Vanderbilt Political Review Fall 2013 | Page 20

DOMESTIC pointed to these levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as evidence that action needs to be taken immediately, regardless of the uncertain economic consequences. However, these same statistics could be cited by opponents as evidence that if climate change is a real and legitimate phenomenon, then we have already gone too far, and the United States should be more concerned with expanding the economy than reaping environmental benefits that won’t be palpable for centuries to come. Ultimately, this criticism could doom President Obama’s plan to political obscurity, especially if he is succeeded by a Republican in 2016. Consider also the herculean amount of infrastructure it would take to meet the Climate Action Plan’s goal of reducing U.S. emissions to seventeen percent below 2005 levels by 2020. Vanderbilt Earth and Environmental Sciences Professor Jonathan Gilligan specializes in climate science. According to his algorithm based on historical U.S. de-carbonization trends and statistics provided by the Energy Information Agency: “Achieving a seventeen percent reduction below 2005 by 2020 while sustaining our economic growth would require building 147 new nuclear power plants, or 33,000 solar-thermal generation facilities, or installing 134,000 new wind turbines or some combination of all three between now and 2020. That would 20 VANDERBILT POLITICAL REVIEW mean building roughly twenty one nuclear power plants per year, 4,700 solar-thermal plants per year, or installing almost 20,000 wind turbines per year from 2014-2020.” Given the astronomic proportions of these requirements, the second and third objectives of the plan, “Prepare the United States for the Impact of Climate Change,” and “Lead International Efforts to Combat Global Climate Change and Prepare for its Impacts,” might well be the most substantial elements of the 2013 proposal. Preparing the United States for the consequences of a warming planet includes directing agencies to support local development of storm and flood-resistant communities, especially in the regions affected by Hurricane Sandy. More importantly, farmers throughout the nation will benefit substantially from the plan’s strategy to spread science-based knowledge about sustainable agriculture practices. Given that nine of the ten hottest years on record have occurred since the late 1990’s, better technology will be crucial to sustaining U.S. agriculture as droughts and floods intensify. So how will the plan be received abroad? While the United States is the greatest per-capita contributor of greenhouse gases, China emits the most total carbon dioxide—a whopping twenty three percent of the world’s emissions. One of the great strengths of Obama’s most recent plan is its pledge to lead international ef- forts. These efforts have already proven effective in the form of five new initiatives signed with China in July that compel the U.S.-China Climate Change Working Group to work more closely on meeting energy efficiency standards and developing clean energy. Likewise, the plan’s initiatives with other major emitters such as Brazil and India will be of crucial importance. As is the case with any new policy, the real test will be how effectively the Obama administration can ignite change worldwid K?[????\??]H[?]Y??]\??&H?Z[\?H??]Y?HH?[????????[? NNM??[Xx?&\?[???\??\?\?[??[?H?X?H\??Y??K[??[?][?^[\H?]?[?[???][??\?\??B????X?K??]?\?Y?HX???^H??\?\?\?[?\?H?]?[?\??H?[?\????H??\?[??Y?\?H[???[??[Y[??H??]Y?H???X?][?\??YH]??[??\??\?H??\??H??[?\?Y\?]?\?[\???X?H?\??\??HY??X?]?[?\???H?\?Y[?8?&\??]?[???H[YB??[[ ???[?\?Y[??[Xx?&\??[X]HX?[?[?X?X[H[XY?HB?X???^H\??[Y\??\??\X?X?[????\??Y[?[???[Y???]\??Z[K\??Z[\?H??[Y?[?H\?Y?X?K???[?H[?]Y?]\??&HY?\??[?\??\??H??[[?[Y[???\??H[?H?\?Z[?X?H?]\?K?Y? ??H???[???X?????HHYX\? ?? ?[Z[?\?Y[??[XH\?[?[??\??Y[?[\?????\??[^HX???