President Barack Obama addresses the opening session of the first U.S.-China Strategic and Economic
Dialogue. Listening at left are Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan, center, and Chinese State
Councilor Dai Bingguo, left. (Photo by Chuck Kennedy, courtesy of the White House)
The Chinese are in Washington in high-level talks with the Obama administration about – among other things – energy and the environment. Lester Graham has more on that:
Transcript
The Chinese are in Washington in high-level talks with the Obama administration about – among other things – energy and the environment. Lester Graham has more on that:
Opponents of the climate change bill in the U.S. like to remind us that China is the world’s biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. China likes to point out the U.S. didn’t even sign the Kyoto Protocol.
“We’ve been each other’s biggest excuse for the past five, eight years about not acting on international commitments.”
That’s Jennifer Turner. She’s Director of the China Environment Forum at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
Turner says things are changing.
Recently China and the U.S. started talking about how they can help each other. And, she says, while China’s not talking about climate change a lot, it is talking about energy efficiency.
“China has actually been doing a lot over the past eight years on lowering their CO2 emissions, pushing energy efficiency more, for trying to ensure their own energy security and to lessen the health impacts of pollution.”
While the U.S. has been stressing climate change.
The governments have figured out they’re working on the same problem, just looking at it a little differently.
President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev sign documents on nuclear arms reduction
before their news conference at the Kremlin in Moscow Monday, July 6, 2009.
(Photo by Chuck Kennedy)
President Obama has reached what he’s calling a “joint understanding” with Russia on reducing the number of nuclear arms. But as Mark Brush reports this agreement doesn’t necessarily mean we’ll be dismantling a lot more nuclear weapons:
Transcript
President Obama has reached what he’s calling a “joint understanding” with Russia on reducing the number of nuclear arms. But as Mark Brush reports this agreement doesn’t necessarily mean we’ll be dismantling a lot more nuclear weapons:
As it stands now, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia will take warheads off of a delivery system, like a missile.
So, unless things go farther with this treaty, the warheads will still be kept in storage. And as it turns out, there are already thousands of these warheads kept in both countries.
Hans Kristensen is the Director of the Nuclear Information Project with the Federation of American Scientists.
He says even if the warheads get dismantled, there’s still the sticky issue of what to do with all that radioactive plutonium.
“The plutonium cores of those weapons, most of them, are still stored. We have something in the order of 15,000 warhead cores. An enormous amount of plutonium.”
The radioactive plutonium can be reprocessed and used in nuclear power plants.
Kristensen says the U.S. bought plutonium from old Soviet warheads – and that fuel is used nuclear power plants here in the U.S.
Van Jones, speaking on the far right, at a White House event called "Investing in Our Clean Energy Future" (Photo by Jason Djang, courtesy of the White House)
The economy is bad. New scientific reports indicate global warming is worse. And the Obama Administration is trying to tackle both problems through creating green jobs. Lester Graham talked with one of the President’s advisers about that:
Transcript
This is The Environment Report. Well, the economy’s bad and global warming is getting worse. There’s a lot of talk about creating jobs in a new clean energy sector. Van Jones is President Obama’s special advisor for green jobs, enterprise, and innovation at the White House council on environmental quality.
Lester Graham: Mr. Jones, back in 2007, when you were in the non-profit world in California, we aired a report where you said we need a new sort of environmentalism:
Van Jones (from 2007 clip): We need less about the Birkenstocks and the tofu, although that stuff is all beautiful, but it’s more about the hard hat, the lunch bucket, more of a working class, “we can do it” environmentalism I think is the next step to a new environmental revolution.
Graham: Now that you’re in the White House, what are you advising the president to do to take the first steps in that direction?
Jones: Well, I think that if you look at what the President has done, we’re moving right in that direction. We had to do two things: we had to get the public investments right and we did that with the recovery package, where depending on how you do the math, we did between 20 and 60 billion dollars in clean energy efficiency. That’s the biggest single investment in clean energy in the history of humanity. So that public investment side we nailed down and now we got to get the public rules right, and that is our climate and clean energy jobs bill that was voted on the recently—through the house successfully. The future started on Friday, as far as I’m concerned, when you had a chamber of congress step forward and say, “We are gonna change the rules so that clean energy can compete and we are gonna make sure that all sectors of America—rural, industrial—have a chance to transition effectively. But we are gonna move into this clean energy economy. And that’s where the jobs come from—when you get the public rules right and the public investments right you get a boom that is sustainable and lasting. We saw that in telecom, we’ve seen that over and over again, and that’s where we’re going.
Graham: You’ve mentioned a lot of times about, we’ll see more jobs in harnessing energy from the sun, wind, water, smart biofuels, geothermal and advanced geothermal. And that climate change bill would do that, but it faces a tough time in the senate. How will the fate of that legislation affect growth in those green jobs areas?
Jones: Well, I think the senate is going to show the same courage at the end of the day that the House did. The President has been very clear over and over again that if we want the jobs of tomorrow, we’ve got to make the products of tomorrow, and the products of tomorrow will be advanced vehicles, advanced cars, and also advanced energy—wind turbines, solar panels, and all that stuff. And I think the senate has to make a choice: does it want to stay on the sinking ship of yesterday and have the United States fall further and further behind in the race for clean energy, where China is spending 12 million dollars an hour to corner that market on every renewable technology. So we’ll be importing wind turbines, solar panels, smart batteries from them, or are we going to suit up and get in this race. And I think the Senate, looking at the same facts the House just did, is gonna step up and match the President in his leadership and vision.
Graham: During the debate in the house last Friday, we heard a lot about the loss of jobs because of higher cost of energy, because of the reduction of the use of fossil fuels. How much might the creation of green jobs offset the loss of jobs because of what the conservatives and opponents of the bill say we’ll see?
Jones: I mean, everybody who has looked at this objectively—I mean, there’s some reports out there that are circulating from extreme ideological groups, that are kind of masquerading as these reports, you hear a lot of, “Oh you’ll lose two jobs for every one green job.” All that stuff has been debunked. The Wall Street journal looked at that stuff and said the methodology is flawed. What every serious study shows is that you will create many more jobs in a clean energy economy—you’ll have more work, more wealth, and better health for Americans when we are producing the technologies of the future. There are just not that many more jobs available in some of the legacy sectors. But, we can put… we have a wealth of solar power, wind power, and other power in this country that we’ve never tapped. The challenge facing America is simply this: can we tap our clean energy power centers and connect them to our population centers. We have a sun belt in this country that is a wealth of solar power but it doesn’t stop there—really on rooftops across America. We have wind potential in this country—gigantic wind potential—untapped. Not just in the plains states, but off our coasts, up in the Great Lakes area, in our mountains. These are potential power centers for the country. If you tap our clean energy power centers, connect them to our population centers, you create jobs in rural America, urban America, you advance our resource and technology agenda, you get our scientists engaged and you unleash innovation and entrepreneurship on this problem. And that’s how we’re not only going to beat the global warming problem, it’s also how we’re going to beat the global recession by putting Americans back to work.
Graham: Who do you envision getting these jobs? Are we talking about out of work, blue-collar workers getting green-collar jobs or are we talking about low income folks who need training?
Jones: Well, the great thing about this green wave that President Obama is talking about is that it’s a green wave that can lift all boats. You’re talking about jobs from the GEDs to the PHDs and back again. And you’re talking about giving somebody who, maybe they were working in the automotive sector and they’ve been thrown out of work, well, Hilda Solis just put 50 million dollars, our secretary of labor, toward retraining those workers and giving them the opportunity to become green workers. If you know how to make a car, you probably know how to make a wind turbine and other things, with a little bit of retraining. If you were a home builder—we’re probably not going to be building am lot of homes in the next 12 months, 18 months—but we have five billion dollars in the recovery package for helping those home builders and others go into the work of rebuilding homes, upgrading homes, for energy efficiency, weatherization, retrofitting building. If you’re a farmer, if you’re in rural America, if you like at the recovery package, if you look at the climate bill there are opportunities to grow smart advanced biofuels, to put upwind turbines on your acreage, to become a part of the solution by grabbing carbon out of the air with your tilling and with your agricultural practices. Every part of America can play a role from the GEDs to the PHDs. The other thing that’s so important: get people on the ground floor, low-income people, people who are marginalized, people who have not had good economic opportunities—let’s get them in on the ground floor so that they can… maybe this summer their installing a solar panel, next summer if that firm grows, they can become a manager, and then an owner, an inventor, an investor. Green pathways to prosperity are available if we move now, seize the opportunity, and make sure all Americans get a chance to play.
Graham: When you talk to homeowners, many of the middle class homeowners get all excited about the gee-whiz stuff of solar panels on the roof, maybe a backyard wind turbine, but most people skip the first step, and that is weatherization. You’ve been talking about weatherization for not just homes, but buildings in general for a while now. How much employment could there be in just that sector alone?
Jones: Well, if we got serious and aggressive and said we wanted to retro-fit the majority of our building stock, you’re literally talking about millions of jobs. And what’s so exciting about that is we are an advanced industrial country, we have a lot of building stock, but it was built using what are now outdated technologies, outdated materials. The chance to go back through all of those buildings and blow in clean, non-toxic insulation, replace ill-fitting windows and doors with the new high-performance windows, putting in the high-performance boilers and furnaces—all that is work, but it’s work that pays for itself in energy cost savings. So you’re talking about going back and upgrading our buildings and cutting unemployment, cutting energy costs, cutting pollution from our power plants, which will have to work less hard. And at the same time, you say “How are you going to pay for it?” Well, it can pay for itself through the energy cost savings. That’s why the President but 5 billion dollars, as opposed to the last term’s 200 million, five billion into energy efficiency for people of moderate income, because we know it’s not just the solar panels, which everybody likes, the gee-whiz stuff as you said, it’s also the caulking guns. It’s also those existing technologies that right now are sitting on the shelf. You’ve got workers sitting on the bench—stand those workers up, let them take those technologies off the shelf, and get out there and retrofit America, save money on energy bills and also put people to work.
Graham: Conservatives, some members of Congress, some think tanks have expressed some concern that businesses, ne’er-do-wells, will grab government money saying their creating green jobs when in reality it simply might be the difference between and janitor or a lawyer working for a bank, and a janitor or a lawyer working for a solar panel installer or environmental group. What are you doing to make sure we’re actually creating green collar jobs with the taxpayer money that’s being used to kick-start those jobs?
Jones: Well, you know, one of those things is that we have more commitment to transparency and accountability in this program, the recovery program, than in the history of the Republic because we have the technology now that makes this stuff a lot more possible. We’re very confident that we’re going to be able to make sure that we get the maximum benefit to the American people out of the recovery dollars. I think that sometimes we don’t worry about the right things. Often the upshot of that is that therefore the government should sit back and do nothing, we should let people pay too-high energy bills, we should let workers go idle, we should continue to pump massive amounts of carbon-pollution, heat trapping pollution, into the atmosphere, and continue to let Asia and Europe get all of the jobs of tomorrow. And I think the problem with that way of thinking is that it has nothing to do with the way Americans have been for the past 200 hundred years. This is the one country in the world that has always leaned forward into change; we’ve always led the change. Talking about the industrial revolution, the information revolution, the space race—we weren’t afraid of the future. We went out and defined the future, created the future. And for some reason we’ve had stagnation in our energy sector, which we’re now finally busting through. We’re shattering that old logjam that we’ve had where we were told that if we tried to do right by our grandchildren environmentally, to give them the best possible future, we would be starving our children economically. We would have to take care our children economically or our grandchildren environmentally but we couldn’t do both. Well, Barack Obama has shattered that old logjam, that false choice, he says no we can actually do great by our children economically, grow our economy, but do it using the clean and green and new technologies that will also take care of our grandchildren environmentally. And that’s the breakthrough. You know, you’re always going to have naysayer’s but they’ve never won in American politics, and they’re not going to win on this one either.
Graham: I’m wondering if there’s anything you think we should be talking about that I haven’t asked you about so far?
Jones: Well, I just think that the courage of the president to actually run for office talking about environmental issues as he did, talking about clean energy jobs and green jobs as he did, and then to actually use his political capital to get it done, is something that is extraordinary. I think sometimes we take this stuff for granted. But I’m someone, again, coming from outside of electoral politics, more working at the community level, I’ve always seen politicians come and they make all these promises to the community and as soon as they get elected you never hear from them again. Here’s an administration I’m proud to be a part of, that made a bunch of promises around healthcare, made a bunch of promises around the environment, and the economy, and education, and we’re actually beginning to deliver. And my big hope is that not only do we restore our economy, and restore our environmental health, we can begin to restore people’s confidence that government and community and people working together can actually solve tough problems again. This is not the only tough problem we’re going to have to solve in this century but I hope we’ll be able to set a good example on this one.
Graham: Van Jones is the special advisor on Green Jobs to President Obama. Thanks for talking with us.
Jones: Well, thank you.
Graham: That’s The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.
Van Jones is a special advisor on green jobs, working with President Obama. He spoke with The Environment Report’s Lester Graham.
Energy Secretary Steven Chu says coal will have to be a part of the energy mix in the future, so the government is committing money to clean it up. (Photo courtesy of the USDOE)
President Obama’s Energy Secretary is talking about building a facility to find ways to burn coal more cleanly. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
President Obama’s Energy Secretary is talking about building a facility to find ways to burn coal more cleanly. Lester Graham reports:
Burning coal pollutes – acid rain, toxic mercury, soot. And lately the big concern – carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas contributing to global warming.
The Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu told Members of Congress, despite the concerns about pollution, we still depend on coal for half of our electricity.
“So, it’s very important that we develop the technology that captures and also that safely sequesters carbon from coal plants.”
The technology does not exist today.
Chu says three-point-four-billion dollars in government stimulus money is now available to find a way to clean up coal.
An experimental plant called Futuregen was supposed to find ways to burn coal more cleanly and do something about carbon dioxide emissions. But the Bush administration killed funding.
Secretary Chu says the Obama administration is now negotiating with Futuregen partners again.
North America's largest solar plant, covering 140 acres (Photo courtesy of the Nellis Air Force Base)
President Barack Obama’s visit
to Nellis Air Force Base near
Las Vegas has more to do with
what’s on the ground than it
does the fighter jets in the air.
Lester Graham reports on the base’s
solar energy project:
Transcript
President Barack Obama’s visit
to Nellis Air Force Base near
Las Vegas has more to do with
what’s on the ground than it
does the fighter jets in the air.
Lester Graham reports on the base’s
solar energy project:
Nellis Air Force Base is home to the nation’s largest solar photovoltaic power plant. The system generates enough electricity to power the equivelent of more than 13,000 homes.
The Air Force’s partner in the solar plant is MMA Renewable Ventures. Matt Cheney is CEO.
Cheney says there are lots of advantages, starting with no need for foreign or domestic fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases.
“It gets its energy from the sun. And, by the way, the sun is pretty predictable and effectively the energy we get from it is free.”
That’s not to say solar energy is free. The array at Nellis Air Force Base cost 100-million dollars to build.
The Air Force saves about a million dollars a year. So, it’s going to take a while to break even.
But as the demand for more solar goes up, the technology gets cheaper, in just a few years you might be able to get solar energy for about the same price as from coal-burning power plants.
Mercedez-Benz A-Class F-Cell at the 2009 Washington DC Auto Show (Photo source: IFCAR at Wikimedia Commons)
The Department of Energy wants to cut funding for the development of hydrogen powered vehicles. Mark Brush reports the Energy Secretary has decided that cars powered by hydrogen are too far off:
Transcript
The Department of Energy wants to cut funding for the development of hydrogen powered vehicles. Mark Brush reports the Energy Secretary has decided that cars powered by hydrogen are too far off:
Six years ago, President George W. Bush proposed spending 1.2 billion dollars to develop hydrogen power cars.
Now, Stephen Chu, President Obama’s Energy Secretary, says hydrogen powered cars aren’t yet practical for today’s market.
Chu says they’d rather spend money on things like plug-in cars and cars powered by biofuels. Things that can hit the road now instead of 20 years from now.
People working on hydrogen powered vehicles aren’t too happy about the cuts.
Patrick Serfass is with the National Hydrogen Association.
“I’d say the hydrogen industry is perplexed. The administration has a lot of smart people in it and they have done a lot of great things for many parts of the renewable energy sector. But the proposal to eliminate the hydrogen vehicle program is a mistake.”
Serfass says hydrogen powered cars are not as far off as the Energy Secretary might think. He and his group are trying to persuade members of Congress to put research money back into the budget.
Lisa Jackson is the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (Photo courtesy of the US EPA)
Some members of Congress feel they’re being coerced into approving a Climate Change bill that would force industry to reduce greenhouse gases. Republicans and some Democrats feel the Obama Administration is telling Congress to either approve legislation or the Environmental Protection Agency will use its authority to restrict greenhouse gases. Lester Graham spoke with the Administrator of the EPA, Lisa Jackson, about that perception:
Transcript
Some members of Congress feel they’re being coerced into approving a Climate Change bill that would force industry to reduce greenhouse gases. Republicans and some Democrats feel the Obama administration is telling Congress to either approve legislation or the Environmental Protection Agency will use its authority to restrict greenhouse gases. Lester Graham spoke with the Administrator of the EPA, Lisa Jackson about that perception.
Administrator Lisa Jackson: They want to say that it’s EPA’s action that’s compelling them to be forced to address energy and climate change legislation. I certainly hope that’s not the case. We are actually in a race here to move to a greener energy economy. And the rest of the world is certainly doing it. And I always tell people that if you don’t want to do it for the environmental reasons, you need to look at the economics and where the world is going, and realize we need to break our dependence on fossil fuels that come from out of our country. We need to move to clean energy. That should be the imperative. I hope it becomes the imperative.
Lester Graham: There’s a new treaty coming up to replace the Kyoto Protocol, the UN Climate Change Conference will meet in Copenhagen in December for a new climate change agreement – if Congress does not pass climate change legislation by that point, how will it affect the standing of the United States in those talks?
Administrator Jackson: Well, certainly it’s fair to say the eyes of the world are upon us, to some degree. Each country is dealing individually with their own situation on energy and climate, and then obviously those are big multi-lateral talks. But I do think people are watching to see if the United States is in this game of clean energy and addressing carbon.
Graham: If Congress does not pass a measure this year before that conference, but there’s a likelihood of it passing next year, will that change – I’m just trying to figure out how we enter into those negotiations if we don’t have a solid plan for reducing greenhouse gasses.
Administrator Jackson: I know lots of people are trying to figure out whether or not the United States will be at the table and in a big way. It certainly is the most important thing to be able to say to the rest of the world, is that not only President Obama is clearly behind this, but the Congress representing the people of the United States has moved to embrace new energy policy, and clean energy, and low-carbon. We’re not there yet, obviously. I’m still optimistic, despite all the other discussions going on, because I know that there’s been real progress made to date.
Graham: You’re just a few months into the job, and already seeing a little heat from Congress and big, big challenge – how do you feel about the job and what do you hope to accomplish in the first year?
Administrator Jackson: I already know that it’s the best job I’ll ever have. I understand that the push and pull of the system is that we’re going to have some dialogue on issues that are of great concern to members of Congress, to the American people, to various stakeholders, and I’m eager to have those conversations. And I think as long as we keep in mind that we’re going to follow the best science we can, we’re going to follow the law, we’re going to be honest, we’re going to be transparent, we’re not going to hold information back. You know, I think that was the most damning criticism of EPA – that there was information out there that might have protected the environment or the American people that was held back. And that time and trust, we have to now re-earn. So that’s what we’re about.
Graham: Administrator Jackson, thanks for your time.
Administrator Jackson: Thank you so much, Lester. Nice talking to you.
Lisa Jackson is the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. She spoke with The Environment Report’s Lester Graham.
Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar (Photo by Andy Pernick, courtesy of the Bureau of Reclamation)
The Department of Interior includes
agencies such as the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, the National Park
Service, the Bureau of Land Management
and many other bureaus, services and
offices. Former Senator Ken Salazar
directs it all. Lester Graham recently
talked with the Secretary of Interior
about the Department and the problems
and challenges he faces:
Transcript
The Department of Interior includes
agencies such as the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, the National Park
Service, the Bureau of Land Management
and many other bureaus, services and
offices. Former Senator Ken Salazar
directs it all. Lester Graham recently
talked with the Secretary of Interior
about the Department and the problems
and challenges he faces:
Lester Graham: Interior is a huge department, with many services and bureaus. Some of those departments deal with oil and gas exploration on public lands and places such as Alaska, Utah, and offshore. During the Bush Administration, the Department of the Interior was criticized for being too cozy with the oil and gas industry. And it culminated with a scandal involving oil company execs, government workers, and wild parties – complete with cocaine and sex. Secretary Salazar stressed to me, those days of partying and sweetheart deals with oil and gas companies are over.
Ken Salazar: It is unfortunate that the department was blemished in the Bush era because of the transgressions which occurred here and the paradigm which unfolded – which we are seeing the results of today – is that there was a bending of the rules and a flaunting of the law. There is a lot of cleaning up that has to be done.
Graham: Recently you came to a memorandum, I’m understanding, with FERC about offshore wind turbines. How soon might we see wind turbines off the coasts of the US?
Salazar: I expect that it will happen during the first term of the Obama Administration. I think that there is a huge potential for wind energy, especially off the shores of the Atlantic, because of the shallowness of those waters.
Graham: Will we ever see a point where we have windmills near coast, and drilling rigs out farther, along the Atlantic Coast?
Salazar: I do believe that we will see the wind potential develop. I think it will be similar to what we already see in the United Kingdom and Denmark and Norway. In respect to oil and gas off the Atlantic, I think that is still a question that needs to be looked at. And it’s part of what we’re doing in looking at a new 5-year plan for the Outer Continental Shelf. And we are not making a decision at this point, or pre-judging where we will end up after we complete the comment process which ends in September.
Graham: Secretary Salazar says domestic oil and gas will play a role in American energy. He talked about the Department of Interior’s role in the nation’s energy independence, and noted the departments 15,000 scientists will be helping deal with the big issues such as global warming and climate change. Ken Salazar says that since the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and other nature-related agencies make up Interior, one of its top priorities is a program called ‘Treasured Landscapes.’
Salazar: I am hopeful that we will be able to, in this Administration, create the kind of legacy that was created by Teddy Roosevelt. President Obama has a vision for the landscapes of America, which is one that I believe we can deliver on. Restoration of major landscapes, such as the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes and the Everglades and so many others, will be a part of that agenda.
Graham: Secretary Salazar, thank you so much for your time.
Salazar: Thank you very much, Lester.
Graham: Ken Salazar, President Obama’s Secretary of the Interior. For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.
Senator Robert F. Bennett blocked the nomination of David Hayes as the Deputy Interior Secretary (Photo courtesy of the US Senate)
This week the Senate is expected to take up President Obama’s nominee for deputy secretary of Interior. Lester Graham reports the nomination was blocked last week because of a dispute over oil and gas leases:
Transcript
This week the Senate is expected to take up President Obama’s nominee for deputy secretary of Interior. Lester Graham reports the nomination was blocked last week because of a dispute over oil and gas leases:
Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar says he knows his old Senate colleague Bob Bennett of Utah very well, and he understands the politics behind blocking the nomination of Salazar’s deputy.
Senator Bennett and his fellow Republicans blocked the nomination of David Hayes after Secretary Salazar canceled leases for oil and gas drilling near National Parks in Utah.
Salazar says the leases were rushed through late in the Bush administration without proper environmental review.
Senate Democrats say the Hayes nomination will be brought up again. Secretary Salazar says he hopes so.
“I sure hope that it happens. You know I think Senator Durbin and others, Senator Reid, indicated they think that it can happen this week. I hope that it does.”
The Democrats will need the votes of Senators Edward Kennedy and Robert Byrd. Both men have been absent from the Senate because of health problems.
The EPA and other agencies want to spend $475 million on the Great Lakes
(Photo by Karen Holland, courtesy of the EPA)
The Environmental Protection
Agency’s budget has a lot of
money for green energy projects,
dealing with climate change and
creating green jobs. But Lester
Graham reports the EPA will also
deal with old fashioned environmental
issues such as pollution:
Transcript
The Environmental Protection
Agency’s budget has a lot of
money for green energy projects,
dealing with climate change and
creating green jobs. But Lester
Graham reports the EPA will also
deal with old fashioned environmental
issues such as pollution:
Cleaning up air and water pollution almost seem passe’ after hearing about all of President Obama’s shiny green plans.
But cleaning up past messes is still a priority.
The EPA’s budget is 10.5 billion dollars. In a release, the agency highlighted a plan for the Great Lakes.
The EPA and other agencies want to spend 475-million dollars to clean up polluted bays, stop raw sewage from spilling into the lakes and deal with other ongoing problems.
Andy Buchsbaum heads up the Great Lakes office for the National Wildlife Federation. He says early signs indicate this item in the President’s budget will stick in Congress.
“They haven’t given final approval, but both the House and the Senate approved budget resolutions that include this 475-million dollars for the Great Lakes.”
And there’s also money to work on the Chesapeake Bay, San Francisco Bay, Puget Sound, and other big bodies of water around the nation.
President Barack Obama addresses the opening session of the first U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue. Listening at left are Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan, center, and Chinese State Councilor Dai Bingguo, left. (Photo by Chuck Kennedy, courtesy of the White House)
