[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 44, Number 15 (Monday, April 21, 2008)]
[Pages 524-527]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks on Energy and Climate Change

April 16, 2008

    Thank you. Welcome. I thank you all for coming. I particularly want 
to thank members of my Cabinet for joining me here today in the Rose 
Garden.
    Tomorrow represents--representatives of the world's major economies 
will gather in Paris to discuss climate change. Here in Washington, the 
debate about climate change is intensifying. Today I'll share some views 
on this important issue to advance discussions both at home and abroad.
    Climate change involves complicated science and generates vigorous 
debate. Many are concerned about the effect of climate change on our 
environment. Many are concerned about the effect of climate change 
policies on our economy. I share these concerns, and I believe they can 
be sensibly reconciled.
    Over the past 7 years, my administration has taken a rational, 
balanced approach to these serious challenges. We believe we need to 
protect our environment. We believe we need to strengthen our energy 
security. We believe we need to grow our economy. And we believe the 
only way to achieve these goals is through continued advances in 
technology. So we've pursued a series of policies aimed at encouraging 
the rise of innovation, as well as more cost-effective clean energy 
technologies that can help America and developing nations reduce 
greenhouse gases, reduce our dependence on oil, and keep our economies 
vibrant and strong for the decades to come.
    I've put our Nation on a path to slow, stop, and eventually reverse 
the growth of our greenhouse gas emissions. In 2002, I announced our 
first step: to reduce America's greenhouse gas intensity by 18 percent 
through 2012. I'm pleased to say that we remain on track to meet this 
goal even as our economy has grown 17 percent.
    As we take these steps here at home, we're also working 
internationally on a rational path to addressing global climate change. 
When I took office 7 years ago, we faced a problem. A number of nations 
around the world were preparing to implement the flawed approach of 
Kyoto Protocol. In 1997, the United States Senate took a look at the 
Kyoto approach and passed a resolution opposing the approach by a 95-to-
nothing vote.
    The Kyoto Protocol would have required the United States to 
drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The impact of this 
agreement, however, would have been to limit our economic growth and to 
shift American jobs to other countries while allowing major developing 
nations to increase their emissions. Countries like China and India are 
experiencing rapid economic growth, and that's good for their people, 
and it's good for the world. This also means they're emitting 
increasingly large quantities of greenhouse gases, which has 
consequences for the entire global climate.
    So the United States has launched, and the G-8 has embraced, a new 
process that brings together the countries responsible for most of the 
world's emissions. We're working toward a climate agreement that 
includes the meaningful participation of every major economy and gives 
none a free ride.
    In support of this process, and based on technology advances and 
strong new policy, it is now time for the United States to look beyond 
2012 and to take the next step. We've shown that we can slow emissions 
growth. But today I'm announcing a new national goal: to stop the growth 
of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2025.
    To reach this goal, we will pursue an economy-wide strategy that 
builds on the solid

[[Page 525]]

foundation that we have in place. As part of this strategy, we worked 
with Congress to pass energy legislation that specifies a new fuel 
economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020 and requires fuel 
producers to supply at least 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 
2022. This should provide an incentive for shifting to a new generation 
of fuels, like cellulosic ethanol, that will reduce concerns about food 
prices and the environment.
    We also mandated new objectives for the coming decade to increase 
the efficiency of lighting and appliances. We're helping States achieve 
their goals for increasing renewable power and building-code efficiency 
by sharing new technologies and providing tax incentives. We're working 
to implement a new international agreement that will accelerate cuts in 
potent HCFC emissions. Taken together, these landmark actions will 
prevent billions of metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions from 
entering the atmosphere.
    These objectives are backed by a combination of new market-based 
regulations, new government incentives, and new funding for technology 
research. We've provided billions of dollars for next generation nuclear 
energy technologies. Along with the private sector, we've invested 
billions more to research, develop, and commercially deploy renewable 
fuels, hydrogen fuel cells, advanced batteries, and other technologies 
to enable a new generation of vehicles and more reliable renewable power 
systems.
    In 2009 alone, the Government and the private sector plan to 
dedicate nearly a billion dollars to clean coal research and 
development. Our incentives for power production from wind and solar 
energy have helped to more than quadruple its use. We worked with 
Congress to make available more than $40 billion in loan guarantees to 
support investments that will avoid, reduce, or sequester greenhouse gas 
emissions or air pollutants. And our farmers can now compete for 
substantial new conservation incentives to restore land and forests in 
ways that help cut greenhouse gases.
    We're doing a lot to protect this environment. We've laid a solid 
foundation for further progress, but these measures--while these 
measures will bring us a long way to achieving our new goal, we've got 
to do more in the power generation sector. To reach our 2025 goal, we'll 
need to more rapidly slow the growth of power sector greenhouse gas 
emissions so they peak within 10 to 15 years and decline thereafter. By 
doing so, we'll reduce emission levels in the power sector well below 
where they were projected to be when we first announced our climate 
strategy in 2002.
    There are a number of ways to achieve these reductions, but all 
responsible approaches depend on accelerating the development and 
deployment of new technologies.
    As we approach this challenge, we face a growing problem here at 
home. Some courts are taking laws written more than 30 years ago, to 
primarily address local and regional environmental effects, and applying 
them to global climate change. Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species 
Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act were never meant to 
regulate global climate. For example, under a Supreme Court decision 
last year, the Clean Air Act could be applied to regulate greenhouse gas 
emissions from vehicles. Now, this would automatically trigger 
regulation under the Clean Air Act of greenhouse gases all across our 
economy, leading to what Energy and Commerce Committee chairman John 
Dingell last week called, quote, ``a glorious mess.''
    If these laws are stretched beyond their original intent, they could 
override the programs Congress just adopted and force the Government to 
regulate more than just powerplant emissions. It could also force the 
Government to regulate smaller users and producers of energy, from 
schools and stores to hospitals and apartment buildings. This would make 
the Federal Government act like a local planning and zoning board. It 
would have a crippling effect on our entire economy.
    Decisions with such far-reaching impact should not be left to 
unelected regulators and judges. Such decisions should be opened--
debated openly. Such decisions should be made by the elected 
representatives of the people they affect. The American people deserve 
an honest assessment of the costs, benefits, and feasibility of any 
proposed solution.

[[Page 526]]

    This is the approach that Congress properly took last year on 
mandatory policies that will reduce emissions from cars and trucks and 
improve the efficiency of lighting and appliances. This year, Congress 
will soon be considering additional legislation that will affect global 
climate change. I believe that congressional debate should be guided by 
certain core principles and a clear appreciation that there is a wrong 
way and a right way to approach reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Bad 
legislation would impose tremendous costs on our economy and on American 
families without accomplishing the important climate change goals we 
share.
    The wrong way is to raise taxes, duplicate mandates, or demand 
sudden and drastic emissions cuts that have no chance of being realized 
and every chance of hurting our economy. The right way is to set 
realistic goals for reducing emissions, consistent with advances in 
technology, while increasing our energy security and ensuring our 
economy can continue to prosper and grow.
    The wrong way is to sharply increase gasoline prices, home heating 
bills for American families, and the cost of energy for American 
businesses. The right way is to adopt policies that spur investment in 
the new technologies needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions more cost 
effectively in the longer term without placing unreasonable burdens on 
American consumers and workers in the short term.
    The wrong way is to jeopardize our energy and economic security by 
abandoning nuclear power and our Nation's huge reserves of coal. The 
right way is to promote more emission-free nuclear power and encourage 
the investments necessary to produce electricity from coal without 
releasing carbon into the air.
    The wrong way is to unilaterally impose regulatory costs that put 
American businesses at a disadvantage with their competitors abroad, 
which would simply drive American jobs overseas and increase emissions 
there. The right way is to ensure that all major economies are bound to 
take action and to work cooperatively with our partners for a fair and 
effective international climate agreement.
    The wrong way is to threaten punitive tariffs and protective--
protectionist barriers, start a carbon-based global trade war, and to 
stifle the diffusion of new technologies. The right way is to work to 
make advanced technology affordable and available in the developing 
world by lowering trade barriers, creating a global free market for 
clean energy technologies, and enhancing international cooperation and 
technology investment.
    We must all recognize that in the long run, new technologies are the 
key to addressing climate change. But in the short run, they can be more 
expensive. And that is why I believe part of any solution means 
reforming today's complicated mix of incentives to make the 
commercialization and use of new, lower emission technologies more 
competitive. Today, we have different incentives for different 
technologies, from nuclear power to clean coal to wind and solar energy. 
What we need to do is consolidate them into a single, expanded program 
with the following features.
    First, the incentive should be carbon-weighted to make lower 
emission power sources less expensive relative to higher emissions 
sources, and it should take into account our Nation's energy security 
needs.
    Second, the incentive should be technology-neutral, because the 
Government should not be picking winners and losers in this emerging 
market.
    Third, the incentive should be long-lasting. It should provide a 
positive and reliable market signal not only for the investment in a 
technology but also for the investments in domestic manufacturing 
capacity and infrastructure that will help lower costs and scale up 
availability.
    Even with strong new incentives, many new technologies face 
regulatory and political barriers. To pave the way for a new generation 
of nuclear powerplants, we must provide greater certainty on issues from 
licensing to responsible management of spent fuel. The promise of carbon 
capture and storage depends on new pipelines and liability rules. Large-
scale renewable energy installations are most likely to be built in 
sparsely populated areas, which will require advanced interstate 
transmission systems to deliver this power to major population centers. 
If we're

[[Page 527]]

serious about confronting climate change, then we have to be serious 
about addressing these obstacles.
    If we fully implement our new strong laws, adhere to the principles 
I've outlined, and adopt appropriate incentives, we will put America on 
an ambitious new track for greenhouse gas reductions. The growth in 
emissions will slow over the next decade, stop by 2025, and begin to 
reverse thereafter, so long as technology continues to advance.
    Our new 2025 goal marks a major step forward in America's efforts to 
address climate change. Yet even if we reduced our own emissions to zero 
tomorrow, we would not make a meaningful dent in solving the problem 
without concerted action by all major economies. So in connection with 
the major economies process we launched, we're urging each country to 
develop its own national goals and plans to reduce greenhouse gas 
emissions.
    Like many other countries, America's national plan will be a 
comprehensive blend of market incentives and regulations to reduce 
emissions by encouraging clean and efficient energy technologies. We're 
willing to include this plan in a binding international agreement, so 
long as our fellow major economies are prepared to include their plans 
in such an agreement. We recognize that different nations will design 
different strategies, with goals and policies that reflect their unique 
energy resources and economic circumstances. But we can only make 
progress if their plans will make a real difference as well.
    The next step in the major economies process is a meeting this week 
in Paris, and I want to thank my friend President Sarkozy for hosting 
it. There representatives of all participating nations will lay the 
groundwork for a leaders' meeting in conjunction with the G-8 summit in 
July. Our objective is to come together on a common approach that will 
contribute to the negotiations under the U.N. framework convention of 
global climate once the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012. This approach 
must be environmentally effective and economically sustainable.
    To be effective, this approach will require commitments by all major 
economies to slow, stop, and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse 
gas emissions. To be economically sustainable, this approach must foster 
the economic growth necessary to pay for investments in new technology 
and to raise living standards. We must help countries in the developing 
world gain access to technologies as well as financing that will enable 
them to take a lower carbon path to economic growth.
    And then there will be the major economies leader meeting in July--
that's the one I'll be going to--where we will seek agreement on a long-
term global goal for emissions reductions, as well as an agreement on 
how national plans will be a part of the post-2012 approach. We'll also 
seek to increase international cooperation among private firms and 
governments in key sectors such as power generation, auto manufacturing, 
renewable fuels, and aluminum and steel.
    We will work toward the creation of an international clean 
technology fund that will help finance low emissions energy projects in 
the developing world. We'll call on all nations to help spark a global 
clean energy revolution by agreeing immediately to eliminate trade 
barriers on clean energy goods and services.
    The strategy I have laid out today shows faith in the ingenuity and 
enterprise of the American people, and that's a resource that's never 
going to run out. I'm confident that with sensible and balanced policies 
from Washington, American innovators and entrepreneurs will pioneer a 
new generation of technology that improves our environment, strengthens 
our economy, and continues to amaze the world.
    Thanks for coming.

Note: The President spoke at 2:45 p.m. in the Rose Garden at the White 
House. In his remarks, he referred to President Nicolas Sarkozy of 
France.