billion in loan guarantees to support “clean” technology
Beneath the surface however, even more significant changes occur, which Harder’s article hinted at when he said that a few selective shots could completely shift the game in favour of a more environmentally friendly US.
One critical factor is simply his position, affirming a strong goal towards renewable ewnergy and immediately backing up his position with investment, will create a multiplier effect for other investors, who can rest assured of a stable climate for the next 4 years ( or 8!) for renewable energy. The argument could just as easily work in reverse on polluting energy, if the White House began to place restrictions on it. Perhaps wwhat evnrionmentalists are hoping will happen is a tipping point occurs where investors begin to regard “dirty” source of energy as poor investments and vice-versa for renewables.
Perhaps more subtle, and doubtless typical of Obama’s political guile has been the subtle transformation of the debate itself . It’s no coincidence that Dr Chu is also a scientist. Obama’s policy since returning to the Whire House has been to move the whole debate onto a more scientific one, rather than let ideology dominate and skew science. Obama has pledged to invest up to 3% of the US’s GDP in research and technology, and Chu has been open about his desire to speed up funding in clean energy development areas. Furthermore, by giving scientists such prominence he has at last given them a platform to contribute or even direct public discourse, compared with the muffled sound from the boot of the Bush admnistration’s car scientistrs previously had to endure.
In a sense, Obama is moving the goalposts, trying to make the debate how Climate Change will be solved, not whether it exists or not and not an exclusive preserve of w wing of the Democratic party. By re-framing the debate and allowing scientists as well as politicians to join the debate, it will increasingly become harder for those opposing Climate Change ( although in Fox news they will always have a platform) to doubt it, without having the science to back it up.
If the debate on environmental grounds goes awry, Obama has a second trick up his sleeve, energy security. If nothing else, the NIC report ( a joint intelligence report from military intelligence to academics) has made it abundantly clear that resource and energy wars will define the next two decades at least. In this respect, Obama received a crucial boost, as covered by Politico recently when Vote Vets, came out strongly in favourof renewable energy – on the grounds that otherwise soldiers will have to fight energy wars in the future which could be averted.
If, as expected the economy bottoms out and begins to pick up, Obamam can point to the green jobs as key to the recovery, he can then add the economic benefits of “green jobs” to his arsenal of arguments – something that may not quite come soon enough for the current Climate Change bill but will neverthelss prove critical in the long run.
If all of this happened, Climate Change legislation of the sort needed to kickstart the world efforts would still be an uphill struggle but Obama’s behind the scenes efforts have got the ball rolling, in money, policy and public discourse, all three of which the Bush White House sought to oppose, perhaps that will be enough to generate a public mandate to break down the dam, of established interests.
