The Clean Energy Jobs & American Power Act

As I yesterday,Barbara Boxer and John Kerry have released their piece of climate legislation, The Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act(full text).  If you aren’t up for the heavy reading, here is an overview, a summary, and a section by section summary.  Here is a press release about the legislation.  Below is an op-ed John Kerry has out in Politico about why we need to pass this bill.

A new path for energy use

For decades, politicians have talked about the importance of ending America’s addiction to oil and investing in energy that is made in America and that works for America — from coal and nuclear to solar and wind.

But with the Clean Jobs and American Power Act, which we are introducing Wednesday, we at last have an opportunity to put our country on that path — a path more critical because of the urgent threat of global climate change.

The Clean Jobs and American Power Act is aimed at no less than the reinvention of the way America produces and uses energy. It will be a challenge, but America has never shied away from a challenge before.

Reinventing the way we use energy can also be the cornerstone for decades of economic growth and a stronger, more powerful America. Today, 15 million Americans are out of work. We send $1 billion per day overseas to feed our oil addiction. Scientists and generals warn that climate change caused by carbon pollution threatens our health and our national security. Each of these factors weakens America.

Rarely have we faced so many challenges, but rarely have so many challenges also culminated in such an enormous opportunity — an opportunity to put millions of Americans back to work, to invest in homegrown innovation and to protect our children’s health and our environment.

The Clean Jobs and American Power Act takes a comprehensive approach to meeting our energy challenge head on.

It sets ambitious carbon pollution reduction targets, creates powerful new incentives for companies to find the most cost-efficient ways to meet them and makes historic new investments in technology and efficiency that will improve every sector of our energy economy. And it does not raise the deficit by one single dime.

Based on the successful bipartisan plan that reduced acid rain, a market-based pollution reduction and investment system will set ambitious yearly targets. It will reduce carbon pollution 20 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050, a decrease that scientists consider the minimum necessary to avert a climate disaster.

This system is tough on corporate pollution, taking aim at America’s largest polluters: those emitting 25,000 tons of carbon each year. The 7,500 facilities covered in 2012 — mostly power plants, industrial facilities and petroleum and petrochemical operations — account for nearly three-quarters of America’s carbon emissions. Farmers and nearly all small business are exempt. More than 98 percent of all American businesses fall below the threshold.

The bill is designed to offer big polluters options: Those that need more time to clean up their emissions can pay for the continued right to pollute. Those companies that decrease pollution quickly and affordably stand to profit.

This bill creates powerful new market incentives for developing clean energy and improving energy efficiency. Americans invented the technologies behind wind and solar energy, but countries like China and Germany have surged ahead of us. This bill provides new funding for research and deployment to make us the world leaders once again.

Every dollar spent on clean energy creates nearly four times as many jobs as a dollar invested in oil and gas. These are good-paying, regionally diverse jobs for American workers of all educational backgrounds — and best of all, they can’t be shipped overseas.

As we transition to this new energy future, we need game-changing investments and improvements throughout our entire energy system. We can’t afford to ignore any homegrown energy resources. Because coal will remain an important part of America’s economy, we must help the coal industry reinvent itself — that includes rewards for installing new technology to capture and store carbon pollution before it reaches the air we breathe.

Natural gas will receive similar incentives to increase cost-effectiveness and galvanize technological advances. We will also make the investment in research, development and worker training needed to build the next generation of American nuclear power plants.

Of course, the cleanest and cheapest kilowatt of energy is the one you never use. More than 1,000 U.S. cities have adopted tough environmental standards for new construction and for refitting existing buildings. We respond to the urgent requests of our governors and mayors by funding these efforts.

As our energy economy races ahead, no one should be left behind.

This bill protects everyday consumers. Rebates on monthly electric bills will ensure that energy remains affordable for low- and middle-income families. And a new market-based mechanism will kick in as needed to keep prices stable.

This bill also includes targeted protection for our manufacturing sector, to ensure that American companies remain competitive and keep jobs here at home. New programs will train workers to succeed in the new clean energy economy.

We can do all those things, and more, to make America safer and stronger. But only if we reinvent the way America uses energy.

It won’t be easy. For too long, Washington let Big Oil and special interests stand between us and our goals. This has hurt our economy, helped our enemies and risked our security. But the time has come to put America back in control, and the Clean Jobs and American Power Act at last turns rhetoric into reality and puts us on that path.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) is chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and the lead sponsor of The Clean Jobs and American Power Act.

Nike leaves Chamber of Commerce Board!

The Chamber of Commerce has been fighting the regulation of carbon dioxide for a long time, and has been very intense in its opposition this year because of pending Federal legislation. Wonkroom has a great history lesson of all the shenanigans of the Chamber, most recent of which was calling for a “Scopes Monkey Trial” on global warming.

Many large businesses that sit on the Chamber of Commerce’s board of directors have taken issue with the Chamber’s inability to represent their views on climate legislation. As a result, Excelon, PNM Resources, PG & E have left the Chamber.  Duke Energy and Alstom left coal front lobby group ACCCE, after their controversies.  Johnson&Johnson wrote an angry letter to the Chamber.  But one of the strongest advocates for climate action, Nike, was still on the board of directors of the Chamber. Nike is a member of Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), a business coalition that supports federal clean energy and climate policy. As GetEnergySmart lamented, Nike just couldn’t “do it”. Well, on the day the Senate climate bill is being released, Nike Did It.  Now, as EnviroKnow says, when will Nike leave for good?

Which begs the question. Will the Chamber of Commerce have anyone in it by the end of the year if it keeps advocating for the destruction of civilization?  Nike’s statement below.

“Nike believes US businesses must advocate for aggressive climate change legislation and that the United States needs to move rapidly into a sustainable economy to remain competitive and ensure continued economic growth.

As we’ve stated, we fundamentally disagree with the US Chamber of Commerce on the issue of climate change and their recent action challenging the EPA is inconsistent with our view that climate change is an issue in need of urgent action.

We believe businesses and their representative associations need to take an active role to invest in sustainable business practices and innovative solutions.

It is important that US companies be represented by a strong and effective Chamber that reflects the interests of all its members on multiple issues. We believe that on the issue of climate change the Chamber has not represented the diversity of perspective held by the board of directors.

Therefore, we have decided to resign our board of directors position. We will continue our membership to advocate for climate change legislation inside the committee structure and believe that we can better influence policy by being part of the conversation. Moving forward we will continue to evaluate our membership.”

**Update 10/7/09**  Apple has also quit

The Senate Climate Bill

here..we...go!

Tomorrow, the Senate climate bill draft is finally being released tomorrow.  6 months ago, we saw the released version of the House draft climate bill.  That bill went through a great deal of changes, and didn’t pass until late June, nearly 3 months after it was released.  So we’ve got a long way to go, and there will be a lot of moving parts.  As both an activist on the ground and a  blogger, I’ll be writing both about the efforts of my group UMD for Clean Energy, giving updates on significant changes to the content and timeline for the Senate bill, and providing analysis of the bill, whats good, whats bad, where it’s okay to give ground, and ground we need to hold or fight for.

If you happen to live in Maryland and have access to the radio station 95.5, myself and a couple other members of UMD for Clean Energy will be interviewed about our local campaign.  However, we’re going to also plug the Senate bill, the October 24th 350.org international day of action, and tell people to support both.  95.5 is one of the most popular radio stations in the DC/Prince Georges County area.

More U.S. Leadership Needed

I’ve been critical of the Obama Adminstration’s move to put the climate bill in the Senate on hold while making it work on health care.  In my opinion, besides the greater urgency in the real world for a bill to pass the Senate by Copenhagen (versus the political points of doing health care first), having Congress work on healthcare and climate change bills at the same time splits the progressive community up, since part of it prioritizes working on health care reform, and another part is busy advocating for climate legislation.  A new article in “The New Yorker” magazine by Elizabeth Kolbert highlights how President Obama needs to stop talking about action, and act like passing a climate bill by the end of this year is the short term top priority for him.  Excerpts below.

“n October 13, 1992, the United States became the world’s first industrialized nation to ratify a treaty on climate change. The treaty committed its parties to the important, if awkwardly worded goal of preventing “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.”

“The convention remains in effect, and for the past seventeen years the United States has insisted that it is living up to its terms. Under Bill Clinton, this claim was implausible; the U.S. took no meaningful action to reduce its emissions. Under George W. Bush, it became a bad joke. (When the Bush Administration wasn’t handing out tax breaks to fossil-fuel companies, it was muzzling climate scientists and storming out of international negotiations.) The election of Barack Obama seemed in this, as in so many other areas, to offer a fresh start. A few weeks after his victory, Obama vowed to open a “new chapter” on climate change. And yet, almost a year later, the United States is again—or, really, still—stuck in the same old pattern. We keep saying that we want to be marching at the front of the parade, and then hanging back with the tubas.”

“What would it take for the United States actually to show leadership, instead of just talking about it? First, it would have to impose binding emissions limits of the sort that it has spent the last two decades evading.”

“In contrast to the Kyoto Protocol, which was designed as a sort of warmup exercise (and which the United States never agreed to), this new treaty is supposed to be the real thing: a pact strong enough to avert, as Obama put it, “irreversible catastrophe.” Both China and India, which have long resisted emissions targets, have recently signalled a willingness to make a deal. If the American team shows up in Copenhagen with nothing to offer, though, it’s hard to imagine how such a deal could be struck.”

““Is the U.S. Senate really expecting all the other countries to make a serious effort on climate change at the Copenhagen conference in the absence of a clear commitment from the United States?”

“When the President proposed that Congress take up a climate bill along with health-care legislation and, on top of that, regulatory reform, he made an enormous gamble. This gamble, at some point, could have been called bold; increasingly, it just seems naïve.”

“For the world to avoid “dangerous anthropogenic interference,” the United States is, finally, going to have to live up to the commitments it made under the Framework Convention. And, in order for this to happen, Obama is going to have to move climate change to the top of his agenda—quickly. As the President himself put it last week, “The time we have to reverse this tide is running out.”

Obama to Denmark for Olympics Pitch

I came across an article that President Obama is going to Denmark.  For crucial international negotiations in Copenhagen this December about the next global climate treaty?  Not quite.

“President Barack Obama will travel to Denmark this week to support Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics.”

“Obama would be the first U.S. president to take on such a direct role in lobbying for an Olympics event.”

Well, lets hope he returns this December as the first U.S. president to take on a direct role in lobbying for the most important global treaty in the history of mankind.  If he doesn’t, I sense the activists will really have a field day with this one.

Ontario finalizes Awesome Feed-in Tariff

I had a column out about the incredible potential of the feed-in tariff for the US.  According to Grist writer Paul Gipe, Ontario has just launched the strongest policy in North America, and appears to have a whole host of other admirable commitments.  Notable excerpts below.

“The announcements began with Minister Smitherman opening the Canadian Wind Energy Association’s annual conference in Toronto. At the conference’s plenary session on Monday, Sept. 21, Smitherman revealed a $2.3 billion (CAD) plan to build new transmission and distribution lines in the province to rapidly develop Ontario’s renewable energy potential. 

On Wednesday, Sept. 23, Smitherman announced a special fund to aid development of renewable energy projects by First Nations (Ontario’s indigenous people), community groups, and cooperatives. 

Thursday’s announcement culminates a months-long series of public consultations on the feed-in tariff program. The program now goes live Oct. 1, 2009.”

“The tariffs are precedent setting in North America not only for the number of different technologies listed, but also for the prices offered. Solar energy advocates will be particularly pleased. Ontario’s proposed tariffs, if implemented, will be the highest in North America. For rooftop solar they will be comparable to those offered in Germany and France. 

Ontario is expecting a boom in rooftop solar installations as a result of the program. The province will pay $0.80 CAD/kWh ($0.69 USD/kWh) for electricity from small rooftop solar systems less than 10 kilowatts for a period of 20 years. 

Through the feed-in tariff program, Ontario will also pay the highest prices for wind energy, and biogas in North America. The tariffs represent the best estimates by engineers and economists of what it costs to develop renewable energy under Ontario’s climatic conditions.”

“Ontario plans to close all its coal-fired power plants by 2014. It is the only jurisdiction in North America to make such a commitment. As a result, Ontario has embarked on an ambitious plan to become a leader in renewable energy development to make up the difference in lost power generation.”

Green for All Unleashes Energy Opportunity Fund

I wrote a couple weeks ago about the power of energy efficiency loan funds, and it’s good to see that Green for All’s CEO has posted an accomplishment on Grist of getting a 20 million dollar loan fund up expected to leverage 10 times that amount in private capital.  I’m re-posting what they wrote below.

Opportunity, fully funded

Today, Green For All and Living Cities unveiled the Energy Efficiency Opportunity Fund alongside President Clinton, at the closing session of Clinton Global Initiative’s annual meeting.

The groundbreaking fund will finance innovative efforts that create jobs and cut energy costs for low-income families through energy-efficiency building retrofits.
 

I am proud to say that in addition to advocating for public policies that invest in the clean energy economy, Green For All is now mobilizing private capital to directly create jobs and fight global warming. 

By investing in new models for financing retrofits, the Fund will help catalyze and leverage additional funding from federal, state and local governments, financial institutions, and foundations. 

The Fund creates a unique platform for “triple bottom line” returns, including:

• Profit for investors: A financial return of 2 – 3 percent annually; 
  
• Cuts in global warming pollution: An environmental return in the form of reduced energy consumption and avoided greenhouse gas emissions; and
• Jobs and opportunity for Americans: A social return that saves money and creates jobs for low-income people. 
  

We estimate that when fully deployed, a $20 million fund would leverage approximately $200 million in financing for building energy retrofits. On an annual basis, this would mean:

• 37,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions avoided—the equivalent of more than 4,700 cars taken off the road;
 
  
• 25 percent energy savings on average in 15,000 homes, with total household savings of $6 million;
 
  
• 25 percent energy savings on average in 2,000 commercial/community buildings;
  
  
• 2,500 clean energy jobs, with substantial opportunity for low-income people; and
 
  
• Improved health, increased household income and/or greater worker productivity experienced by 40,000 people.
 
  

The Energy Efficiency Opportunity Fund is an extension of Green For All’s commitment to build a clean-energy economy that is ripe with broad opportunity and shared prosperity for every neighborhood.

In particular, we have been engaging the business community through our Capital Access Program.  Through CAP, we coach emerging clean energy businesses, provide resources for the business community, and now, invest directly in the clean-energy economy.  You can learn more and get involved with CAP here.

Building a better economy for America requires working hand in hand with diverse and unlikely partners: from elected officials to unemployed workers, from businesses to community organizers.  Everyone has a role to play in crafting a clean energy future.

We are so proud to be able to work with businesses and investors to directly create jobs and wealth through clean energy.

Economic opportunity and environmental renewal are now converging through smart investments in people, place, and planet.”

More UMD for Clean Energy Media

I posted a list of some media hits my student group had managed to get in just the first week of school.  We’ve had some more exciting ones as well, which can also be found on our website www.umdforcleanenergy.com

Blog Post in Rethink College Park:  here

“A student based group called UMD for Clean Energy is spearheading a campaign called Green for College Park where they plan to become very actively involved in the upcoming City elections to push forward clean energy policies.”

Interview in Just Up the Pike:  here

“Green for College Park plans to interview all of the candidates running for College Park City Council this fall, but will wait until closer to the election in November before deciding whether to endorse a candidate. If they do choose to back anyone, it won’t necessarily be their fellow Terps who’ve decided to run. “A lot of the organization on this is student-based, but we’re not going to favor student candidates for city council,” says Dernoga.”

Article about our kick-off event in the Diamondback:  here

“The student group, UMD for Clean Energy, is working to mobilize a few hundred students from campus groups in order to draw support for candidates that put the environment near the top of their priorities.”

Article on our participation in a city council work session: here

“The student group, Clean Energy for UMD, pitched a plan last night in which the city would partner with a company to provide loans for residents who wish to add environmentally friendly features — from energy-efficient appliances to solar panels — to their homes at no upfront cost.”

Guest post in the popular blog Climate Progress: here

“This upcoming fall, we’ve decided to get involved in our city’s elections, which take place in College Park, Maryland on November 3rd.  Why now?  At the state level, policies and programs such as the Maryland global warming bill, new energy efficiency standards, an improved Renewable Electricity Standard, and renewable energy rebates are underway.  At the same time, the federal government is investing record amounts of money in clean energy and energy efficiency, and could soon pass a climate change bill that will drive hundreds of billions of dollarsworth of public and private investment into clean energy and energy efficiency over the next decade.”

A guest column in the Diamondback:  here

“Moreover, regardless of what policy the city council finds most appropriate, university students are putting pressure on our local legislators to take action on a host of green policy proposals. We intend to engage all of the candidates in the election about the direction of College Park, including Fellows, so we have a seat at the table afterwards.”

Feed-in Tariff Column

I have a column out today on why a feed-in tariff the a great policy for generating renewable energy that should be considered locally and nationwide.  Also, here is another source for more information on feed-in tariffs.  A couple of corrections, the editors got a little trigger happy here…

-The 1st sentence of the 3rd paragraph was nixedcompletely so, I’m randomly saying “suddenly” with no prior sentence talking about but difference between a feed-in tariff and net metering.  It now looks like I’m talking about net metering in the 3rd paragraph when I’m not.  The first sentence said “Under a feed-in tariff policy, utilities are obligated to buy renewable electricity generated by small-scale installations at a premium rate set by the government over a long period of time.”

- The paragraph on Gainesville got changed in a confusing way, it originally said this..  ”Gainesville County in Florida became the first local government with a feed-in tariff.  Less than a week after introducing the policy, Gainesville hit its cap of 8 megawatts for those 2 years.  For such a small area, that’s solar production on steroids.  The cost to Gainesville’s ratepayers to subsidize the program is 74 cents a month.”

Energy: Feeding the beast

There’s a popular policy in many parts of Europe called a feed-in tariff. Most Americans, even environmental activists, have never heard of it. Under a feed-in tariff policy, utilities are obligated to buy renewable electricity generated by small-scale installations at a premium rate set by the government over a long period of time.

Right now, if I put solar panels on my house, net-metering keeps track of the power I produce versus the power I consume from the utility and charges me for the net amount of power I consume over a certain period of time. The solar power I produce is only worth as much as the electricity the utility is selling to me. What happens if I produce more energy than I consume? I’ll get paid a low price for the excess electricity I’m feeding back to the grid.

Suddenly, the solar panels on my house are making me into a renewable energy entrepreneur, and I have a predictable payback for many years, allowing greater certainty for investment decisions. The entire payback rate and return on investment is now turned upside down.

In cloudy Germany, a homeowner with a rooftop solar system can be paid four times as much for their electricity as a coal-fired power plant. The feed-in tariff’s establishment in 1999 saw Germany producing almost half the world’s solar energy by 2006, with 15 of the largest 20 solar photovoltaic plants located in Germany. Spain set their feed-in rate so high in 2007, projects were getting 575 percent more than the average electricity price. The result was a tidal wave of solar installations, causing Spain to overshoot its 2010 goal of 400 megawatts by installing 3,000 megawatts in 18 months.

The feed-in tariff has just started to take root in the United States. Vermont recently passed a feed-in tariff policy for small-scale renewable energy projects. Some of Wisconsin’s utilities offer feed-in tariffs for certain technologies. California has a version as well. Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, Michigan and Indiana are among states that have recently considered passing feed-in tariff legislation here.

Gainesville, Fla., became the first local government with a feed-in tariff — the city surpassed its 4-megawatt cap for 2009 before the policy officially began. For such a small area, that’s solar production on steroids. The cost to Gainesville’s ratepayers who sign up in the first two years to subsidize the program is 32 cents per kilowatt.

Compared to other incentives for renewable energy, studies by major economic and energy institutions have found the feed-in tariff in European countries has achieved the largest renewable energy deployment at lower costs than other incentives such as tax credits and renewable electricity standards have. As more states consider and pass feed-in tariff policies, the feed-in tariff will become the next major piece of federal clean energy legislation by early next decade.

Maryland should join the fray and pass its own feed-in tariff policy with specific caps, parameters and rates that make sense for our state. The first step would be for a legislator to introduce a bill and start the conversation. This is an opportunity to decentralize energy production and make the clean energy revolution a product of the people. Germany and Spain made up 72.6 percent of demand for worldwide solar production in 2008 — that’s how it’s done.

Matt Dernoga is a senior government and politics major. He can be reached at dernoga at umdbk dot com

Barack Obama’s First Major Speech on Global Warming

Good morning. I want to thank the Secretary-General for organizing this summit, and all the leaders who are participating. That so many of us are here today is a recognition that the threat from climate change is serious, it is urgent, and it is growing. Our generation’s response to this challenge will be judged by history, for if we fail to meet it – boldly, swiftly, and together – we risk consigning future generations to an irreversible catastrophe.

No nation, however large or small, wealthy or poor, can escape the impact of climate change. Rising sea levels threaten every coastline. More powerful storms and floods threaten every continent. More frequent drought and crop failures breed hunger and conflict in places where hunger and conflict already thrive. On shrinking islands, families are already being forced to flee their homes as climate refugees. The security and stability of each nation and all peoples – our prosperity, our health, our safety – are in jeopardy. And the time we have to reverse this tide is running out.

And yet, we can reverse it. John F. Kennedy once observed that “Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man.” It is true that for too many years, mankind has been slow to respond to or even recognize the magnitude of the climate threat. It is true of my own country as well. We recognize that. But this is a new day. It is a new era. And I am proud to say that the United States has done more to promote clean energy and reduce carbon pollution in the last eight months than at any other time in our history.

We’re making our government’s largest ever investment in renewable energy – an investment aimed at doubling the generating capacity from wind and other renewable resources in three years. Across America, entrepreneurs are constructing wind turbines and solar panels and batteries for hybrid cars with the help of loan guarantees and tax credits – projects that are creating new jobs and new industries. We’re investing billions to cut energy waste in our homes, buildings, and appliances – helping American families save money on energy bills in the process. We’ve proposed the very first national policy aimed at both increasing fuel economy and reducing greenhouse gas pollution for all new cars and trucks – a standard that will also save consumers money and our nation oil. We’re moving forward with our nation’s first offshore wind energy projects. We’re investing billions to capture carbon pollution so that we can clean up our coal plants. Just this week, we announced that for the first time ever, we’ll begin tracking how much greenhouse gas pollution is being emitted throughout the country. Later this week, I will work with my colleagues at the G20 to phase out fossil fuel subsidies so that we can better address our climate challenge. And already, we know that the recent drop in overall U.S. emissions is due in part to steps that promote greater efficiency and greater use of renewable energy.

Most importantly, the House of Representatives passed an energy and climate bill in June that would finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy for American businesses and dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. One committee has already acted on this bill in the Senate and I look forward to engaging with others as we move forward.

Because no one nation can meet this challenge alone, the United States has also engaged more allies and partners in finding a solution than ever before. In April, we convened the first of what have now been six meetings of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate here in the United States. In Trinidad, I proposed an Energy and Climate Partnership for the Americas. We’ve worked through the World Bank to promote renewable energy projects and technologies in the developing world. And we have put climate at the top of our diplomatic agenda when it comes to our relationships with countries from China to Brazil; India to Mexico; Africa to Europe.

Taken together, these steps represent an historic recognition on behalf of the American people and their government. We understand the gravity of the climate threat. We are determined to act. And we will meet our responsibility to future generations.

But though many of our nations have taken bold actions and share in this determination, we did not come here today to celebrate progress. We came because there is so much more progress to be made. We came because there is so much more work to be done.

It is work that will not be easy. As we head towards Copenhagen, there should be no illusions that the hardest part of our journey is in front of us. We seek sweeping but necessary change in the midst of a global recession, where every nation’s most immediate priority is reviving their economy and putting their people back to work. And so all of us will face doubts and difficulties in our own capitals as we try to reach a lasting solution to the climate challenge.

But difficulty is no excuse for complacency. Unease is no excuse for inaction. And we must not allow the perfect to become the enemy of progress. Each of us must do what we can when we can to grow our economies without endangering our planet – and we must all do it together. We must seize the opportunity to make Copenhagen a significant step forward in the global fight against climate change.

We also cannot allow the old divisions that have characterized the climate debate for so many years to block our progress. Yes, the developed nations that caused much of the damage to our climate over the last century still have a responsibility to lead. And we will continue to do so – by investing in renewable energy, promoting greater efficiency, and slashing our emissions to reach the targets we set for 2020 and our long-term goal for 2050.

But those rapidly-growing developing nations that will produce nearly all the growth in global carbon emissions in the decades ahead must do their part as well. Some of these nations have already made great strides with the development and deployment of clean energy. Still, they will need to commit to strong measures at home and agree to stand behind those commitments just as the developed nations must stand behind their own. We cannot meet this challenge unless all the largest emitters of greenhouse gas pollution act together. There is no other way.

We must also energize our efforts to put other developing nations – especially the poorest and most vulnerable – on a path to sustainable growth. These nations do not have the same resources to combat climate change as countries like the United States or China do, but they have the most immediate stake in a solution. For these are the nations that are already living with the unfolding effects of a warming planet – famine and drought; disappearing coastal villages and the conflict that arises from scarce resources. Their future is no longer a choice between a growing economy and a cleaner planet, because their survival depends on both. It will do little good to alleviate poverty if you can no longer harvest your crops or find drinkable water.

That is why we have a responsibility to provide the financial and technical assistance needed to help these nations adapt to the impacts of climate change and pursue low-carbon development.

What we are seeking, after all, is not simply an agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions. We seek an agreement that will allow all nations to grow and raise living standards without endangering the planet. By developing and disseminating clean technology and sharing our know-how, we can help developing nations leap-frog dirty energy technologies and reduce dangerous emissions.

As we meet here today, the good news is that after too many years of inaction and denial, there is finally widespread recognition of the urgency of the challenge before us. We know what needs to be done. We know that our planet’s future depends on a global commitment to permanently reduce greenhouse gas pollution. We know that if we put the right rules and incentives in place, we will unleash the creative power of our best scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs to build a better world. And so many nations have already taken the first steps on the journey towards that goal.

But the journey is long. The journey is hard. And we don’t have much time left to make it. It is a journey that will require each of us to persevere through setback, and fight for every inch of progress, even when it comes in fits and starts. So let us begin. For if we are flexible and pragmatic; if we can resolve to work tirelessly in common effort, then we will achieve our common purpose: a world that is safer, cleaner, and healthier than the one we found; and a future that is worthy of our children. Thank you.