ultimately, and most importantly, climate change is about health. carbon pollution and hotter weather can lead to longer allergy seasons, contribute to the spread of insect borne i illness and worsening smog. the good news is that we can do something about this. you know, the climate change cannot be solved over change. it is going to take a broad, n concerted effort. but we cannot afford to delay. we can successfully face the challenge of climate change if we work together and act now. the action we will discuss today is an important step in that process. again, i would like to thank you very much for being here today.

and my colleagues and i look forward to hearing your comments. i am going to wrap up by doing something i should have done at the beginning and i apologize for delaying. i know you were thinking you were listening to a nameless bureaucrat, but i am joseph goffman and counsel member for air and radiation. and now i will turn it over to john millet. >> thank you. good morning, everybody. and thanks again for joining us. before i turn over to you, i want to walk through there part of the clean air acting the epa will be using to reduce the pollution from the coal power plants. as we listen to your ideas and

approaches, we will be thinking about how they fit under this section of the law. president obama has directed the epa to issue a proposal by june of 2014 and take final action by 2015. greenhouse gases are air pollutants at are subject to regulation under the clean air act. we have the authority under section 1-11 of that law and it sets out separate approaches to addressing new sources of pollution. and new sources, epa standards of performance, call nspf, this is the proposal that was signed on september 20th and is available on epa's website for review. this type of standard must

reflect the degree of the limitation acheviable through the best system. now source standards address the six common pollutants, but not air toxins. for existing sources covered under section 1-11 d, the subject of this listening section, epa doesn't set ix -- explicit standards -- we set guidelines and companies use them to set their policy while getting the necessary pollution reductions. section 1-11 d is reserved to address other pollutants that are not covered. greenhouse gases, including pollution are covered under the

section. most have been shutdown for new, modified or reconstructed sources. few regulations have been iss d issued. the guidelines establish binding obligations for the states to address the carbon pollution. last month, epa posted a document setting out a number of key questions to guide public decision on our website. we will have that as we start to craft the proposal. two questions are fundamental and good to keep in mind for today. they are what should had epa consider in setting standards and goals to reduce pollution associated with fossil fuel power plants.

and secondly, because the guidelines might show how the state plans to meet the goal, what should that timeframe be? some states show the leadership may range from action taken at the power plant like switching fuel to other programs like energy eefficiency in homes and businesses. it can affect the electricity and that will affect their emissions. we know there are a lot of ideas about getting reductions from the power plants. so today, and in the coming weeks, let us know what is important to you. what do you think the epa should improve in the carbon guidelines for existing power plants and why? do you have suggestion on what

might help to reduce the gases from power plants? we want to hear about what programs to reduce should the epa explore. we are interested in what can be directly at the plants. and in what could be done in other places throughout the system that could potentially reduce the pollution. how can we incorporate this approaches? what makes sense? if you have experience with energy efficiency and renewable programs that might help reduce the greenhouse emissions share with us what you have learned and tell us what we should keep in mind. we look forward to hearing from you. you may share in writing and information is at the registration tables out front. before we get started, let me fill you in on ground rules and housekeeping. i will be the one to call the

speakers to the micrmicrophone pairs. state your name and affiliation before beginning. please limit them to three minutes each and remain at the micr microphone until all of the speakers have finished. if yuld you would like to submit in writing, give a copy to the staff out front. and you may e-mail your ideas to carbon pollution input at epa dot gov. the yellow light will come on at the two minute mark and when you see the red-light you will be asked to stop.

we will take a break 12-1 and as needed throughout the day. if you would like to make remarks, but haven't registered, please see the table. we ask for your patience as we go through the list. finally, if you need any help getting around this building or around the locale, please see any of the helpful folks out there. they will all be there to assist you and direct you. once again, thanks on behalf of myself and everyone here. i will call the names. first gale bush.

and michael heard. please come up to the front table. >> my name is gale bush and i am here as a volunteer and representation of the american lung association and someone who has worked in the health industry for over 20 years. i am hear to hopefully encourage you to implement the same starnt standards for the existing power

plants. i see our inpatient volume increases whether when the air pollution is high. i see the impact the air quality has on patients. we are impacted by having to implement changes within the hospital because of the in-patient admission. we can be penalized because of the readmission and that is impacted by the poor health. we cannot do anything do manage what they are exposed to outside in the environment. so i am hear to encourage you to continue the work you are doing and try to implement the same standards for the existing power plants to help reduce the impact of carbon pollution. >> thank you very much.

>> i am michael heard and the business manager in baltimore and district of columbia. i represent 700 active and retired filmmakers in the district of columbia. and internationally we have 60,000 members and our work is involved in fossil fuel plants. i would like to thank you for holding this. i have been a business manager for six years, work was prominent when i started. internationally we worked to get the standard up so we could put quality pollution control on the plants. there is a lot of technology out there that can reduce the amount

of admissions into the environment and we were going in that direction. the utilities were putting that work into the their existing power plants. my concern is in the past two years, since 2011, the work has dropped off from our members. you know we are talking about -- everybody is talking about creating jobs. we are loosing them by not putting these retrofit controls on the plants so that americans can continue to work in this country doing american work. as far as that is concerned, you are looking at already 50,000 megawatts. that is a lot of power plants. and with the new rules in june, it will have more closures and

more american jobs. good, high paying jobs with health benefits. my concern is that it seems drastic, the standards they put on keeping the coal fire plant is the same as the gas fire plants, what they admit is different, but if you put the right controls on the plants, you can get close to that. also, with the restrictions being put on our country, with all of the closures something needs to be looked at globally. they are polluting into the atmosphere with no control equipment whatsoever. it seems redundant to charge us

with penalties. if you shut all of them done, what will you replace with? there is a lot of coal in this country. when you close down a power plant people think 50 guys lost th their job. but the people around there are affected as well. there is a trickle down effect there. i believe something needs to be done. as far as the standards and the limits they are putting on coal i think with the technology today and all of the scrubbers and stuff we can put on there,

and you can look at carbon capture which is a great technology to keep it from going up into the atmosphere when you put them into the ground. with that, i believe i am rambling, but it hits me deep because i am looking at loosing a lot of members a year. and someone needs to do something to bring the fossil fuel back. >> thank you very much for your perspecti perspectives. appreciate it. our next two speakers, david scott first and then next is greg burleson. >> we will work with our timer

this time. >> has my time started? my name is david scott and i am president of the national sierra club. morning. i appreciate the opportunity to speak to you about why the sierra club strongly supports the epa efforts to tackle carbon pollution from existing power plants. make no mistake these are a first step in addressing the most important challenges of our time.

and immediate action to slash and end that carbon pollution is the only way to assure that future generations inherit a habitable planet. additionally science -- scientists and doctors warn us the earth warms unhealthy levels of ozone pollution or smog will increasingly become more widespread. higher small levels mean more cases of respiratory ama such as childhood asthma and lung diseases. according to the american lung association 154 million

americans half of our nation's population already suffer from unsafe levels of air pollution. holding operators of 30 power plants accountable for the carbon pollution they emit will mean less disease reduce health care costs and a better quality of life for tens of millions of americans. the fastest possible transition to a more energy-efficient economy and clean energy sources such as wind and solar power will not only cut the risk of catastrophic climate disruption but also create incentives for innovation that will create good new jobs in the clean energy economy. detecting workers must be an urgent priority. we flatly reject the notion that protecting human health and environment the environment are incompatible with a healthy economy. poll after poll demonstrates the public supports the implementation of the clean air act protections and wants epa to do its job to protect public health and confront the growing threat of climate disruption.

young young voters in particular recognized the threat and the recent poll showed 80% of young voters support the president taking action to address the threat of climate change. in closing we strongly support epa effort to clean up dangerous carbon pollution and applaud this first step in the transition to a clean energy economy. >> thank you. >> good morning. on behalf of the national association of manufacturers i am pleased to offer the following remarks for the environmental protection agency's greenhouse glass -- guess regulations for generating units. manufactures are committed to protecting the environment and greater sustainability increased energy efficiency and conservation in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. make no mistake the regulation we are discussing today is about energy. how we generated, whether we can

rely on a steady and secure supply of it how much it will cost households and businesses to consume it. energy is the life of the manufacturing a manufactures consume one third of the nation's energy. the cost availability and reliability of energy directly impacts manufacturers ability to compete in the global economy. today is the technological advancements in genetic manufactures and energy producers a diverse mix of energy resources energy is a bright spot for manufacturing united states pre-manufactures make investments in united states in energy is the main reason why. if done the wrong way this revelation will threaten energy reliability increase costs for manufacturers and in turn -- return a competitive advantage into a disadvantage. as the epa develops this regulation manufactures encourage you to consider two important limits. first there is a limit to what the law permits in the

controlling statute the clean air act. in attempt to expand beyond what the law allows would lead to delays in costly litigation and regulatory uncertainty that will stifle growth and manufactures have been and will continue to be the drivers of the newer and cleaner technologies that we need to need know the rules of the game. weird cpa to carefully consider what is legally permissible to avoid years of regulatory uncertainty with this policy. we contingently the clean air act is the wrong tool for addressing greenhouse gas emissions and a belief supported by a statute. second there are limits to what is achievable. powerplant technologies are remarkable. today's plans can generate more electricity for fewer resources than ever before and do so in an environmentally friendly way. like all to knowledge he there are limits. drafting a regulation that requires more than what technology allows using existing plants with one choice shutting down. let's not take any energy

options off the table that will cut manufacturing jobs in the process. with the right policies and access to affordable and reliable energy manufactures the united states will continue developing sustainable solutions that will fuel job creation and drive economic growth. thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. >> thank you. our next two speakers are on at the and james. a. >> good morning and thank you

for the opportunity. my name is monica and i'm here speaking on behalf of the over 180,000 members of the clean air force. a community dedicated to clean air and children's health. as a member of the team working monitoring our social media channels and e-mail accounts i have the privilege of interacting with many of our members on a daily basis. hearing their stories and providing them with resources encouragement and feedback. i sit here today on behalf of all of our members. the stories i hear of those plagued with asthma especially children have struck me the most. whether it's north carolina preteen sisters raven and destiny severe asthmatics who had experienced their hot worsted symptoms during hyatt owns of days or -- whose pediatrician prescribes steroids when media experiences the flareup of her symptoms.

she calls them the crying medicine because they cause her to have nightmares angry outburst in episodes of uncontrollable tears. ray then destiny and mia are the tip of the iceberg. over 7 million children suffer from asthma and the united states. this number is growing. in june 2010 study from the center for disease control showed an increase in asthma for all ages from 2001 to 2009. how do we reverse these numbers? how do we ease the suffering of future generations when it comes to this chronic disease? reducing carbon pollution is a critical first step. power plants our nation's largest source of carbon pollution with 40% of our nation's carbon dioxide emitted from power plants. carbon pollution is causing global warming and hotter weather means more ozone. more ozone in turn causes more lung damage and children's lungs in particular. more locally here in d.c. the

air received an f waiting for a zone at converting to the lung association 2013 report putting the health of thousands of children at risk. we know what we can and should do. the obvious way to start is with the largest individual source of carbon pollution, power plants. let's set meaningful life saving standards for all power plants that exist in our country today. sydney generally reducing the deadly carbon pollution emitted unchecked and breathed in by vulnerable lungs. this support is evident. over the past few months more than 13,000 members have commented in support of news source carbons standards and in favor of stronger climate regulations. and would likely show additional enthusiasm for standards that you more immediate results. on behalf of the over 180,000 members including raven destiny

and mia i urge you to set strong and meaningful pollution standards for existing power plants. let's make the united states and easier place for future generations to breathe. generations were counting on to run this country someday. these future generations and their lungs will thank you. >> thank you. >> i am herbert nelson the director of the office of public witness here in wishing to d.c.. i am pleased to be here today representing our denomination but also representing the work we are doing with creation justice ministries the national equal justice program. environmentalist activists and others who are in the same place

looking at reducing carbon pollution. the united states is producing more greenhouse gases than any country in the world. yesterday the world meteorological organization announced the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere reached a new record in 2012. according to the environmental protection agency, your agency 40% of united states pollution and 67% of direct emissions reported under the greenhouse gas report. the general assembly presbyterian church usa entitled power to change, u.s. energy policy and global warming states emphatically that we both have a spiritual and moral responsibility to address the issues related to global warming in order to do this we believe that attendance is required are

biblical understanding that calls people and nations to stop the actions contrary to god's desires for the sustainability of human life while turning to a new way of living that promotes life more abundantly. god can give us the power to change it we do believe that. at the core of this understanding is the belief that the psalmist was right in the bible when he wrote in psalm 21 the earth is the lord's and the fullness thereof and those who live within it. therefore we call upon this administration as well as the united states congress to look at the possibilities in encouraging decentralized and distributed power generation. renewable energy systems distributed generations of community wind farms can relieve asher on the power grid create new jobs and empower local communities. we ask a moratorium on all new coal-fired and nuclear power plants take place until related

environmental concerns are addressed. thirdly we ask the limited exploration and exploitation of new fossil fuels across the nation where this can be done without adverse effects on people and environment. today we believe this environmental protection agency is a great first step. we believe all nations should share in restoring the burdens of the blessings the creator has given us in this world. thank you. >> thank you. our next two commenters bill and frank. >> good morning.

i am here on behalf of the coalition for innovative climate solutions. the coalition for innovative climate solutions is a group of forward-thinking electric generating companies and electric service providers located across the country. our members reflect a diverse geography and widely varying energy resources and regulatory frameworks. there are eight companies representing all aspects of the electric industry from the integrated electric utilities public power electric cooperatives and merchant power companies doing business in 15 states. if epa develops its regulations to establish greenhouse gas standards for the power sector and her goal is to provide epa and the states with constructive input on how best to set such standards so as to achieve meaningful reductions for a process that is legally defensible economically rational one workable across geographic and regulatory landscape.

our members have experience in implementing these local and regional measures that achieve significant reductions. our guiding principles for in developing his regulations for existing sources under section 111d is epa must recognize the primacy of the states in setting the standards and implementing their programs. second, you must encourage the states to be flexible and promote innovation. you have to love the states eliza wide range of measures to achieve the greenhouse gas emission reductions. any of our members have achieved dramatic reductions in the past 15 years or measures and policies in cooperation with their states. you have to recognize the broad regional diversity and the opportunities available to the states electric generating companies amongst our coalition we have operations from oregon to kentucky louisiana to north dakota and minnesota to new jersey. one size cannot fit all.

and forth we have to allow the state the benefit of the measures and programs they have already undertaken to address climate change. we support an approach that builds on the years of hard work and innovation that leverages existing state programs by allowing the states to develop a portfolio of measures appropriate to each stage. existing source ring house gaskin achieved the deepest reductions will minimizing economic dislocations paid within electric industries and most cost-effective mission reductions obviously will curry and nonemitting sources in downstream activities. epa's authority under section 111 of the clean air act is limited. epa cannot require the states to adopt programs such as renewable standards energy efficiency programs or intrastate cap-and-trade programs. epa can recognize such measures in the programs may be more effective than the states can implement these programs. we think these flexible programs will result in the greatest reductions at the lowest cost

that can be achieved through the federal program. thank you. >> thank you. just reminder to the speakers please talk into the mic as closely as you can. >> my name is frank hart a. a. >> i'm sorry. >> my name is frank with the international brotherhood of boilermakers in virginia. we represent about 1000 workers in the state of virginia and also west virginia. a lot of our guys make a living by repairing buildings and maintaining power plants and also constructing these epa required devices that take out the pollutants.

we recognize the need to keep the air claims and we feel like these requirements are going to be too strenuous on on the owners that have put billions of dollars into these plants to clean them up as much as they can to this point. technology is starting to catch up with the part of cool that we haven't been able to figure out yet the carbon capture and sequestration. we do know that they it can be done but right now, we know that coal was her greatest natural resource and we can't just shove it off to the side at this point. we are the saudi arabia of coal and again there are a lot of things we can do but these owners are going to need more time to bring their plants into compliance but they're also going to need to have a little bit of help from you guys and allowing them to come up with these plans that will bring

sequestration into play and solve this issue with carbon. if we shut down all of our coal-fired power plants or don't allow any more it's not going to be a will to keep up with with the 50,000 megawatts laws. the wind and solar projects are slow to bring us up to that's badger but nonetheless we do field this is a job-killing proposition for a lot of evil through the coal industry and i really do feel there are a lot more jobs affected by this than you guys realize. >> thank you. >> the next two on the panel will be set field and samantha.

e. good morning. my name is seth -- >> closer to the mic if you can. >> good morning. my name my name is seth field and i live in virginia. i've retired a month ago after 35 year career in the department of justice. i did not work on environmental issues and i never really thought of myself as an environmentalist until a few years ago. i became more informed and aware about local warming and climate change and i'm here today on my own initiative. no one is paying me and i don't represent anyone other than myself as a concerned citizen and a parent and perhaps someday a grandparent.

i'm also after a retired enrolled in the program at johns hopkins university studying for a master's degree in energy policy and climate. i'm in my first semester and i have homework. i was doing it the other way -- day. distinguished archer who wrote a textbook on global warming. he's a notional it is at the university of chicago university of chicago and i knew i was getting ready for coming here today. i came across a sentence that i thought i had to bring up today. the future of the earth's climate depends mostly on what happens to coal and you might as well have said the future of human civilization depends on what happens to coal. we all know that science tells us that coal burning and carbon oxide emissions are causing enormous problems for the country and for the world and are going to cause even more.

when i hear manufactures and the electric power industry and the coal industry argue against taking any significant action we hear a lot about jobs and we hear a lot about the economy but they frequently fail to address the problems that are already happening and they're going to happen even more seriously in the future from global warming caused in large part by carbon dioxide emissions. justin august ceo of a group called the american coalition for clean coal electricity complained about epa standards. he said they are going to to kill jobs and they talked about all the pollutants that have been cleaned up so far by the coal industry but he did not mention carbon dioxide. you can't just ignore the problem of carbon dioxide and you cannot wish away the problem of global warming. these are serious issues and

science tells us what needs to be done. the coal industry and electric the electric power industry have had lots of time to get ready for this. they have really not taken this seriously and i urge the epa to take strong actions to reduce carbon dioxide pollution. thank you. >> thank you. >> my name is samantha and i met pediatrician and alexander of virginia they fellow at the american pediatrics and i'm here on behalf of the aed two express our support of the standards for existing power plants. we thank the epa for giving us the opportunity to speak out today for children on the critical issue of carbon pollution and resulting climate disruption. children are one of the most vulnerable groups of the adverse effects of climate change critically to the world health organization more than 80% of the current health burden due to

climate change occurs in children less than five years old. these health impacts include the broad effects of weather disasters increases in range shifts in climate sensitive infections increases in allergic and asthmatic diseases for and security and increased heat related deaths. the reasons for the unique vulnerability of children to the climax to change. allergies are different than adults. they even have more food and breathe more air per human body weight than adults and experience greater exposure to environmental and infectious toxins. the bathers of children are different. they spend more time outside during the peak hours of the day children are more vulnerable to the changes in air quality as well as insect infection disease. children are dependent on the caregivers for safety and as their proxies in decisions such as this which will have a great impact on their future. lastly children are still developing adverse impacts and physiologic effects that will last like on.

the impact of early life experiences and environments on lifelong health has been called biologic embedding and results in the development of cardiovascular disease diabetes and hypertension and cancers. i would like to discuss briefly some children's choose life soup soup -- children whose lives have been affected due to increasing climate change. 2005 hurricane katrina devastated new orleans and cause the largest displacemdisplacem ent or nations history including 163,000 children. children as young as four experienced weeks of such ration from caregivers suffer suspected abused by strangers and homeless shelters and years of homelessness in school instability. approximately 40% of new orleans children develop significant mental health problems as a result and this is taken along time to resolve. his weather disasters hit communities with greater frequency due to climate change for families of children will bear the burden of his experiences such as this. i'm a change is also influencing infectious disease patterns

could west nile disease is endemic in united states and lyme disease-carrying ticks -- canada. valley fever is caused by fungus highly sensitive to heat immunity. emily is a young girl in california who attracted valley fever when she was six and required treatment for over a year but remains at risk as most patients do. and summary climate is a major threat to children and as states across the row. we applaud the epa for taking this crucial step to protect the future of children by reducing carbon emissions on existing power plants. thank you. >> thank you. >> the next two we have todd keller and pearl mitchell.

>> good morning. thank you very much for allowing us to do this. i know you guys have had a long day today. my name is todd keller and i'm with the advanced energy economy as their vice president of federal affairs. we support the environmental protection agency's effort to -- to the cleaner. developing these standards we urge the epa to provide maximum flexibility to incorporate advanced energy technologies and services into their implementation plans. as a national association of business leaders whose companies are making global energy systems more secure clean and affordable we believe establishing standards in this manner will move the united states toward a higher performing energy system for the 21st century. thanks to technology and innovation we now have more

options in energy needs than ever before in history. we call those two options at dance energy. as documented in the report economic impacts of advanced energy is more than a 1 trillion-dollar industry worldwide and the u.s. advanced energy revenue grew an estimated 19% from 2,112,012 to $157 billion. advanced energy represents an opportunity to create prosperity across the economy as we modernize or methods of producing managing and using energy. the same time advanced energy provides a wide range of technologies products and services that can reduce greenhouse gas emissions as we define it. advanced energy includes energy efficiency demand response solar wind natural gas electric generation hydronuclear electric vehicles by a few smart grid and more. these technologies and service provide states with an array of cost-effective options as they develop implementation plans to

meet the epa's standards in greenhouse gas emissions. in closing we believe that designing for standards to allow the states the flexibility to incorporate these technologies and services into their implementation plans are simply good policy. such flexibility is the best approach for achieving a cost-effective ring house gas reduction for power plants and the power sector across the country. thank you very much. >> good morning. my name is earl mitchell and i live in springfield virginia. let's start with what webster says about pollution. a harmful chemical or waste material discharge into the water and atmospheric to make unclean in pure corrupt contaminant dirty. what we are really discussing today is how dirty do we want to

make a planet? the burning of coal the dirtiest carbon fuel actually harms both the air and water. my remarks will concern water. case in point, the solid residue from burning coal is known as coal ash into stored in man-made ponds. in december 2008 tda federal utility said that containment spilled more than 1 billion gallons of toxic waste including lead arsenic and saletti him which polluted over 300 acres of private farmland into rivers. ..

it was contaminated with chemicals and dies. you can look downstream to determine what color cloth they were producing that day. after about three quarters of a mile, the stream dumped in to the cove. cove -- is an ideal anchorage for small boats. well protected on three sides with a narrow entrance. not much title -- tidal action. i shall say clams to most of you folks. whenever you get --

whoever you order clam chowered it's made with these and not soft shell claims. as many as 2 -- kept it tied up in the cove. they had to travel to the main body of water for the bay to work. as you see, the cove was cleared off limits during the '40s to the fishing by the state of rhode island due to heavy pollution. it took place before the clean water act. i visited there this summer. i went cove while there. i stood on a hill high above the cove and gazed back and thought of the earlier times. i thought of the cohoggers. i became sad. the cove is still polluted. the.

>> it's time to wrap up. >> 50 years has passed and the pollution remains. it's the end result in the weak environmental laws. let's work to make the ruling as strong as we can. otherwise we'll have many coves all over the nation. it is in your power to make it happen. remember that clean air and water are necessary to sustain life. and yes, i was -- i would be happy to explain the trade to you during the break. >> thank you very much, both of you. we'll call the next two, please. patricia and ashley.

remember to speak in to the mic. >> any name is trish tricia. i'm behalf here on creation justice ministries representing 37 christian dominations and the policy relating to care. our members exist on a wide spectrum from methodist to baptist and orthodox tradition. we do not agree on many things. what we do agree on; however, is the necessity to care for god's creation and for god's people. this morning, right outside of those walls, the faith community hosted a blessing to bring thoughts and prayers to this important process. standing in the overcast -- 28 people who care deeply about our planet and the help of all people gathered stoght.

-- together. it was time to reflect on a great gift god has given us as well as the responsibilities that come with them. as steward of the land we are called to care for creation and ensure we leave our planet better for future generations. the faith community has sought to address climate change for more than two decade. we believe it's the greatest moral issue of our time. sustainable and renewable practices must be implemented. meeting our own present needs should not prevent our children and our children's children from meeting their needs. we're looking for cooperation between the epa w states and utility to protect god's planet and people in a way that makes sense and meets various needs. we need strict emissions reductions standards to reduce pollution, but these standards also need to recognize the city of culture and economies.

the epa should do all it can to guarantee that prices do not skyrocket and we urge the epa, states, and you till to prioritize plans that protect low-income consumers from disproportionate and large increases in utility bill. we have a responsibility to care for our neighbors and ensure they do not carry heavy burden from the necessary changes. this carbon rule needs reduce emissions by 35 to 40% in order keep the u.s. on pace with the international commitment weapon urge you to require existing power plant to reduce the emission by at least the necessary 35 to 40%. we owe this change to our brothers and sisters around the world who are already suffering at the hand of climate change as well as to those that come after us. because for heaven's sake the time for climate justice is now. >> thank you.

>> my name is ashley got. i'm a pastor. 50,000 honey bees called a backyard called it homes. three honey beehives are part of the urban garden. our honey bees pollinate the vegetable and fruit along with the garden along with the forest next to us, rock creek park. the eggplant, peppers, basil and beans goes to create meal for open table. our lunch every sunday afternoon for 40 hungry neighbors. on sundays our garden is alive. honey bees buzzing around pollen

and hungry neighbors munching on the goods. on that moment our backyard is host and home. to living beans our society thinks are dispiece of equipmentble. honey bees are threaten by colony class disorder a disorder created by humans. hungry people are the most socially vulnerable of humanity starving off the lack of access to affordable food. we designed our backyard because the trust in the holy one. and with a moral vision our garden symbolizes how we're to live of people's god ways and shows what we live for. osama bin laden and right now the planet is poor from climate pollution impacting humans and insect like the honey bee. the greek word for house or house hold and it's also root

for the wood ecologist and economics. for christians of the ancient church, oikos is not limited to the private home but referring to the planet itself as the whole house. god's home. oikos sets the intention in how to ab sacred neighbor. we are shared household where all who are born belong and all who live cohabit. the role of the epa is to real late the commons. we are doing just that. tending our ecolocation with the intentional to reflect our place in society and god's home. having no national car -- carbon limits.

>> thank you. >> the next two are james -- and. >> good morning my name is james and the treasurer and member of the board board of directors building tools. it's the leading voice of the deconstruction and building material reusing industries. it's a proud new member of the

american sustainable business counsel. the esbc currently represents over 175,000 large, small, -- large and small triple-bottom-line businesses in america. it was extremely pleased to be able to host epa administrator -- business summit on building for a sustainable economy two weeks ago. the asbc is generally supportive of the epa's efforts to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. the asbc has urged the state department to disapprove the construction of the keystone x l pipeline to -- to pump oils from canada.

who teaches at the graduate sustainable design program at catholic university america. in 2011, community forklift inhibited the release of 513 more megatons of carbon equivalent in the annual operations than it emitted due to the fact that raw, virgin raw materials were not extracted. i believe that building material reuse is a significant element of our energy future. in general, the bmra and asbc are supportive of the proposal at hand. one element concerns me greatly. i speak now not representing any organization but as a citizens. i'm against the inclusion of enhanced oil recovery in the type of carbon capture storage that proposed standard promotes. i do not dispiewt that the science of carbon capture and storage --

i do not dispute the science. i'm dubious many of the claim with respect to the permanence and ethics of such storage. i object to the use as a mechanism to extract more fossil fuels from the earth that, for the most part, be burned for energy. implying, enhanced oil recovery is a form of fuel switching from coal to oil that works against the effort to reduce carbon -- and protect the environment. ly quote from page 280. the epa acknowledges that the can be downstream losses after capture. for example, during transportation injection or storage. a well-selected and operated site is expected to contain co, 2 for a long-term. there's will a potential for unanticipated leakage. they expect the loss to be modest with incentives due to the market use of co2 is as a

product purchase. there remains an issue of whether the standard i.t. should be adjusted to reflect these downstream losses. the epa is not proposing go so. more over the epa wishes to encourage rather than discourage eor using co2 since it makes carbon storage itself more economic and thus promotes the use of technology which the proposed standard is based. i dispute this. market -- [inaudible] >> yeah. market forces are a thin read on which to rest the clean energy and environmental policy. in conclusion, i just like to add that as a residents of capitol hill, i urge the standard to serve federally-run facilities like the capitol hill power plant not far from us today. i thank you for this opportunity to share my views. >> thank you. [applause]

>> thank you epa on moving forward to develop standards to control carbon pollution and holding today's listening session. we have an obligation to protect our children and future generations from the effect of climate change. and speaking as a parent, i say this as a paramount responsibility. in order to meet this obligation, it is critical that we reduce carbon pollution from the very units responsible for 40% of u.s. greenhouse gas emissions existing power plants. to meet the president's goal of a 17% economy-wide reduction and climate pollution by 2020, in a role for existing power plants must ensure a 35 to 40% reduction from 2005 levels, which is a 25 to 30% reduction

from 2012. to underscore the importance of achieving reduction in the electricity power sector, i point to california. according to the california air resources board, the state experience 29% decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity power sector between 2001 and 2011. compared to an economy wide reduction of 6%. i would also add that california's energy production increased during the same period. it must seat clear rule for what it will take for states to get the plans approved. it is important for both insuring that the plans e feck wait the climate action plan and get legally sound state implement plans as quickly as possible the majority of our -- the dirtiest coal plants in the nation are operating beyond the intended use for life. the clean air act contemplates

that the epa and the states consider remaining useful life and setting performance standards for existing facilities. here that factor weigh in favor of setting protect sthashedz help promote the shift to clean energy already underway. the clean air act is a successful law that is helped to reduce the levels of many conventional air pollutants and saved the lives of hundreds of thousand of americans. much of this progress has been the direct result of the successful enforcement of the law by the agency and citizens. making progress on reducing carbon pollution from existing power plants will be dependent on both the vigor and enforceability of the role and the state or the federal implementation plans that implement it. therefore, it is vital that the implementation, the -- therefore it's vital that the emissions reductions adopted in the rule be measurable, verifiable, and enforceable in the subsequent implementation

plans. thank you. >> thank you. our next two will be james and joelle. my name is jane and i'm here representing myself. thank you for hosting this session on standard for carbon emissions. your generosity is not lost on me. we like to add things out and evaluate the consequences and by my reckoning you're going to be sitting through one or two thousand of these three-minute testimonial. i hope you have a deep bench. thank you for accepting mine. i'm a middle-aged mother of two

with a busy job. as a clinical research scientist. i work on tuberculosis and the search for a bio marker that help treat the disease that kills 1.4 million people a year. most of thement outside the u.s. but poses a grave threat to our population given the advances of drug resistance. i'm booked up to my eye brows with family and work and my community. yet every day i get up and wonder what else i should be doing to enhance my disability at the climate activist. i've hosted for the last two years joined protest and media campaigned, i've hosted meetings and provided beds and meals for young activists in town to protest the keystone pipeline. i've logged, divested, i've engaged in civil disobedience action including one that got my arrested. to be here today takes me so far outside my comfort zone that you wouldn't believe it.

i'm here because we need to do more without correction on carbon emissions and climate disruption. curing tuberculosis won't matter. nothing will matter. i'm scared. one day two years ago i lived at the decision to engage as a climate activist. i'm courageous and -- why i was i shrinking that from which i most feared without a good answer i faced and i joined up and it's been better since. there are a lot of people like me who have engaged in many more who want to but have not out of fear. and uncertainty about what to do next. please lead.

we need to leave the car bonn in the ground. i'm here to ask you to leave the likes of me and all of these people here and you can feel it. to engage, to think, to press, tokingking a at a time, to sacrifice and demand results. thank you. >> thank you. >> i think you want to be closer to the mic for that. hrnd of local congregations of all religious traditions work together on energy and climate issues. this morning as you've already seen i'm only one of over a dozen religious voices you will hear speaking out in support of strong safe guards on carbon

pollution from existing power plants. and we are joined by religious voices around the country who are participating in the epa's other listening sessions. the teaching for my own tradition that informs my thought on carbon solution from a rabbi a 124th century scholar of jewish law. he wrote: one is for bidden from gaining livelihood at the expense of another's health. one is forbidden from gaining a livelihood at the expense of another's health. simple, ethical wisdom. not bad for the middle ages. for too long, here, now those who operate our power plants have been forbidden to gain their livelihood at the expense of people's health. there have been limits on other kind of pollutants will there have been no limit on carbon pollution. here in d.c. we have one of the nation's highest asthma rates particularly among children. nearly 134,000 children in our

nation's capitol city sometimes struggle to breathe because of our dirty air. someone is making their living at the expense of these kids' health. we'll be hearing a lot from polluters today saying that any limit on carbon pollution will interfere with their job. they have every right to make an honorable living, but it should be forbidden in this country for anyone to make their livelihood at the expense of people's health. in the religious community with which i work, people are heart sick about the role of fossil fuel in producing the heat trapping gases that cause climate change. they are working to reduce their electricity use in the sanctuary and home. they are climbing on ladders to change to more efficient lightbulb and working together to support clean energy flu -- through the energy bill. they fought hard bring wind power to the coast and willing to spend many hours figuring out how to finance solar panel. so often we are told that the change we are trying to make is

unrealityist because clean energy it so expensive while dirty energy is cheap. but who pays for dirty energy? who bears the cost of bad air call quality in the cost of kids with asthma? seniors having heart attacks, pregnant mothers with mercury in the body. who bears the cost 6 stronger storms, extreme drought, devastating floods, and other scary weather caused by climate change. any energy we pay for through the permanent destruction of our climate. any energy people pay for with their health isn't cheap energy. it is intolerable expensive. on the historic morning the epa stands poised to set national limit on the nation's single largest source of carbon pollution. please proceed to -- for existing power plants.

next up we have dustin weise and robert blakeland. >> thank you, sir. hi, i'm wearing three hats right now. another is that of the west virginia-based ohio valley environmental coalition, and the third is that of an eighth generation southern west virginia resident. why did i feel the need to travel all the way from southwestern west virginia to attend this listening session?

because i want you to hear that there are people in west virginia who support the epa's action to establish. as a member of a faith community i believe i'm called to be a steward of god's good creation and care for the most vulnerable populations in all communities. as a member of an organization which actively seeks to preserve clean air, water, and equal justice for all citizens in west virginia. i'm here to urge the epa to set strict standards for overall emission reductions while also working with states and utilities to prioritize shifting energy sources to truly renewable sources like wind, solar, geotheythermal, and microhydropower.

instead of shifting to seemingly lower cost of fossil fuel such as shale gas, which in fact, has huge hidden costs. west virginia, by the way, is the only state in the country that has both gas fracking and mountain top removal coal mining going on. we are are being ranched by both. and head water stream of the eastern coast is at stake. i urge epa states and you utilities to prioritize plans that will protect low-income consumers from disproportionate and large increases in utility bill. i urge the epa to move quickly with a proposed and final rule so that the u.s. can begin to address the increasingly urban america jebt dr urgent problem of climate change.

the they recently put out a report. it was a strategic plan to addressing asthma. 2011 to twowfort. i want to mention a few highlights from that. the right of asthma hospitalization has more than doubled among seniors in west virginia since 1996. west virginia adult females are nearly twice as likely to have asthma. the dhhr study concludes that west virginia have low socioeconomic status. adults without a high school diploma and an yule household energy of less than $25,000 are significantly more likely to have asthma. >> time to wrap up. >> in short from west virginia's example it seems clear that asthma-remitted health effect of living near a coal-fired power plant which we do through our

state. we have no other alternative often costs people who can lest afford it. children, seniors, and women. please establish strict rules. >> thank you. >> good morning. i'm dustin with the ohio valley environmental coalition which is a member group of the alliance for appalachian. i want to taunt -- talk about for the opportunity to speak today. i'm speaking and the the community where they mine the coal for the power plants. u i'm from the community of the navajo nation to the powder river basin and my home who live in the wake of the extraction process can attest that coal is harmful to public health.

i'm from southern west virginia and i have been around coal my entire life. we need to talk realistically about the human health impact of carbon pollution not just the contribution to climate change. as a west virginia person i support epa's effort and believe me there are many more who do as well. i feel you cannot realistically talk about emission without discussing the extraction because they are -- by regulating the amount of coal power pollution that is produced by plants, you are also helping the communities where the coal industry on a daily basis rip coal from the ground and blow up entire mountains. let's call it what it is. coal pollution. whether you're living with a coal-fire power plant in the backyard or mountain top removal mine site over your community and your neighbors are getting sick because of the impact to air quality among others. the extraction process is

poisoning our air, water, and land. i'm not a scientist. i can't sie statistics. i do not deal with numbers and statistics. i deal with reality. and the reality is people are getting sick and dying from this pollution. we know this. there are numerous scientific studies that state this. and i know that the epa has the studies. i don't have to quote them. i amount; however, living witness to the illness and death back home. i can spend hours telling the stories who suffer. like the 19-year-old girl from my home county who is diagnosed with multiple type of cancer and given two months to live. i'm outliving people i played with as a child at 30 years old. all because they live around coal. i'm certain there are resident --

even if it true to clear no one has a job that is more important than someone else's life. contrary to what the politicians and industry say we know there are safer and cleaner ways to produce electricity. >> time to wrap up. >> we must come together and end coal cycle death. this starts with meaningful regulations. no one should have to live with the issues, birth defect to cancer and other human issues human health issues that coal is responsible for. for the sake of our planet and public health, and the sake of future generations let's stop talking. epa, do your job. thank you. >> thank you.

thank you for making the drive here. on what people think about the future carbon regulations on existing power plant. i couldn't help but notice the sessions are scheduled only for states where coal does not have a large presence. like california and massachusetts. other regions of the country;

whole does not have a large presence in some states, like california and massachusetts. other regions are well aware that kentucky. to hear t cncer we country. but since epa i refuses tocom to kentucky, i decided on behalf of kentucky's coal miners and families that i would bring their concerns to you myself. the epa won't come to listen to us, we'll come here. to the epa. by now it is clear that this administration and your agency have declared a war on colt. for kentucky it means a war on jobs and our state's economy. the president outright stated his intention for the coal industry. this is what he had to say. if somebody wants to build a coal power plant. they can. it will bankrupt them. they're going to be charged a huge sum for the greenhouse gas being emitted. a direct quote from the president of the united states.

one of the first things president obama did upon taking office in 2009 was to push through congress' cap-and-trade bill to try to push it through -- i might add. designed to hike utility rights and bankrupt the coal industry. back in 2009, his party, the democratic party controlled both houses of congress. they held a super majority in the senate of 60 votes. they could actually pass anything they wanted to. but the bill only narrowly passed the house and could never pass the senate. it idled away and did not pass in the senate. that is how extreme this president's agenda. he proposed setting unheard of cap on greenhouse gas emissions.

before you do, you're going to hear from us. coal employs more than 13,000 people in kentucky. i think it's important to note the beginning of the administration employed 18,000. we have gone from 18,000 coal miners to 13,000. we have a depression in eastern kentucky. not a recession. a depression. for every coal job there are three or four additional jobs. so this administration's declared war on coal. as far as my state is concerned, since 90% of our electricity comes from coal from our generation. we can anticipate higher utility rates. it's one of the great ways we've been able to attract new visit to commonwealth. so we're here to remind you that coal keeps the lights on for kentucky and for the nation. i want to introduce you to a man who will speak for kentucky coal miners today. as a fifth generation coleman he

truly understands the central role coal plays in kentucky's industry and in our economy. in our history and, yes, in our future. bryan's great, great grandfather was a coal miner in ireland. his father managed large coal mines in kentucky. and today bryan is the president of service at the james river coal service company. he knows full well how kentucky coal miners work 14-hour days to bring affordable energy to the state and the country. he knows because he works just as hard himself. if you're truly interested listening to the people his way of life you will affect the most. you need to listen to bryan's voice of wisdom and experience. so i would like now to call on bryan for his observations.

as he said before, we have a descrption in eastern kentucky. when i left eastern kentucky yesterday after a 48-hour workday over two days, we furloughed and/or laid off over 2,000 employees. our company as a whole over the last six months had to do it furlough 725 employees. these are communities of just 1,000 to 2,000 people. 3,000 people. and when you have that type of an economic impact due to regulations, many of which are regulations that come from washington, d.c., that have very little understanding of what the

outcome is for local folks. i find myself coming to washington, d.c., to discuss issues. it's not first u visit here. i've been here on numerous occasions. but i would very much wish and invite you to coal country. i think there is a -- you've heard people speak previously saying they're from coal country. some of those folks are. some maybe visit. but there are thousand of folks right now that would love the opportunity to sit and discuss with you the issues they have at hand. those issues are basic. they want a job. they want to go to work. they want to provide for their families, they want to provide college educations for their kids, they want to have a decent retirement. as simple as they want to buy a boat. just the american dream. it's all that simple. and in appalachian without coal,

and without the industry that provides jobs, we have very little left for the people remain employed. there may be alternative fuel measures and the other things that can pop out of the woodwork, at this point, there is no alternative. so i ask that you consider the real people of appalachian. the real people of coal country, the people that really matter in this argument because if you take away our livelihood, and i don't know what we have left. and so, again, invite you to coal country. thank you. we're going take a ten minute break. then we'll reconvenient -- reconvene.

[inaud >> on our next "washington journal", a how-to guide to rewriting the constitution, which argues that the constitution should be rewritten. then the head of the centers for disease control and prevention. after that, a look at a report of population trends and birth rates and health care in the u.s. joining us, stephanie ventura at the national center for health statistics. "washington journal" is live each morning at seven eastern on c-span.

>> a tight ship was run at the white house with this first lady. watch our program on saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. and live on monday night, our series continues. >> mrs. kennedy is well-known and mrs. kennedy put a lot of thought into her wardrobe when she was representing the white house and traveling abroad trade and to think about what colors would mean something to the country. so for her visit to canada, she chose this red suit by peter cardin as a gesture of respect for the red of the canadian maple leaf. >> i really admire what she put into her wardrobe. and she also knew how to do choose a style that would make

her stand out in the crowd. >> first lady jacqueline kennedy monday night at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> we will focus on energy policy and renewable energy. a look at the future of solar energy followed by a discussion of wind energy. in focusing on how environmentalists affect energy policy. >> michael is joining us from san francisco to talk about environmental and energy policy. michael brin, let me begin with the obama administration's record so far. >> we would grade is pretty good, although it is incomplete. certainly what the administration has done with health standards has been very important with performing the

improvements of our utilities and protecting our air and water. whether or not the upgraded facilities were transitioned to cleaner forms of energy. we must recognize supporting two rounds of automobile efficiency standards, which will simultaneously save significant amounts of oil over the next couple of decades and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. .. to 55.4 miles per gallon. by itself, that will cut greenhouse gas emissions in the u.s. by 10%. those are things we are excited about. is piece that is undecided whether or not the administration will adopt a supply-side strategy to their climate land. -- plan. right now you have an energy

policy that is often undermining the president's climate goals. when you talk -- here the president talk about exporting, that sets us further back from where we need to be in terms of stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions, and it is undecided whether or not the president and the administration will show strong leadership on the. host: let me show you from the white house, the president's plan to address climate change and four key points -- has he succeeded on any of these fronts? you talked about café standards, but otherwise?

yout: it depends how quantify success, taking a long- term view, what are we doing to build an economy that is 100% power with energy that is clean, renewable, safe, secure, and sustainable? you would say we are making great progress. we have secured the retirement of more than 150 old and out plants.irty coal fire energy use has declined as the economy has grown. cars and trucks are becoming more efficient. all of that is good. at the same time, when you look at the affect that we already see from a destabilizing climate, droughts, wildfires, severe storms, you know that we need to be doing everything we can to accelerate a transition to a clean energy future, and weeks -- when we set the standard that high, that is when the president does not always

reach the right marks. the way the president has laid out his priorities from mitigation, both from power plants and mobile sources, cars and trucks, is sound. it is a comprehensive, strategic approach. but, in the face of persistent, unyielding opposition, both from most segments of the republican party, as well as the oil, coal, and gas industries, the president has not always reached -- the strongest long-term view, and sometimes steps back from what actually needs to be done. host: michael brune, let me show you what the president had to say last week, touting his strategy on energy. [video clip] of theave pursued in all above energy strategy, so we are producing more traditional energy, more noble energy than

ever -- renewable energy than ever before, more natural gas come to we have cut our pollution in the process here at -- process. host: what do you mean -- what do you make of the all of the above policy? itst: we do not support because it means more of the same. this is where the administration is at war with itself, without the president has talked about how climate change is a moral obligation and an economic opportunity to transition to clean energy. at the same time, when the president talks about an energy policy that is all of the above, expanding oil drilling, expanding fracking, expanding exports of fossil fuels, that only undermines his first goal. the opportunity here is under the obama administration, the

price of wind has dropped by almost 50%. the price of solar has dropped more than 75%. so, we have a chance right now, to leapfrog over fossil fuels. not right away, and not entirely, but when all of these coal plants are coming off line, we can have a majority of the energy mix -- a super majority of the energy mix, come from solar, wind, and in aggressive renewable energy. that is starting to happen at the utility level, but it is not being pushed as much as it needs to at the federal level. there are a lot of great examples. the omaha power district in nebraska recently made a big investment in wind, so by 2017, they will be at 30% of their power coming from wind. a warren buffett subsidiary, mid-american energy, was considering building a nuclear

power plant, backed away from that, and made the largest economic investment of any kind in the state of iowa's history, and by 2017, mid-america and iowa will be powered 39% by wind. we see in oklahoma, texas, colorado, minnesota, all of the states, big investment in solar and wind hitting penetrations of 30% and 40% by the end of this decade. similar level a of ambition from this president, going all in on clean energy and pushing out as much oil, gas as we can. host: viewers are waiting to talk to michael brune. in northp first carolina. democratic caller. caller: good morning. in the mid-2000's, "the st.

-- st.urg" time petersburg times" put on an article about use you in florida, and i travel on the highways, night and day. i would like to know if you are mixing to michael's and pumping the chemicals in the tanks and adding water to it to make our fuel. in the old days i saw nothing but all four corners with gasoline stations, and now there are fewer gasoline stations, more cars, and i cannot understand why these tankers are off of the road. can you answer that question for me, and thank you, c-span, for not cutting me off. a nice day, sir. but i. -- bye-bye. host: michael brune. guest: thank you, john.

it sounds like you are spending a lot of time on the road. because of state and federal mandates, policy has been put in place to address two things -- lowering air pollution, all different kinds -- compounds that affect locally as well as greenhouse gas emissions, and also, to make vehicles more efficient at the same time. there has been attempts to reformulate gasoline, to make it cleaner, but the biggest move that happened over the last decade or so federally has been to make our vehicle more efficient -- to go further on a gallon of gas. california, where the air quality is pretty poor, about 10 years ago, the state set policies to make our vehicles more efficient, and those policies were copied by,

eventually, 19 other states across the u.s.. then, when obama became president, he made easy efficiency standards ubiquitous across the country. the country had one set of standards to take the average efficiency from 22 miles per gallon, up to 35 miles per gallon. a second set of standards have been formalized and finalized, which will increase efficiency up to 55, or almost 55 miles per gallon for an average vehicle. automakers ins detroit and elsewhere that are able to lower the energy cost or bysumers -- for consumers getting the same types of cars and trucks to go much much further. host: florida. republican caller. span.r: praise be to c- here in florida, we have a

unique program that is combined with getting families to camp out one day a month in their backyard and incrementally get used to being off of the grid, and i would like to invite joe biden and ralph nader to come visit us. the citizens only utility company, and i would like those three people to come help me deal with our new mayor he you asked. his name is howard, and he won a moral way, because he bear false witness against his opponent. host: will move on to art. independent caller. .o ahead, sir all right, one last call for our. -- art.

let's move on to john, brooklyn, new york, democratic caller. caller: good morning, c-span. thank you for taking my call. since we have had efficiency improvements in the united states the last couple of years, since we talked about, why is oil production increasing in the united states, and my second question is about buildings operating efficiency -- efficiently. are there training programs for kids coming out of high schools and colleges to maintain buildings to operate efficiently moving forward. thank you for taking my call. guest: thank you for calling in, and congratulations on your new mayor. programs for efficiency, and some have been extended by the administration,

acceleratesory that progress -- employment in communities and gives people a leg up into the jobs market. in california, there is a small group called solar richmond which takes youth from urban , and helpse bay area them get a leg up on the solar economy. we have similar programs in the central valley and all across the country, either to help install solar panels on the roofs of each -- churches, buildings, and homes, or to make buildings more energy efficiency -- efficient. can you remind me of the first part of the question? host: i blanked. john, are you still with us?

increasingwe are efficiency, why is oil production increasing? thank you. guest: that is part of the untold story. 22 billionalmost use barrels of oil every day, and now we are down to 19, and most estimates have that declining to below 15. and how do you reconcile those? we are becoming a major exporter of oil and gas, so here, in the u.s., we are bearing the pollution burden from fracking gas, and theal pipelines being constructed go through special places in the watersheds, and a lot of that oil is being

exported to other countries. the keystone xl pipeline, if it is built, would go not to the united states, but through the united states, and most of that oil would be exported to other countries. so, we get the risk, as taxpayers and citizens of the united states, and often it is the oil industry or gas industry that reaps the profits. host: michael brune, where is the evidence that this will be exported? guest: go on an earnings call for any refinery based in the gulf, and they will state clearly that the majority of oil will be exported, and they say that because investors in these companies know they will command a higher price overseas. so, if the oil is exported as diesel products for latin america, they would get a much higher price than they would in the united states. so, you hear the refineries

talking quite clearly and candidly that they expect an increased profit potential from exports down south. host: earlier this year, you laid out five essential presidential actions. the keystone xl pipeline was number one on the list. why? .uest: for two reasons one, it has become symbolic of the types of choices the administration needs to make. one of the things the president said in his climate speech at building thene, keystone xl pipeline is not in our country's interested it would expand or exacerbate the challenge of stab amazing -- stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions. aat is true for keystone and variety of other energy decisions the energy -- the country is making. keystone has become a high- profile is true -- issue and

symbolically, it is important. is one of the dirtiest sources of oil on the planet. you cannot reduce greenhouse gas emissions, cut carbon pollution, and expand investment in the dirtiest sources of oil on the planet. so, we have to have a reconciliation of the president's policy. if we are serious about a stable climate, and you have to cut emissions, you cannot grow new sources of dirty oil. york magazine," -- "the keystone fight is a huge --

make keystoneto the number 15? -- number one fight? guest: i read that article, and there are two faulty assumptions . first, the level of robin pollution. his assumption -- carbon pollution -- carbon pollution. that it willn is come no matter what, where that is transferred from the keystone pipeline, or if it goes by rail to other countries, or trucks --

for spec, however it comes. the assumption is the oil will come out no matter what, and that is a cynical projection because if we extract the oil from the tar sands that is economically recoverable, and similar amounts of oil from other oil fields, we had no chance, zero chance of stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions. scientists have agreed that if we want to keep global warming to a roughly manageable level, 3.6 degreesrming to fahrenheit, we have to keep two- thirds of our fossil fuels in the ground. a tall task. the second assumption that is not true in the article, is we only do one thing in the environmental movement, but we are focused on one issue, and i run the largest grass roots

environmental organization in the country, and i know that is not true. you can look at our budget, which is publicly disclosed every year, and you can see that both at the sierra club and many arer organizations, we spending significant resources in other areas. the largest campaign in the history of the movement is focused on retiring dirty coal plants and expanding the use of clean energy. at the sierra club, we have more than 150 full-time staff doing exactly what jonathan said, working to secure strong rules workmit carbon, into state-by-state, utility by utility, and coal plant by coal plant, to make sure each individual boiler is retired on a thoughtful, smart, schedule, and replaced with energy, wind, and other sources. -- pleaseasktter

the guest commenting millions of dollars his outfit contributed to natural gas drillers to cripple coal. contributedve not to natural gas drillers in any way. they are quite wealthy in their own right. they do not need contributions from the environmental industry. there have been partnerships between environmental groups in the natural gas industry, which is ill advised. we recognize that the natural is andustry -- natural gas fossil fuel, it causes significant air and water pollution. it is not a bridge fuel. it does not take us to a clean energy future. it distracts us from building a clean energy economy. what the sierra club believes is there is enormous potential in investing for solar, wind, and energy efficiency to meet our needs now and in the future, and

increasingly, more utilities agree. we installed new power sources -- more than 2012, then oil, coal, gas and nuclear power combined. host: c is next. herkimer, new york, republican caller. thank you. we elect a president every four years, and the american people are asked what issues are most important to them, and the environment always comes in at the bottom at 4%. it is not that the american people do not want clean air and clean water. the american people are smart enough to know that no one knows less about the environment than environmentalists. if you people were not so destructive, you would be even more comical. highlight one of your more humorous comedy routines.

least10 years ago -- at 10 years ago -- one of the upper midwestern states, there was an area where ranchers grazed their cattle. some environmentalist group sued because this area was the home for prairie dogs. a federal judge ruled in their favor, and when the cattle stopped grazing, the grass grew so tall that the entire area became uninhabitable and the prairie dogs left. my point is, most s are notntalist scientists, and judges are not always the smartest people in the room. thank you. guest: well, thank you for the love, charlie.

, we are notlists just folks to get up early in the morning and get on television in suits and ties. we are your friends, your neighbors, and people that are in the republican party, the democratic party, able to live in cities, and people that lived in the country. all we have in common is basic values that regardless of what our job is, our sexual orientation, our religious belief, we believe in clean air, clean water, producing jobs in industries that are sustainable, that we have the potential to power our economy with energy that is clean, renewable, and save, and we think we can work with businesses to establish grow our economy, improve our quality of life and make air and water clean. i know there are controversy of

issues some have taken, and controversy of things -- controversy oh -- controversy from things we have said, but i know there is common value it has most of america really does believe in basic environmental values. i would just say there's a lot more that brings us together then sets us apart. thank you for your comments. numbers, hereoll , findingnt from pew energy problem has declined as a public priority. venice beach. democratic caller. see, thank you. -- caller:. for the sierra club.

we are all entitled to pressure, clean water. bioain comment is regarding mimicry and nanotechnology, cuttingally is the edge, and something we can learn from nature. obviously, favorable to nature, but we can utilize nature by studying the components of things like shapes andnd feathers and things that could actually have no net loss of everything is utilized to perfection by nature . therefore, the principles in nature can be applied to different types of engineering ,ursuits in building designs things like air conditioning that can be modified and structured on these natural

occurring structures in nature, and applied to difficult science , therefore making it far more conducive to a healthy environment with no net loss. host: i will leave it there. mr. brune? guest: i do not have much to add, except for people that are not familiar with the term bio mimicry. there are lots of ways to interact with nature. some of us go on hikes were camped out every now and then, but there are a lot of scientists that want to understand in great detail the processes of nature -- how the ecosystems interact, and how different organisms interact to see what lessons we can learn that can be applied to a modern economy. how can we produce materials in ways that do not produce pollution? how do we find ways to minimize waste question mark in -- waste?

in nature, there are no landfills, garbage dumps. nature operates with efficiency. bio mimicry involves understanding nature to apply the lessons to a modern world, it is a fascinating idea. int: let's go to tom illinois, a republican caller. talk to you to today. i am from illinois, and i live in flyover country thomas and i never hear that debate -- country, i never hear the debate -- i would like to know how many jets the guest flies in the the year. two years ago, i called in and they had a nasa scientist. him -- there are 5000 jets a day and each one uses

diesel fuel. i have a 1500 acre farm, and i do not use that much diesel fuel a year. i asked the scientist, what affect do the jets have on the atironment, because they fly 20,000, 30,000 feet, putting out carbon. plants.ctually food for so, i asked him, what does that do, and i said have you ever the upper air environment, and he said yes, on 9/11. i remember those days, four the, and no jets flew in air was clean. the other thing is, it if you have ever stood behind roads and it will damage

near knock you off of your feet. what do you think a jet flying at 35,000 feet the size of a football field does to the turbulence of the atmosphere? nothing is ever brought up because of the people flying in those jets. host: all right. ?sther --mr. brune guest: you are right, we look at the sources of air pollution, there is relatively little attention paid to airlines, jets. but is therobably, fastest growing source of carbon pollution, and the fastest- growing attribute or to climate change around the world. most of the agreements that have been put into place -- international agreements -- they do not yet applied effectively to air traffic.

you asked about my own travel, and how much i am flying. i am traveling too much, extensively, mostly in the u.s., to help establish policies that would address that. youi suspect that i -- that are trying to find some inconsistency there. in thisneed to do country is find ways to make our economy more efficient and effective so that people who need to travel, or be with family members or their business, can do so in ways that do not pollute. we want to offer incentives for airlines to be able to use fuel that do not contribute to a destabilized climate. we want to find a way to get people from place to place efficiency without causing negative side effects. brune, the epa is holding listening sessions around the country on the best way to reduce emissions fro