President Obama underscored his commitment to fighting climate change in both his Inaugural Address and his State of the Union Address. Now he has two critical opportunities to turn those words into deeds.
It's up to national leaders across federal agencies to put us on a better and safer course. This will not be easy. But, it is abundantly clear that the longer we wait, the harder - and more expensive - it will be.
When I first started working on climate change a decade ago, we spoke in terms of distant forecasts and long-range impacts. Now we simply look out the window to see what climate change can do to our communities.
As we enter 2013, President Barack Obama faces a major challenge on how to address climate disruption. The nation -- and the world -- are looking to him for bold action and to see whether America will finally take the steps needed to address one of the biggest crises our planet has ever faced.
Okay, it's past Thanksgiving and the election is long over, but a series of ads I saw on television on election night keep playing in my mind. They were about the virtues of coal. Why would such ads stay with me? Let me explain.
In his acceptance speech last night Obama seemed a bit short on specifics for what his second term would mean in the area of policy. His campaign's response to Science Debate's question on climate represents a similar approach.
As consumers fret about the inevitable rise in food prices, the drought is unveiling another, darker threat to the American lifestyle, as it is now threatening electricity supplies. It's time for serious national discussion about renewable energy.
Against this backdrop, Americans from all backgrounds are banding together to act. City by city and state by state, we are making progress. Americans are working together to phase out the dirtiest fuel -- coal -- and we continue to rack up victory after victory.
If suggesting that we upgrade the nation's energy system to reduce carbon emissions leads to partisan sniping, but investing in renewable energy to protect our water brings public agreement, it's a no-brainer about where the focus of the energy discussion must shift.
If we couldn't figure it out ourselves from the freak derecho storm that crippled the Washington area; from the devastating wildfires in Colorado; from the hottest January-June in U.S. history or one of the worst U.S. droughts ever, science once again has shown us the connections.
For many Latinos in these seriously impacted parts of the country and for many who work outside in the heat or live in areas that don't meet clean air rules and are struggling under healthcare costs, the risks of climate change are real.
That's right. Romney and Inhofe would rather let big polluters off the hook than protect our kids from a toxin that causes developmental delays and other serious conditions. So do the 46 Senators who voted on Wednesday to block the mercury and air toxin standards.
With moments of compelling commentary, the EPA forum provided a pressing reminder that there are real victims of our choice to pollute or put up with pollution, and in many instances those victims are from low-income areas.
Americans are behind Obama, in the sense that they support the president's concept of a national clean energy standard. But they're also behind, in the sense that the voting public is unwilling to go as far as the president wants to go because of costs.