[ad_1]
Until the day of the elections, the Brian Lehrer Show is organizing a series entitled "30 issues in 30 days". The idea is to delve deeply into one question a day to give voters an idea of what candidates are saying about policies that affect their lives. Next step: Trump's policies on climate change.
This week, the United Nations released their most urgent report on climate change, concluding that the prognosis for planet Earth is much bleaker than previously thought and that it is deteriorating faster than planned.
But for the moment, the globe and the White House continue to turn.
"I saw [other] fabulous reports, "President Donald Trump told a reporter on Tuesday.The president did not specify where these other reports and what constitutes" fabulosity "in terms of climate change, but Trump invokes this alternative reality in which climate change does not exist or even in cases where it is good since the campaign days. (Remember in 2016 when he wanted MORE climate change on a cold day in the north of the state?)
So how does this cavalier and disdainful attitude in the face of an impending unprecedented catastrophe translate into current policies? Let's see how Trump has affected the climate change policy since taking office:
Out of Paris Deal:
A year ago, Trump announced that the United States would not participate in a global compact among 194 countries to fight rising temperatures and reduce carbon emissions. Under the terms of the agreement, the United States should have reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 26% to 28% from 2005 levels by 2025 and pledged to pay 3 billions of dollars to the poorest countries by 2020. Trump has called these provisions "humiliating" and attacking US sovereignty.
What is the impact?
Technically, the United States is not even out of the agreement yet. Trump has only announced his intention to withdraw but can not do it officially until 2020. In the meantime, states are intensifying, promising to meet Paris Agreement standards and achieving new goals. California, for example, is committed to using 100% renewable energy and carbon neutrality by 2045. But observers are also concerned that US nonconformities may spur further country to withdraw. The Brazilians are expected to elect the right-wing presidential candidate, Jair Bolsonaro, who has promised that he would pull that country out of the deal if he wins (Brazil is the seventh most the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter).
Increase in the amount of allowable auto emissions:
In 2012, President Obama announced that automakers should start making fuel efficient cars at 54mg (almost double what they are now) by 2015. In August, The Trump administration has announced a policy preventing regulatory standards from becoming stricter after 2021, freezing the fuel economy standard at 37 miles per gallon. In a statement titled "Make Cars Great Again Again", Transportation Secretary Elaine L. Chao and Andrew Wheeler, the EPA's interim administrator, said their proposal "would give consumers better access to safer and more affordable vehicles, while continuing to protect the environment, "While the Obama plan" would eliminate jobs "(Obama expected his plan" would create or save more than 700,000 jobs "). The Trump administration also announced that it would revoke California's special ability to set its own regulations, which other states can follow.
What is the impact?
According to the New York Times, Trump's lower standards would add "the equivalent climate to put 31 million more cars on the road [in 2030 alone]"Which represents" more carbon dioxide than many medium-sized countries, such as Belgium or Greece, emit over a full year ". States do not give up without fighting. This month, California regulators voted to force automakers to comply with more stringent state pollution rules if they wanted to sell cars in that state. The Trump administration is about to face legal battles around this policy and if they lose the court decision, observers expect the country's regulatory standards to be halved: some states follow weaker federal guidelines and others, as a result of the California initiative.
Replaced Obama's clean plan for clean eating:
Also in August, Trump announced the affordable price of clean energy [ACE] plan, its proposal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. Observers have called this version of Obama's plan a total lack of force, with the main disintegration mechanism being the shift from industry-wide regulation to factory-specific regulation. Obama's clean eating plan was designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired plants by 32% by 2030. Trump's proposal, on the other hand, would reduce emissions from these same plants. plants by 1 to 2% by 2035, according to its own EPA. .
What is the impact?
Trump's plan is not finalized and will likely end up being blocked, challenged by lower courts (Obama's clean energy plan never took effect and is still tied to legal battles). If Trump's plan actually comes into effect, E.P.A. show that ACE can cause up to 1,400 premature deaths a year by 2030 due to heart and lung diseases. And that does not take into account the untold deaths caused by the acceleration of global warming, which is fueled by burning coal.
Trump has not started yet, so why is it important in the middle?
Although Democrats are reluctant to make climate change a centerpiece of their campaign message (polls are not well thought out because most voters think they have more pressing issues to worry about, such as how to afford health care), most Democrats are worried about the issue and leave the Blue House blue with other bills to mitigate the catastrophic effects of climate change. As noted above, there is currently a greater chance that significant legislation on climate change will be adopted at the state level. Here in New York, a Democrat-controlled Senate could advance the protection of the environment.
For more information, here is Brian Lehrer's segment:
Loading…
[ad_2]
Source link
