Clean Power Plan

President Obama announced new emissions standards for power plants. The plan is already being challenged in courts.

Joe Romm sees it as a significant step to bring other countries along at the Paris negotiations later this year. Deeper emissions reductions would still be needed to keep warming below 2 degrees Celsius.

Again, Paris is focused on stanching the bleeding with a tourniquet. The goal has always been to get firm global commitments from the big emitters to meet serious targets in the 2025-2030 timeframe so we can get off our current emissions pathway — a pathway that would blow past 4[degrees Celsius] (7[degrees Fahrenheit]) warming, ruin a livable climate for centuries and make feeding 9 billion people post-2050 an unimaginably difficult task.

Update (August 4):  A selection of editorial reactions and the Los Angeles Times notes that the plan doesn't go far enough. Gizmodo has an overview. Meanwhile, a study published in Energy & Science Engineering says methane leaks have been greatly underestimated. And Jason Box writes about how the world's ice is melting faster than forecast and why we're in for more surprises.

Will politicians (namely Republicans) continue to ignore the urgency?

Update (August 17):  Bruce Melton explains the IPCC position that emissions reductions are not enough--carbon dioxide removal is also needed.

Update (August 29):  Paul Rosenberg on the shortcomings of "neoliberal environmentalism".

Grassroots environmentalists — moved by nature, facts and concern for future generations — see one kind of pragmatism: what works to create a livable future. Neoliberal environmentalists see a very different kind of pragmatism: what’s politically achievable, whether or not it actually solves the underlying problems. Fundamentally changing the rules, so that polluting oligopolies no longer control the system, is simply unthinkable for them.

Update (November 26):  A report called "The Clean Energy Future" argues we can protect the environment, create jobs and save money.

Update (February 9, 2016):  The Supreme Court blocked implementation of the EPA rules until an appeals court rules on the legality.

Update (August 21, 2018):  Obama's proposal is now gutted. The new rule could cause 1400 premature deaths per year by 2030.

Update (August 24, 2018):  The EPA's new rule might be illegal according to Joanne Spalding.

You cannot give states a guidance document that’s required by the statute without criteria with which to judge that.