Carbon dioxide emissions keep rising despite Obama’s reign of regs

EIA ChartA report published today by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) shows that energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have increased over the past two years, despite Obama’s bevy of new regulations since taking office in 2009. Collectively, CO2 emissions make up the largest part of overall U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and Obama has even pledged to cut emissions 26%-28% by 2025 over 2005 levels as part of a U.N.-backed global warming treaty.

The EPA also reported in mid-April that there was a “two percent increase in greenhouse gas emissions in 2013 from 2012 levels, but a nine percent drop in emissions since 2005.” This new report, though, shows that despite administration efforts, greenhouse gas emissions are still rising and do not appear to be benefitting from the onerous regulations imposed by the EPA. In 2013, CO2 emissions rose 2.5% and the 2014 energy-related CO2 emissions rose 1.1% over the 2013 levels.

The EIA writes that “changes in CO2 emissions reflect changes in economic and energy-related indicators” and it blames the previous two-year rise in emissions on “economic trends in terms of increasing population and per capita GDP.” Put simply, the upward trend in emissions is blamed on the increased energy demands as much of North America suffered through three of the coldest winters, with some states even breaking cold and snow records.

According to the EIA, the 2.5% increase in CO2 emissions in 2013 was the fourth-largest increase since 1990. “Energy intensity changes can reflect weather variations that directly affect energy use for heating and cooling as well as changes in the composition of economic activity.” The EIA also writes that with “higher natural gas prices in 2013, coal’s generation share rose from 39% in 2012 to 40% in 2013, slowing the rate of carbon intensity reduction.”

The EIA expects energy-related CO2 emissions to increase again in 2015 and 2016, depending “largely on a mix of weather, energy sources, and economic factors—as well as potential changes in national and state policies.” And while “CO2 emissions per unit of energy consumption declined in total by 8% during 2005-14, with an average annual decline of .9% … carbon intensity declined by only 0.4%” in 2013 and 2014.

“Future energy consumption and related emission levels,” the EIA writes, “will depend largely on a mix of weather, energy sources, and economic factors—as well as potential changes in national and state policies.” With a slew of coal-fired plants already shut down and more being closed for not meeting new EPA regulations, energy-producing companies are relying more heavily on natural gas to produce electricity.

Natural gas power plants are also coming under attack from the Obama administration, which is using various agencies such as the EPA and Department of the Interior to bypass Congress and impose new rules and fees. Additionally, The Daily Caller reports that “the Obama administration may be ready to hike royalties paid by oil and gas companies drilling on federal lands,” with those costs being passed on to consumers.

Source

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (5)

  • Avatar

    Just Some Kid

    |

    It would be a mistake to assume that Obama controls world emissions. Policies with the United States do not affect coal burning in China.

    And when you say bypass Congress, that’s sorta like taking the bridge rather than swimming through a dangerous river. Not to mention that the job of the executive branch is to carry out laws passed by Congress. The EPA is doing what it was created for.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Dan Pangburn

    |

    CO2 increase from 1800 to 2001 was 89.5 ppmv (parts per million by volume). The atmospheric carbon dioxide level has now (through March, 2015) increased since 2001 by 28.93 ppmv (an amount equal to 32.3% of the increase that took place from 1800 to 2001) (1800, 281.6 ppmv; 2001, 371.13 ppmv; March, 2015, 400.06 ppmv).

    The average global temperature trend since 2001 is flat (average of the 5 reporting agencies http://endofgw.blogspot.com/). Graphs through 2014 have been added. Current measurements are within the range of random uncertainty with respect to the trend.

    That is the observation. No amount of spin can rationalize that the temperature increase to 2001 was caused by a CO2 increase of 89.5 ppmv but that 28.93 ppmv additional CO2 increase did not cause an uptrend in the average global temperatures after 2001.

    Proof has been hiding in plain sight that change to the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) does not cause climate change. The proof and identification of the two factors that do cause climate change 95% correlation since before 1900) are at http://agwunveiled.blogspot.com .

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Roy Smith

    |

    Wake up EIA! We live on a globe. The air circulates all around the globe. If we cut emissions and China increases emissions, guess what?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Roy Smith to add to your comment .
    It is China that is laughing at how gullible the USA is to trash it’s economy to their benefit .
    I wish every Congress person would have to take a climate knowledge test ,
    some would do great but others probably have little awareness or knowledge .
    That is why your comment ,while true ,is astounding in that it even needs to be said …..But it does apparently .

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Gator

    |

    And…. still no evidence that the warming is not occurring naturally, or any evidence that it is bad.

    Imagine if we put all the resources wasted on the Climate Change Industry into curing diseases and feeding people, who struggle to survive day to day right now.

    [i]About 21,000 people[b] die every day[/b] of hunger or hunger-related causes, according to the United Nations. This is one person every four seconds, as you can see on this display. Sadly, it is children who die most often.
    Yet there is plenty of food in the world for everyone. The problem is that hungry people are trapped in severe poverty. They lack the money to buy enough food to nourish themselves. Being constantly malnourished, they become weaker and often sick. This makes them increasingly less able to work, which then makes them even poorer and hungrier. This downward spiral often continues until death for them and their families.[/i]

    http://www.poverty.com/

    That works out to 7,665,000 every year.

    Reply

Leave a comment

No Trackbacks.