Skip to main content

AFPM comments on Obama’s climate change action plan

Hydrocarbon Engineering,

The AFPM president, Charles T. Drevna, has commented on President Obama’s Climate Action Plan.

Keystone XL

‘We welcome the fact that President Obama seems to be finally acknowledging the value of the Keystone XL pipeline. However, actions speak louder than words. We hope his statement means the State Department will immediately approve the pipeline, since several environmental reviews concluded the building Keystone XL will lead to fewer greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than if we did not build it. Moving ahead on this project is critical for creating thousands of jobs, as well as maintaining and strengthening America’s national and economic security.’

Winners and losers

‘Unfortunately, the overall plan is poised to once again pick winners and losers among energy producers, but at the end of the day, the biggest loser will be the US economy. If world action is dependent on the United States taking the lead, as advocates of fossil fuel energy rationing have claimed, then why haven’t nations with poor environmental standards followed our lead in reducing GHGs and other emissions over the last 12 years?

‘Our air is cleaner than it has been in more than 20 years and yet, in far too many cities abroad, the air is easier to chew than it is to breathe. While the President is paying lip service to the fact that GHG emissions here are the same as GHG emissions abroad, he is still talking about unilateral measures to ration energy regardless of whether or not he is able to gain international cooperation. Despite leading most of the world in air quality, President Obama appears ready to implement additional costly regulations that will produce little if any tangible benefits. His plan will give a competitive advantage to less environmentally friendly nations, including Russia and China, which are unlikely to significantly retool their economies to address environmental concerns.

‘Ironically, the President’s proposal ignores his own regulatory contradictions and also makes claims with little basis in fact. He claims to have a goal of reducing GHG emissions, but is moving forward with Tier 3 gasoline and other stationary source regulations that will increase such emissions. He also expresses support for the RFS, despite data from EPA and the National Academy of Sciences showing that the broken ethanol mandate will increase GHG and other criteria pollutant emissions.

‘Additionally, it is specious at best to make the link between asthma and GHG emissions. The Administration’s own data shows that since 1980, emissions of pollutants linked to asthma have decreased 63%, while GHG emissions in that time period increased 21% before stabilising and then decreasing over the last decade. Not only does this show there is no correlation between the two, but regulations to reduce asthma causing pollutants requires more energy use, once again increasing GHG emissions. The President cannot have it all ways.’

Adapted from press release by Claira Lloyd.

Read the article online at:


Embed article link: (copy the HTML code below):