3 Quick Fixes Obama Might Make to Right Bush’s Environmental Wrongs
by Brian Merchant, Brooklyn, New York 
on 11. 9.08
Image courtesy of Barackobama.com
After Obama takes office next January, it may be a good long while before he’s able to implement some of his broader environmental plans—there is a tanking economy, a couple wars, and an increasingly testy Russia to deal with, after all. But there are a few quick moves he may make—actions that he’s already publicly advocated—that could swiftly begin to reverse the damaging environmental policies of the Bush administration. So yes, that plan to invest $150 billion in renewable energy technologies may have to wait. Here’s what won’t.
1. Reverse executive orders for drilling in Utah
AFP reports that Obama is reviewing Bush’s orders to drill for oil and gas in Utah. John Podesta, the co-chairman of Obama’s transition team, said of the order under review, "They want to have oil and gas drilling in some of the most sensitive, fragile lands in Utah that they're going to try to do right as they -- walking out the door. I think that's a mistake.”
2. Allow California to regulate automobile emissions
The EPA and Bush administration made a decision last December to deny California the authority to impose CO2 regulations on cars. Obama has stated that he plans on quickly reversing that decision. This would be a relatively easy way for Obama to send the message that he’s serious about dealing with climate change, while allowing California to do the dirty work of implementing a regulatory system. In January, Obama said "Effectively tackling global warming demands bold and innovative solutions, and given the failure of this administration to act, California should be allowed to pioneer."
3. Enable the EPA to declare that CO2 emissions are endangering human welfare
The EPA recommended Bush make this declaration last year, but his administration ignored the request. Obama has said that he’s in favor of making the declaration, which would open the gateway to initiating policy on climate change. Bush rejected the declaration to protect the utility and auto companies—ignoring the problem for economic gain is hazardous, and potentially stifling. The declaration would ideally inspire innovation, and put an economic emphasis on developing renewable energy—so when the government does have that $150 billion handy, the industries will be ready.
More on Obama’s Environmental Views:
Obama and McCain Discuss Global Warming, Environmental Views in ...
Too Little, Too Late? McCain v. Obama on Global Warming : TreeHugger
Barack Obama Faces Environmental Clean Up After Two Centuries of ...
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Ditch Bisphenol A (BPA) Now if You Want to Have Kids!
- Obama Swats a Fly Ninja-Style; PETA Gets Fired Up (Video!)
- Green Glossary: Volatile Organic Compounds
- Replace Toxic Caulking in Your Bathtub Now! (Or Learn to Hold Your Breath)
- Mister Miyagi's Guide to Going Green: 5 Questions to Always Ask to Think Green and Be Green
- Donate a Single Dollar to Do Some Really Affordable Good
Sign Kyoto - it's our mantra - pass it along
Though going green is really important, I believe find a fix for the economy is more important. Not that I completely disagree with all theses choices but I feel I must point out these will have a direct effect on the economy. There is a chance it is positive but a bigger chance that it is negative. I really hope he has some good ideas to offset everything.
Why can't he work on many problems at once with the same solutions? Like this!
What problems can't be solved by most of the green agenda? What can you add to the chart?
Here is the source file.
Synergy: mutually advantageous conjunction or compatibility of distinct efforts.
4. Do nothing and let GM, Ford and Chrysler go bankrupt. These three dinosaurs have fought higher fuel efficiency standards for years and are now paying the price. It is not apparent with plummeting wages, higher fuel prices and higher resource prices that there is any future for the US auto industry. Let it die and support industries with a future, like rail and sustainable energy.
@ Richard
Your version of #4 can't be allowed to happen. Too many US jobs are at stake. Instead, tie any government loans - I saidLOANS to greener vehicles made HERE.
Obama called for the green vehicles and technology to be made here by American companies.
Richard your a fool. I say let them drill in Utah, nothing but religious zealots and neocons there anyways.
All those ipods,pc's,hdtv's,xbox's, and etc don't run off fruit juice; they run off coal powered electricity folks. How about a Carbon Tax on Internet use or cell phones?
We need solutions not these insane ideas. How about tax credits for roof top solar or plugin hybrids instead?
We do need more jobs and better educated people in this country to help with the problem instead of being part of it. If we had more industry in photo cell production, and wind generator factories.Most of these jobs are in China and that is not helping us in the long run
it seems to me that so many greens and not greens completely miss the point. we should absolutely not 'fix' the economy and then afterwards think about "green".
this 'economy' is completely flawed and is the main cause of our earth destruction. we should absolutle stop creating jobs to do useless even harmfull things, building bombs, dinasour cars, security, lawyers, finance, insurance so many inproductive free loaders. it would be so much better if they would go back to school, create poetry or do something useful.
i dont think that everybody really wants a job; i think that most people would love to quit if they were not enslaved by finances.
this is what we need to work on!
The sentiment is honorable, but I hope that the Obama administration will be conscious of what is actually working and what is sorely broken. Many organizations such as CARB actually inhibit innovation and rely upon guidance from even more inhibiting federal regulations and organizations like the EPA. It's important that environmental administrations on the state and federal levels be closely examined to find out why they haven't been effective. It's not just the current administrations fault. There are old bureaucratic traditions entrenched in environmental administrations that hold back science and technology that need to ease their grip and let innovators try things in a free and supportive environment.