No Major Climate Initiatives From State of the Union

Jan. 29, 2008 — -- On climate and environmental issues, there is mixed reaction this morning to President Bush's final State of the Union address. As expected, Bush did not call for any major initiatives to address the growing problems of global warming.

In his speech, the president called for more of the nation's power to come from so-called "clean coal," a technology that is commercially unproven, as well as from nuclear, solar and wind.

Environmental advocacy groups, members of Congress and even evangelical leaders sent out a flurry of press releases after — and some even before — the speech was delivered, reacting to what the president said (or did not say) about global warming.

As in 2007, the president mentioned the words "climate change" just once in the speech, and even then, only in the context of strengthening America's energy security.

"The United States is committed to strengthening our energy security and confronting global climate change," Bush said. "And the best way to meet these goals is for America to continue leading the way toward the development of cleaner and more efficient technology."

To that end, the president announced $2 billion to create a global clean technology fund, which he said would help developing nations increase the use of clean energy sources. He also hinted at the need for a new international climate treaty.

"Let us complete an international agreement that has the potential to slow, stop and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse gases. This agreement will be effective only if it includes commitments by every major economy and gives none a free ride," the president said.

Democrats saw a missed chance to address the effects of global warming.

"This was a golden opportunity for President Bush to embrace meaningful solutions to the global warming crisis," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., in a statement. "The president says he favors bipartisan measures, but he failed tonight to join the growing bipartisan coalition behind the Lieberman Warner Climate Security Act. Instead, he offered the American people empty rhetoric and failed to take the bold action needed to avert dangerous climate change."