Obama Embroiled in Carbon Reduction Goals, What About South Korea?
U.S. President Barack Obama’s executive order to reduce power plant carbon emissions by 30 percent by the year 2030 has not brought controversy to an end. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reported that this regulation would not only reduce electricity bills by 8 percent, but also infuse $93 billion into the U.S. economy. However, the American political and business world dispute these claims. Republican Senator Mike Enzi argued that, "the [Obama] administration has set out to kill coal and its 800,000 jobs." The U.S. Chamber of Commerce stated that this regulation could cost the U.S. $51 billion a year, 224,000 jobs, and by 2030, an increase of $289 billion in electrical bills.
The media has also put in their two cents. The Wall Street Journal raised suspicion about these recent actions having a political motive. The Republican strongholds are the central states, which would be most heavily hit by any regulations regarding the coal, gas and oil industries. On the other hand, the Democratic strongholds in the eastern and western states would not be as affected. The newspaper stated that the Obama administration was seeking to display global leadership in the environmental field, but also predicted that there would be nothing to show for it. In regards to the regulation on greenhouse gases, the United States has relatively fallen behind, and industrializing nations like China are extremely unlikely to participate.
These U.S. actions are raising eyebrows. President Obama’s claim that "ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous" has especially been accused of misquoting and being pulled from flawed analysis. The South Korean domestic situation somehow is even more serious. Starting next year, an automobile carbon tax will be imposed, and a tradeable permit system will be introduced. Goals have also been set so that by 2020, all industries must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent.
These regulations are wider and more severe than the power regulations in the United States. Why we are pushing ahead like this is quite curious.
The media has also put in their two cents. The Wall Street Journal raised suspicion about these recent actions having a political motive. The Republican strongholds are the central states, which would be most heavily hit by any regulations regarding the coal, gas and oil industries. On the other hand, the Democratic strongholds in the eastern and western states would not be as affected. The newspaper stated that the Obama administration was seeking to display global leadership in the environmental field, but also predicted that there would be nothing to show for it. In regards to the regulation on greenhouse gases, the United States has relatively fallen behind, and industrializing nations like China are extremely unlikely to participate.
These U.S. actions are raising eyebrows. President Obama’s claim that "ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous" has especially been accused of misquoting and being pulled from flawed analysis. The South Korean domestic situation somehow is even more serious. Starting next year, an automobile carbon tax will be imposed, and a tradeable permit system will be introduced. Goals have also been set so that by 2020, all industries must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent.
These regulations are wider and more severe than the power regulations in the United States. Why we are pushing ahead like this is quite curious.