Its inside story. Welcome to inside story. Im Lisa Fletcher in for ray suarez. President obama said theres no better time than the present to clean the air for future generations. They set the first ever federal standards on Carbon Emissions on power plants. His plan calls for 32 reduction in Carbon Emissions created by power plants over the next 15 years. It gives states with unique circumstances to come into compliance. The cost of the president s plan came in at 84 billion. According to the estimates, a small price to pay. Considering the alternative. Rising sea levels, extreme weather events like stronger storms, deeper drought and longer wildfire seasons, disasters that are more frequent, expensive and dangerous. President obamas plan does it go too far. Lawyers in the lobbyist make their case. Al jazeeras Roxana Saberi takes a closer look. And the single most important step america has taken in the fight against Global Climate change. Reporter a bold announcement from president obama. Unveiling the final aversion of his Clean Power Plant at the white house. We are the first generation to felt the impact of climate change, and the last generation that can do something about it. Reporter the Administration Plan is a joint effort with the Environmental Protection agency, meant to stifle pollution and promote Renewable Energy. For the first time, it sets a sealing for power plant Carbon Emissions in the United States. The amount of toxic chemicals and mercury and arsenic in air and water. And are better off for it. Existing plants can dump on Carbon Pollution into the air. For the sake of our kids, and the health and safety of all americans, that has to change. For the take of the planet. That has to change. Coalbased Energy Production provides 40 of power, and puts out threequarters of emissions, the gas responsible for driving climate change. For the president , the new plan makes good on a 2008 Campaign Promise to vet the issue. And could help shape his president ial legacy. It was made with an eye towards International Climate negotiations later this year in paris, in the hopes an american will pave the way for a global agreement. Since the announcement of the plan last year, major carbon emitters made their own commitments to cut back. United nations secretary general ban kimoon lauded the u. S. Initiative. This is a huge, important, visionary leadership. The u. S. Can and will be able to change the world in addressing a climate change. Not everyone is so enthusiastic, congress has, in the past, rejected bids to regulate emission, and a chorus of republican voices renounced the clean power plaftenlt saying it would deal a blow to the least fortunate. Coalminers to consumers. It represents a triumph of confession. The regulations in kentucky likely would mean fewer jobs, shut you have power plants, higher electricity costs for families and businesses. Reporter the president dismissed the comments saying a focus on Renewable Energy drives innovation and investment. And the least advantage affected by pollution we have assembled a unique panel to discuss the standards. We are joined by diana. The director of economics 21. Org and a senior fellow at the manhattan institute. And is the coe author of the disinherited. The Communications Director of the climate and air programme. And greg is the director of energy and resource policy at the association of manufactures. And in watertown massachusetts, the president of the union of concerned scientists. Thank you to all of you for joining us. Keith, how are the standards going to be achieved. Well, in partnerships with the state, they are given targets to move towards clean energy, and they are given a tremendous amount of flexibility, do they switch to clean energy, cleaner fuels, do they trade with other states. Its a flexible plan. Theres a great deal at stake. Up to now we have limits on Carbon Pollution, and putting a burden on the kids. This is a limit on it, i think its the responsible prudent thing to do. You said the plan punishes consumers and red states, what is the problem with the e. P. A. Approach. The problem is the state that has to be cut moist is republican states, and democratic states should california win, because california can sell its credits. So thats one problem. The major problem is, first of all, Carbon Dioxide is not a solution. Im breathing it out now, and im very much alive. Secondly, it increases the cost of electricity. And increasing the cost of electricity means that there are fewer batteries, jobs, and people have to pay more for thrifty, so they have less to pay for other things, low income individuals spend 24 of income on electricity, gasoline and motor fuels, compared with 4 . Its very unequal, increasing in equality and falls on the poor and people who have a hard time finding jobs, does it fall on the poor or conservative states. It falls mostly on the poor in whatever states. The emissions fall greater on. North dakota, for example, we had a chat here, according to e. P. A. Data has to cut by 37 . 35 . We heard from senator mcconnell. His state has to cut by 30 . California gets to increase by 15 , oregon by 15 . So its very unequal. You pointed out in your article mississippi was one of the lowest cuts at the republican state. The idea that this was done on a partisan basis was not true. You have some states that moved ahead. It is highly called. The poor. The extreme weather the e. P. A. Statements that it will cut electricity bills by 8 a month by the time the plan comes to frewishes. Do you believe them. You have solar powers. Its more expensive. When you get do the end of the process, you have cheeper clean energy. You can make wagon wheel horseshoes and move on. Speaking of companies. I want to get greg into the conversation. You are from the association of manufacturers, we are talking about power generating companies. How do they play into this. And from your perspective are they achievable from the dime frame it would be given. In fact, we led the way. The emissions are down 10 since 2005. At the end of the day, however the issue is addressed. Innovation, technology, these are the Solutions Getting us to the next generation of Energy Technologies and environmental solutions. Fix, we are huge energy consumers, manufacturers consume onethird of the energy, and by design, this regulation will increase the rates for manufacturers. So we look at this from the perspective. Perhaps more fund, we look at the clean air act. We know based on the way its written and interpreted, this is the first of many regulations. Our concern is what precedent are we setting for future sectors, manufacturers down the road. It takes a unique perspective to regulating power plants, beyond what the power plants can do, to things outside of their control. Theres a regulation coming down the road in a few years requiring you to account for actions outside your facility, thats a big concern. This is not the only regulation, we are heavily regulated. We face trillions of regulations, and we know that theres another major air regulation, the ozone regulation, all the regulations combined concerns us, putting us at a competitive disadvantage. What businesses have the most to gain and lose out of the deal. Sure. Ill answer that, its good to start this with the science. Away from the union of concerned scientists. The scientists of the world tell us virtually unanimously that we have to cut our Greenhouse Gas emissions, we have to get at the source of global warming. We know that in the United States power plants are responsible for the Carbon Dioxide that is emitted and because of the success of many states that are starting to cut the emissions, we can make them very Cost Effectively with existing technology and policies. So the president had to start someone, and he started in the right place. The winners and the losers, i would push back a little on the thesis that this is a burteden on the red states, and benefit to the blue states. Others will end up being the biggest winners on the power plant. States like iowa, minnesota, north dakota, texas, that have this enormous wind energy resources, its cost competitive. Ill put you on pause, i want to come back and pick on that. Well take a quick break. The u. S. Burns more fossil fuels than many countries, it does more to curb Carbon Emissions. When we come back, well talk about americas role as a world leader, and why it is essential to pick up the pace. Clean power, and what cost. Its inside story. Jooment welcome back to flds. Welcome back to inside story. Im Lisa Fletcher in for antonio mora. President obama created a world day of prayer for the care of creation, sort of an earth day for ath lakes. President obama catholics. President obama added emphasis on caring for mother earth. Back now with diana, the director of economics 21 org and a senior fellow. The Communications Director of the climate and air programme at the environmental defenseman, and greg is the director of energy and resource policy at the National Association of manufacturers, and kimmel, he may want to pick up. You were saying that states mentioned hit hardest, you felt theyd come out on top. Finish that thought for us . They have a great product, wind energy, and therell be a demand for the product because of the way e. P. A. Is allowing the states to trade credits, some states that may struggle to find ways within the state to lower pollution, can look to states with excess energy. Thats one energy. Example. Theres an enormous opportunity for states to invest in energy efficiency, not only cutting car pollution, it saves money for consumers and businesses, and in the northeast and midatlantic where we have cap and trade programme backed since 2008. We have saved consumers money, manufacturers money by investing in energy efficiency. It may increase the trick rates a little bit. It lowers the bills, their demand for electricity is lower, my point is that theres a way to clean the air and cut Carbon Pollution and costs at the same time. E. P. A. Hit those points. Energy efficiency is a great tool. Its part of the doing business, something we have done for years. All of these reduce costs, making us competitive. We need Energy Options that allow us to continue to consume energy at a reasonable and reliable reasonable cost and reliable manner. We have an enormous advantage. We have diverse sources. We have goal, gas, renewables, and a vast supply of courses and the ability to access all of them helps us to remain competitive. When one increase, others fill in the gaps and keep the rates stable and reliable and allows us to be competitive. When we take options off the table, the ability for stable prices is threatened. Thats what we are concerned about. We want to make sure all options are on the table to have prices that are reasonable, reliable, if we do that, keeping things in a way that allows manufacturers to be innovative, continue products, we develop solutions. Can all Energy Options remain on the table given what we know . I think this will expanned energy positions. Theyll be more robust. Wind prices dropping. Your members have been fantastic about moving forwards and adapting when we need to clean the environment. If you look at the history of the clean air act, the law in which this all happens, you have Success Story after Success Story where the benefits outweigh the cost. Every time you look back, its been a huge economic and environmental matter. The president is saying na it will cost south of 9 billion, save about 93 billion a year. First of all, ken said that rates went up, bills down. People use less energy, so they kept the houses less warm, so they werent as well off. No. Plus, we have global manufacturing. The rates go up here, as ken admitted they were going to. Manufacturing goes overseas. We had manufacturing go overseas. Now, with the current electricity lat electricity rates, we are attracting business from germany, which has higher rates. If prices change, the companies will relocate again. Solar and wind are more expensive. Those are facts. By raising less bireplacing less Expensive Energy with more expensive people will be worse off. The people that got through last winter, its not that they were using electricity, they were. They are doing it in a smarter way. Massachusetts is the most Energy Efficient state in the country. Thats because of the investment the state made. This has nothing to do with standard of living dropping. It has to do with using energy and an effective way. When you have went and solar yrge. It gives you a fuel supply that is important. You may thing the prices are low. Theyll not stay that way forever. One thing we need to do is not get too dependent on a fuel, on a diverse grid that has a lot of different options. That is one of the things that the Clean Power Plant is going to do. On places where it makes sense, well see wind, solar, replacing it. But it will be a Cost Effective solution. When we come back we look at the politics of the standard. Since the regulation, not law, the next president will enhance, enforce or eliminate them, making the stakes higher. Clean power, at what cost. Its inside story. They believed in what they were doing but they were reaction to president obamas Carbon Pollution standards has been swift, especially from republicans. Speaker john boehner calmed an expensive arrogant insult to americans struggling to make ends meet. Senate majority leader felt it meant new jobs, shattered plants and higher electricity costs. It was branded irresponsible and overreaching. We are back with the panelists. Let talk about the politics of all of this. How do you see the issue playing out on the campaign trail. If you take 40 of electricity made by coal, which is cheap energy, off the table and you replace it with solar and wind which is more expensive, it will be a big campaign issue, and republicans will Campaign Successfully on the grounds that they would be able to role it back if they got elected. You cited someone saying youre responsible. To put all the burden on the kids, just like the debt argument we have, or should be able to put a huge burden on the kids. Id like to see the candidate saying im from no limits on Carbon Pollution. Clean energy polls. The plan is twothirds supporting the american people. It will be a winner for someone grabbing it plan. Theres nothing to stop. I mentioned the next president from reversing this entirely. Lets say republicans take over the white house. What plan is palatable enough. What changes can be made knew, so it will not be rolled back. With this issue, we are talking about a global issue. The only way to address this issue is to take a global perspective. We need buyin from the world. China, india others making commitments. If we have anything short of that, well send manufacturing production to china, india, and with it the Greenhouse Gas emissions. If we want a meaningful impact, we need global buyin. We have the United States that has things like fuel efficiency standards, drugs, noble portfolio standards, regional programs and states, and in the northeast you have china who is committed to increasing emissions. Is it meaningful for the United States to take a position of leadership. We are meeting. We reduced emissions more than any other factory. Manufacturing is the leading sector, we reduced emissions by 10 . We are leading on the issue. We need the rest of the world to step up. Have we reduced enough to wait for the rest of the world to step up . I dont think its a matter of waiting, i think its a matter of states setting an example, and we have. We have done good things that we should be proud of in terms of standards, Clean Power Plan and whatnot. Its true, and its worth remembering person, we admit about four times the amount of Carbon Pollution. Its important for us to be proud of our success and look soberly on that and realise we have a ways to go. What is important about the power plan rule is the timing. It was submitted a few months before all the countries of the world get together in paris and try to hammer out an agreement in which every country takes responsibility for the problem. The fact that we put this on the table, that the europeans pledged a similar level of reduction, and china has made this astounding commitment that by 2030, 20 of the Energy Supply would be renewable and fossil free. Thats a huge understanding on their part. No reaction from any one country solves the client problem. The United States taking a role is really important, and i think it will galvanise in an agreement at the end of the year that all countries will be in on. The president talked about a moral obligation to future generations of the planet. Do you foresee a time where that sense much responsibility crosses party lines, and this stops being about politics and the bottom line. I think republicans fear a moral obligation, not to impoverish the next generation, if we cared about global warming, wed help china and india reduce their emissions, help them do fracking and put natural gas and technology in place, right now. They will be driving manufacturing offshore. It will increase Greenhouse Gas. Theres about 20 seconds left. We heard this, putting higher fuel efficiency services. Mercedes exported to china, the rules and thriving economy. If they can go together. They will. Thank you all so much for being a part of our conversation. That is it for tonights inside story. Join us tomorrow when we ask what in the world is going on with the democrats field for president. For ray suarez, im lisa fletch fletcher. Have a good night. Two massive explosions in the chinese port kills 17 people, and injured over 400 hello, im darren jordan. The central emission to Central African republic is fired after his troops are accused of rape and murder im in lieu han, in argentina, where thousands have been