Hillary Clinton plans to get \"aggressive\" on climate. Here's what that might look like.

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQQBBGBjDtIBH6DJa80zDBgR+VqlYGaXu5bEJg9HEgAtJeCLuThdhXfl5Zs32RyB I1QjIlttvngepHQozmglBDmi2FZ4S+wWhZv10bZCoyXPIPwwq6TylwPv8+buxuff B6tYil3VAB9XKGPyPjKrlXn1fz76VMpuTOs7OGYR8xDidw9EHfBvmb+sQyrU1FOW aPHxba5lK6hAo/KYFpTnimsmsz0Cvo1sZAV/EFIkfagiGTL2J/NhINfGPScpj8LB bYelVN/NU4c6Ws1ivWbfcGvqU4lymoJgJo/l9HiV6X2bdVyuB24O3xeyhTnD7laf epykwxODVfAt4qLC3J478MSSmTXS8zMumaQMNR1tUUYtHCJC0xAKbsFukzbfoRDv m2zFCCVxeYHvByxstuzg0SurlPyuiFiy2cENek5+W8Sjt95nEiQ4suBldswpz1Kv n71t7vd7zst49xxExB+tD+vmY7GXIds43Rb05dqksQuo2yCeuCbY5RBiMHX3d4nU 041jHBsv5wY24j0N6bpAsm/s0T0Mt7IO6UaN33I712oPlclTweYTAesW3jDpeQ7A ioi0CMjWZnRpUxorcFmzL/Cc/fPqgAtnAL5GIUuEOqUf8AlKmzsKcnKZ7L2d8mxG QqN16nlAiUuUpchQNMr+tAa1L5S1uK/fu6thVlSSk7KMQyJfVpwLy6068a1WmNj4 yxo9HaSeQNXh3cui+61qb9wlrkwlaiouw9+bpCmR0V8+XpWma/D/TEz9tg5vkfNo eG4t+FUQ7QgrrvIkDNFcRyTUO9cJHB+kcp2NgCcpCwan3wnuzKka9AWFAitpoAwx L6BX0L8kg/LzRPhkQnMOrj/tuu9hZrui4woqURhWLiYi2aZe7WCkuoqR/qMGP6qP EQRcvndTWkQo6K9BdCH4ZjRqcGbY1wFt/qgAxhi+uSo2IWiM1fRI4eRCGifpBtYK Dw44W9uPAu4cgVnAUzESEeW0bft5XXxAqpvyMBIdv3YqfVfOElZdKbteEu4YuOao FLpbk4ajCxO4Fzc9AugJ8iQOAoaekJWA7TjWJ6CbJe8w3thpznP0w6jNG8ZleZ6a jHckyGlx5wzQTRLVT5+wK6edFlxKmSd93jkLWWCbrc0Dsa39OkSTDmZPoZgKGRhp Yc0C4jePYreTGI6p7/H3AFv84o0fjHt5fn4GpT1Xgfg+1X/wmIv7iNQtljCjAqhD 6XN+QiOAYAloAym8lOm9zOoCDv1TSDpmeyeP0rNV95OozsmFAUaKSUcUFBUfq9FL uyr+rJZQw2DPfq2wE75PtOyJiZH7zljCh12fp5yrNx6L7HSqwwuG7vGO4f0ltYOZ dPKzaEhCOO7o108RexdNABEBAAG0Rldpa2lMZWFrcyBFZGl0b3JpYWwgT2ZmaWNl IEhpZ2ggU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBLZXkgKDIwMjEtMjAyNCmJBDEE EwEKACcFAmBjDtICGwMFCQWjmoAFCwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQACHgECF4AACgkQ nG3NFyg+RUzRbh+eMSKgMYOdoz70u4RKTvev4KyqCAlwji+1RomnW7qsAK+l1s6b ugOhOs8zYv2ZSy6lv5JgWITRZogvB69JP94+Juphol6LIImC9X3P/bcBLw7VCdNA mP0XQ4OlleLZWXUEW9EqR4QyM0RkPMoxXObfRgtGHKIkjZYXyGhUOd7MxRM8DBzN yieFf3CjZNADQnNBk/ZWRdJrpq8J1W0dNKI7IUW2yCyfdgnPAkX/lyIqw4ht5UxF VGrva3PoepPir0TeKP3M0BMxpsxYSVOdwcsnkMzMlQ7TOJlsEdtKQwxjV6a1vH+t k4TpR4aG8fS7ZtGzxcxPylhndiiRVwdYitr5nKeBP69aWH9uLcpIzplXm4DcusUc Bo8KHz+qlIjs03k8hRfqYhUGB96nK6TJ0xS7tN83WUFQXk29fWkXjQSp1Z5dNCcT sWQBTxWxwYyEI8iGErH2xnok3HTyMItdCGEVBBhGOs1uCHX3W3yW2CooWLC/8Pia qgss3V7m4SHSfl4pDeZJcAPiH3Fm00wlGUslVSziatXW3499f2QdSyNDw6Qc+chK hUFflmAaavtpTqXPk+Lzvtw5SSW+iRGmEQICKzD2chpy05mW5v6QUy+G29nchGDD rrfpId2Gy1VoyBx8FAto4+6BOWVijrOj9Boz7098huotDQgNoEnidvVdsqP+P1RR QJekr97idAV28i7iEOLd99d6qI5xRqc3/QsV+y2ZnnyKB10uQNVPLgUkQljqN0wP XmdVer+0X+aeTHUd1d64fcc6M0cpYefNNRCsTsgbnWD+x0rjS9RMo+Uosy41+IxJ 6qIBhNrMK6fEmQoZG3qTRPYYrDoaJdDJERN2E5yLxP2SPI0rWNjMSoPEA/gk5L91 m6bToM/0VkEJNJkpxU5fq5834s3PleW39ZdpI0HpBDGeEypo/t9oGDY3Pd7JrMOF zOTohxTyu4w2Ql7jgs+7KbO9PH0Fx5dTDmDq66jKIkkC7DI0QtMQclnmWWtn14BS KTSZoZekWESVYhORwmPEf32EPiC9t8zDRglXzPGmJAPISSQz+Cc9o1ipoSIkoCCh 2MWoSbn3KFA53vgsYd0vS/+Nw5aUksSleorFns2yFgp/w5Ygv0D007k6u3DqyRLB W5y6tJLvbC1ME7jCBoLW6nFEVxgDo727pqOpMVjGGx5zcEokPIRDMkW/lXjw+fTy c6misESDCAWbgzniG/iyt77Kz711unpOhw5aemI9LpOq17AiIbjzSZYt6b1Aq7Wr aB+C1yws2ivIl9ZYK911A1m69yuUg0DPK+uyL7Z86XC7hI8B0IY1MM/MbmFiDo6H dkfwUckE74sxxeJrFZKkBbkEAQRgYw7SAR+gvktRnaUrj/84Pu0oYVe49nPEcy/7 5Fs6LvAwAj+JcAQPW3uy7D7fuGFEQguasfRrhWY5R87+g5ria6qQT2/Sf19Tpngs d0Dd9DJ1MMTaA1pc5F7PQgoOVKo68fDXfjr76n1NchfCzQbozS1HoM8ys3WnKAw+ Neae9oymp2t9FB3B+To4nsvsOM9KM06ZfBILO9NtzbWhzaAyWwSrMOFFJfpyxZAQ 8VbucNDHkPJjhxuafreC9q2f316RlwdS+XjDggRY6xD77fHtzYea04UWuZidc5zL VpsuZR1nObXOgE+4s8LU5p6fo7jL0CRxvfFnDhSQg2Z617flsdjYAJ2JR4apg3Es G46xWl8xf7t227/0nXaCIMJI7g09FeOOsfCmBaf/ebfiXXnQbK2zCbbDYXbrYgw6 ESkSTt940lHtynnVmQBvZqSXY93MeKjSaQk1VKyobngqaDAIIzHxNCR941McGD7F qHHM2YMTgi6XXaDThNC6u5msI1l/24PPvrxkJxjPSGsNlCbXL2wqaDgrP6LvCP9O uooR9dVRxaZXcKQjeVGxrcRtoTSSyZimfjEercwi9RKHt42O5akPsXaOzeVjmvD9 EB5jrKBe/aAOHgHJEIgJhUNARJ9+dXm7GofpvtN/5RE6qlx11QGvoENHIgawGjGX Jy5oyRBS+e+KHcgVqbmV9bvIXdwiC4BDGxkXtjc75hTaGhnDpu69+Cq016cfsh+0 XaRnHRdh0SZfcYdEqqjn9CTILfNuiEpZm6hYOlrfgYQe1I13rgrnSV+EfVCOLF4L P9ejcf3eCvNhIhEjsBNEUDOFAA6J5+YqZvFYtjk3efpM2jCg6XTLZWaI8kCuADMu yrQxGrM8yIGvBndrlmmljUqlc8/Nq9rcLVFDsVqb9wOZjrCIJ7GEUD6bRuolmRPE SLrpP5mDS+wetdhLn5ME1e9JeVkiSVSFIGsumZTNUaT0a90L4yNj5gBE40dvFplW 7TLeNE/ewDQk5LiIrfWuTUn3CqpjIOXxsZFLjieNgofX1nSeLjy3tnJwuTYQlVJO 3CbqH1k6cOIvE9XShnnuxmiSoav4uZIXnLZFQRT9v8UPIuedp7TO8Vjl0xRTajCL PdTk21e7fYriax62IssYcsbbo5G5auEdPO04H/+v/hxmRsGIr3XYvSi4ZWXKASxy a/jHFu9zEqmy0EBzFzpmSx+FrzpMKPkoU7RbxzMgZwIYEBk66Hh6gxllL0JmWjV0 iqmJMtOERE4NgYgumQT3dTxKuFtywmFxBTe80BhGlfUbjBtiSrULq59np4ztwlRT wDEAVDoZbN57aEXhQ8jjF2RlHtqGXhFMrg9fALHaRQARAQABiQQZBBgBCgAPBQJg Yw7SAhsMBQkFo5qAAAoJEJxtzRcoPkVMdigfoK4oBYoxVoWUBCUekCg/alVGyEHa ekvFmd3LYSKX/WklAY7cAgL/1UlLIFXbq9jpGXJUmLZBkzXkOylF9FIXNNTFAmBM 3TRjfPv91D8EhrHJW0SlECN+riBLtfIQV9Y1BUlQthxFPtB1G1fGrv4XR9Y4TsRj VSo78cNMQY6/89Kc00ip7tdLeFUHtKcJs+5EfDQgagf8pSfF/TWnYZOMN2mAPRRf fh3SkFXeuM7PU/X0B6FJNXefGJbmfJBOXFbaSRnkacTOE9caftRKN1LHBAr8/RPk pc9p6y9RBc/+6rLuLRZpn2W3m3kwzb4scDtHHFXXQBNC1ytrqdwxU7kcaJEPOFfC XIdKfXw9AQll620qPFmVIPH5qfoZzjk4iTH06Yiq7PI4OgDis6bZKHKyyzFisOkh DXiTuuDnzgcu0U4gzL+bkxJ2QRdiyZdKJJMswbm5JDpX6PLsrzPmN314lKIHQx3t NNXkbfHL/PxuoUtWLKg7/I3PNnOgNnDqCgqpHJuhU1AZeIkvewHsYu+urT67tnpJ AK1Z4CgRxpgbYA4YEV1rWVAPHX1u1okcg85rc5FHK8zh46zQY1wzUTWubAcxqp9K 1IqjXDDkMgIX2Z2fOA1plJSwugUCbFjn4sbT0t0YuiEFMPMB42ZCjcCyA1yysfAd DYAmSer1bq47tyTFQwP+2ZnvW/9p3yJ4oYWzwMzadR3T0K4sgXRC2Us9nPL9k2K5 TRwZ07wE2CyMpUv+hZ4ja13A/1ynJZDZGKys+pmBNrO6abxTGohM8LIWjS+YBPIq trxh8jxzgLazKvMGmaA6KaOGwS8vhfPfxZsu2TJaRPrZMa/HpZ2aEHwxXRy4nm9G Kx1eFNJO6Ues5T7KlRtl8gflI5wZCCD/4T5rto3SfG0s0jr3iAVb3NCn9Q73kiph PSwHuRxcm+hWNszjJg3/W+Fr8fdXAh5i0JzMNscuFAQNHgfhLigenq+BpCnZzXya 01kqX24AdoSIbH++vvgE0Bjj6mzuRrH5VJ1Qg9nQ+yMjBWZADljtp3CARUbNkiIg tUJ8IJHCGVwXZBqY4qeJc3h/RiwWM2UIFfBZ+E06QPznmVLSkwvvop3zkr4eYNez cIKUju8vRdW6sxaaxC/GECDlP0Wo6lH0uChpE3NJ1daoXIeymajmYxNt+drz7+pd jMqjDtNA2rgUrjptUgJK8ZLdOQ4WCrPY5pP9ZXAO7+mK7S3u9CTywSJmQpypd8hv 8Bu8jKZdoxOJXxj8CphK951eNOLYxTOxBUNB8J2lgKbmLIyPvBvbS1l1lCM5oHlw WXGlp70pspj3kaX4mOiFaWMKHhOLb+er8yh8jspM184= =5a6T -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- http://www.vox.com/2015/5/28/8673339/hillary-clinton-climate-policy Hillary Clinton plans to get "aggressive" on climate. Here's what that might look like. Hillary Clinton's advisers say she plans to take "aggressive" steps on global warming if elected president. Here's John Podesta last week <http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2015/05/21/stories/1060018939>: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is "quite" involved in climate change policy as a 2016 presidential candidate and will carry on with President Obama's limits on coal-fired power plants if she is elected, her campaign chairman, John Podesta, said yesterday. ... "I have no doubt that she will move forward with an aggressive program to move the country to a cleaner energy system and do what the United States needs to do to meet the target," he said. But what would an "aggressive program" entail? One place to look is in this big new report <http://wri.org/publication/delivering-us-climate-commitment-10-point-plan-toward-low-carbon-future> by the World Resources Institute. To be clear, the report isn't affiliated with the Clinton campaign at all. But it does lay out, in detail, what policies the next president could pursue to cut US emissions sharply — even without Congress. If Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders or Jeb Bush wants to go big on climate, this would be a place to start. First, the backdrop: As part of the UN climate talks, President Obama has pledged <http://www.vox.com/2014/11/11/7200909/US-china-climate-deal-cutting-emissions> that US greenhouse gas emissions will be 26 to 28 percent lower in 2025 than they were in 2005. That's the "target" Podesta is talking about. The Obama administration has already put out a battery of regulations <http://www.vox.com/cards/obama-climate-plan/what-are-the-obama-administrations-specific-climate-policies> toward that end, like stricter fuel economy standards for cars and the EPA's proposal to curtail CO2 from coal plants. But as the WRI report notes, all of Obama's climate policies so far aren't yet sufficient to hit that big climate goal. (Right now, US greenhouse gas emissions are only about 8 percent below 2005 levels.) So that's where the next president comes in, whether it's Hillary Clinton or whoever else. 10 big things the next president could do to cut emissions — without Congress (World Resources Institute <http://wri.org/blog/2015/05/10-steps-achieve-us-emissions-reduction-target> ) The bulk of the WRI report <http://wri.org/sites/default/files/Delivering_on_the_US_Climate_Commitment_ES.pdf> looks at various policies the next president could pursue to build on Obama's existing regulations and hit or even exceed that 2025 target. Most of these things could be done without Congress, mainly by harnessing the EPA's existing authority to regulate greenhouse gases: 1) Follow through on Obama's Clean Power Plan. This summer, the EPA plans to finalize its Clean Power Plan <http://www.vox.com/cards/obama-climate-plan/what-are-the-epas-carbon-rules-for-existing-power-plants> to curtail CO2 emissions from existing coal-fired plants. The WRI report suggests that the Obama administration strengthen this rule *before* it's finalized, though it concedes this isn't absolutely necessary for the US to hit its 2025 climate target. The Clean Power Plan would then need to survive all legal challenges, and the next administration would have to make sure the rule gets fully implemented. As I've written before <http://www.vox.com/2015/5/5/8542787/climate-change-2016-election>, whoever gets elected president in 2016 will have a ton of leeway over implementation of the power plant rule. Podesta's comments above suggest that Clinton already wants to see these through. So that's step one... 2) Strengthen energy efficiency standards for homes and buildings. Next, the Department of Energy could scale up or tighten various energy efficiency standards for household appliances, residential boilers, commercial ventilation equipment, and so forth. This would help reduce energy demand and CO2 emissions. 3) Expand programs to reduce HFCs. The Obama administration has already begun cracking down on HFCs <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/08/united-states-and-china-agree-work-together-phase-down-hfcs>, a potent greenhouse gas often used in refrigeration and air conditioning. In theory, the next president could direct the EPA to accelerate the phase-out of the worst of these gases and help bolster recycling programs and pursue alternatives. 4) Start regulating industrial CO2 sources. Similarly, the next president could set the EPA loose regulating *other* sources of CO2 emissions. Under Obama, the EPA has only regulated CO2 from vehicles and power plants. But the agency does have the authority to regulate refineries, cement plants, petrochemical plants, and so on. The WRI report suggests that the EPA under the next president could use this power to improve end-use efficiency and fuel switching in the industrial sector and bring down US emissions further. 5) Crack down on methane leaks from oil and gas infrastructure. Again, the EPA has already begun setting standards for methane leaks from new oil and gas wells <http://www.vox.com/2015/1/14/7545377/obama-methane-climate>. The next president could expand this authority to *existing* oil and gas wells as well as other natural gas infrastructure. 6) Expand fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks. Federal fuel economy standards for new cars and light trucks are currently set to keep rising <http://www.vox.com/cards/obama-climate-plan/what-are-u-s-fuel-efficiency-standards-for-cars-and-trucks> each year until they reach 54.5 miles per gallon in 2025. The WRI report points out that the next president could tighten these standards further during the 2017 midterm review, or even extend them further — say, to 63 mpg by 2030. 7) Set new standards for heavy trucks. Similarly, the EPA has already set standards to improve fuel efficiency for medium- and heavy-duty trucks between 2014 and 2018. Either the Obama administration or the next president could extend these standards in the period after that, reducing gasoline consumption. 8) Set CO2 rules for aircraft. Countries around the world are planning to come to some sort of agreement on reducing emissions from flying in the next few years. The WRI report notes that either this administration or the next one could work with the EPA to set a rule to improve the fuel efficiency of new aircraft in the range of 2 to 3 percent annually. 9) Reduce methane from landfills and agriculture. The EPA has already proposed <http://www.vox.com/2015/1/14/7545377/obama-methane-climate>regulations on methane emissions from new landfills. It could go further to restrict emissions from existing landfills and coal mines, as well as look into ways to reduce emissions from agriculture (yes, that means tackling cow burps <http://www.vox.com/2015/1/14/7545377/obama-methane-climate>). 10) Tackle miscellaneous greenhouse gases. On a smaller scale, the WRI notes that the EPA and Department of Energy could likely make inroads on other sources of greenhouse gases, like "off-highway vehicles" or "nitric and adipic acid manufacturing." this wouldn't be world-changing, but it's a small cut that could add up. About 70 percent of these expand on policies that Obama has already set in motion. But some of them, particularly CO2 rules for industrial sectors, would involve brand-new regulations on entire parts of the economy. Far from simple. Add these up, and the US could hit its 2025 goal [image: Next up, oil refineries. (David McNew/Getty Images)] Next up, oil refineries. (David McNew/Getty Images) It depends on how hard the next president wants to push. Many of these regulations are likely to be extremely controversial, so it's far from a given they'll happen. The WRI report models a number of different scenarios here. In one scenario, called "core ambition," the Obama administration finalizes its CO2 rule for power plants and whoever gets elected in 2016 fully implements it. The next president*also* sets new efficiency standards for appliances, bolsters fuel economy rules for trucks, sets new CO2 rules for industry, expands emissions standards for natural gas systems, and cuts down on HFCs. Add it up, and greenhouse gas emissions fall roughly 26 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. The WRI also models another scenario, called "Targeted Sector Push," in which, on top of the above, the next administration strengthens existing CAFE standards for vehicles during the midterm review in 2017 and sets even stricter CO2 regulations for industrial sources, plus some other steps. The result? Emissions fall roughly 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. Granted, there are other outside variables here that could potentially sway US emissions, too. If, say, solar power prices plummet faster than expected, that might push emissions down even further. Or maybe self-driving cars will revolutionize transportation <http://www.vox.com/2014/5/28/5756736/the-case-for-self-driving-cars>. The future's never certain. The point of this paper is to show what an aggressive federal climate policy looks like, given what we know now. Would Clinton actually do any of this? [image: Podesta and Clinton, presumably talking HFC phase-outs. (Ethan Miller/Getty Images)] Podesta and Clinton, presumably talking HFC phase-outs. (Ethan Miller/Getty Images) Well, that's the big question. All Podesta has said is that Clinton would move forward with an "aggressive program" to hit that 2025 emissions target. The WRI report sketches out, broadly, what regulatory steps could meet that goal. But maybe Clinton's thought of options no one else has. Mind you, this analysis also assumes that Congress remains gridlocked on climate change for the foreseeable future. The WRI report points out that there's only so much *any*administration can do on its own to nudge down emissions — particularly for the deeper cuts that will likely prove needed after 2025 for the world to fend off drastic climate change <http://www.vox.com/cards/global-warming/stop-global-warming>. (Of course, other nations will have to respond in kind.) "New federal legislation will likely be needed to drive these deeper reductions," the report notes, "for example, a carbon tax, cap-and-trade program, or national clean energy standards." Some of those legislative policies, like a steadily rising carbon tax, would be more cost-effective than having the EPA continue to regulate CO2 from various industrial sectors, chunk by chunk. In other words, an ambitious climate agenda by the next president could nudge down US emissions quite a bit. An ambitious climate agenda by Congress could go much, much further. Read more: This earlier piece <http://www.vox.com/2015/5/5/8542787/climate-change-2016-election> looks at the flip side — ways in which a more conservative president could dismantle Obama's climate agenda, if he or she so chooses. -- Milia Fisher Special Assistant to the Chair Hillary for America [email protected] o: 646.854.1198 c: 858.395.1741