Put concisely, my fear is that the Administration’s discussion of climate change has a “shiny bobble” quality to it, and that once the (renewed) novelty wears off the political machinery in DC will just grind on with the usual topics of pork and then more pork, intermingled with gamesmanship on debt ceiling rises.

And, no doubt, the GOP will point out that the “solutions” all cost money and that whatever the President proposes will simply be to funnel money to his key constituencies/donors.

Climate change is an issue around which the progressive caucus in American politics will rally, but it then gets transformed into “social justice” and other more nebulous causes.

The more nebulous the cause the more ethereal the solutions seem to become.

US emissions of greenhouse gases did go down - due to the deep recession. As the US economy grows (even if slowly) emissions will tend upwards, though the improved CAFE standards do help.

The President knows the US power generation is turning from coal to natural gas because the latter is so incredibly cheap these days, thanks in part to fracking. Thus there is an on-paper decrease in emissions do to electricity generation.

What happens when (eventually, even if it takes 10 years) natural gas prices go up? Will coal return?

It may seem strange coming from me, since I’ve been writing about climate change here at LGF for quite some time (and in the beginning took quite a beating for it), but I am still skeptical that all this talk about climate change will actually produce meaningful mitigation measures. It might lead to better adaptation planning.