Via Teleconference
2:03 P.M. EST
MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ: Hi. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining today’s embargoed press call. This press call will begin with on-the-record remarks from White House National Climate Adviser Ali Zaidi and Senior Adviser to the President for International Climate Policy John Podesta.
After the remarks, there will be a question-and-answer period, which will be on background and attributable to “senior administration officials.”
The contents of this call and the related materials you all should have already received over email are embargoed until tomorrow, Thursday, December 19th, at 5:00 a.m. Eastern.
With that, I will turn it over to Ali.
MR. ZAIDI: Thanks so much. And thanks, everybody, for joining us.
Under the Paris Agreement, countries are called on to develop nationally determined contributions — NDCs — that collectively advance global progress on climate change.
In April 2021, the United States communicate — communicated its most recent nationally determined contribution.
When we did, we were cognizant of the baseline, a business-as-usual trajectory that projected 15 to 20 percent emissions reductions 2030 relative to 2005 levels.
Under President Biden’s leadership, against that backdrop, we set an ambitious path — a new target for the United States that sought to reduce emissions by 50 to 52 percent in 2030.
In the time since, the United States has deployed a paradigm-shifting strategy that has both accelerated decarbonization and also expanded economic opportunity and economic growth.
We found a way to take on a global problem that was decades in the making, with an approach that makes a visible difference in communities right now — a chance to deliver cleaner air, lower costs, better jobs, and a real sense of pride and purpose.
The U.S. strategy is manifest in the investments from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act and in a complementary architecture of federal standards that spur demand and generate the regulatory certainty needed to accelerate capital formation and encourage entrepreneurial risk-taking.
It is an important combination that has changed the equation: Climate action is no longer about gloom and doom but about hope and possibilities.
Catalyzed by these incentives, fiscal and regulatory, our partners have come together to swing for the fences in every sector of the economy. Looking for wins everywhere — power and transportation, buildings and industry, lands and agriculture — gives us a better shot at sticking the landing and at delivering for everyone.
The coming together is key. The robustness of the U.S. strategy comes from an approach that has mobilized public and private, at every level of government and every layer of the capital stack, in a tech-agnostic race to net zero as our North Star.
You can see this, as I have, not just in communities across America but as business leaders, mayors, governors, Tribal leaders, have joined every single United Nations Conference of the Parties since the president took office. In Glasgow, in Sharm, in Dubai, and in Baku, these leaders showcased the efforts of the United States of America, of all our capacities and capabilities working together.
Today, together, we set a new ambitious target for America — the United States communicating a new nationally determined contribution under the leadership of President Joe Biden.
The United States — all of us working together — will reduce our emissions by 61 to 66 percent by 2035, relative to 2005 levels — all greenhouse gases covered, every sector of the economy reached.
This entire range is on a linear or steeper-than-linear trajectory to net zero by 2050, meaning that America will do its part to keep 1.5 degrees alive.
Today, the U.S. is adding more capacity to its grid than it has in decades. Ninety-six percent of that electricity will be clean. Helped by clearer rules and faster permitting, pioneering offshore wind farms are delivering clean power, retired nuclear plants are coming back online, America is racing forward on solar and batteries — not just the deployment but also the means to stamp those products “made in America.”
Today, the U.S. is mining everything from nickel to the lithium, upgrading it, making the anodes and cathodes and the separators for batteries manufactured by union workers in factories that had once shut down.
From laggard to leader, the U.S. is in the race again on electric transportation — a way to get from point A to point B without putting pollution in the sky or putting our kids and their health at risk.
Today, the U.S. has over 80,000 farmers and ranchers, over 75 million acres, advancing climate-smart agriculture practices; millions of families benefitting from energy efficiency upgrades; and countless new factories on the fore of clean materials, like clean steel and cement, in areas once seen as too hard to decarbonize.
In fact, across the country, we see decarbonization efforts to reduce our emissions in many ways achieving escape l- — velocity — an inexorable path, a place from which we will not turn back.
These proof points show what is possible when we set an ambitious target — informed through rigorous engagement with the techno-economic data — with federal agencies and scientific experts from across civil society, when we take stock of all that is possible when all of us work together.
These proof points also show the massive prize — more good jobs, better public health, increased energy security, bolstered economic competitiveness — if and when we meet this new 2035 climate target.
We are excited about the ambition laid down by the president in this new NDC, and we are confident that, working together, the United States can achieve this goal. And this progress that we continue to see here across the country is positioning America to lead and continue to push the ambition all around the world.
And with that, appropriately, let me hand it over to my partner and to the senior adviser for international climate policy here at the White House, John Podesta.
MR. PODESTA: Thanks, Ali, and thanks to everyone for joining today’s call.
President Biden’s new 2035 climate goal is both a reflection of what we’ve already accomplished, as you’ve heard from my colleague, and what we believe the United States can and should achieve in the future.
Thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we’re on a path to achieve the goal President Biden set in 2021: to cut our emissions in half by 2030.
We’re working to slash pollution from every sector — power, buildings, transportation, industry, agriculture, and forestry — and we’ve ignited a clean energy boom across the country: north, south, east, and west.
Since President Biden and Vice President Harris took office, the private sector has announced over $450 billion in new clean energy investments. Those projects are getting built as we speak. They’ll keep creating good-paying jobs, and they’ll continue to reduce emissions.
Because we’ve implemented a government-enabled but private sector-led strategy, our investments under this administration are durable and will continue to pay dividends for our economy and our climate for years to come, allowing us to set an ambitious and achievable 2035 target.
And in this NDC, we’re being explicit about a methane reduction of at least 35 percent in 2035, showing that the U.S. is maximizing our ability to tackle the climate crisis by targeting all greenhouse gases, including the super pollutants.
The Biden-Harris administration may be about to leave office, but we’re confident in America’s ability to rally around this new climate goal, because while the United States federal government under President Trump may put climate action on the back burner, the work to contain climate change is going to continue in the United States with commitment and passion and belief. That’s not wishful thinking; it’s happened before.
In the wake of COP22 in Marrakesh and President Trump’s decision in 2017 to pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement, the “We Are Still In” movement was born in the United States. It’s now grown into the most expansive coalition ever assembled in support of U.S. climate action, with more than 5,000 businesses, local governments, Tribal nations, universities, and more, covering all 50 states.
That coalition, now called “America Is All In,” represents nearly two thirds of Americans, three quarters of U.S. GDP, and half of U.S. emissions. Governor Inslee of Washington and other subnational leaders came to COP29 in Baku last month to share the same message with the world.
We’re looking to governors, mayors, business leaders, and more to carry this important work forward, because the rest of the world will now be looking to them to show how many Americans still care about the future of our planet and our communities.
The truth is, U.S. climate leadership has motivated the world to move faster.
After President Biden set an ambitious 2030 climate target in 2021, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, Mexico, and others delivered stronger, more ambitious targets.
Once we passed the IRA, other countries — like Japan, Australia, the EU, and the UK — adopted our government-enabled, private sector-led strategy to investment in clean energy.
I’ve spent a significant amount of time this year engaging in productive dialogue with my Chinese counterpart, Liu Zhenmin, and other leaders of the PRC government to encourage the — and I would note, the Pe- — the People’s Republic of China is now by far the world’s largest emitter — but I’ve encouraged them to submit a 2035 NDC target that is aligned with a 1.5-degree world that is economy wide and covering all greenhouse gans- — gasses in the range of a 30 percent cut off their peak emissions.
And at COP29 last month, we saw the UK, the UAE, and Brazil announce new, ambitious climate targets early and a coalition of leading — of leaders — including the European Union, Mexico, Chile, and others — committed to setting NDC targets that reflect a linear, steeper pathway to net zero, which is critical for 1.5 degrees.
Our new commitment meet — meets that standard.
Some national leaders in the United States can continue to show the world that American climate leadership is determined by so much more than whoever sits in the Oval Office.
It happens on the ground, in our cities and states, from Phoenix to Pittsburgh, from Boise to Baltimore. And I believe that with this new 2035 target as their North Star, leaders across Amer- — America can show the world that we are still in this fight for a better future.
Thank you, and let me turn it back to Angelo for your questions.
MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ: Thank you, John. And thank you, Ali.
As a reminder, we will be moving to the question-and-answer portion of the call. Please use the “raise hand” function, as so many of you are already doing. We love to see some excitement.
As a reminder, this will be on background and attributable to “senior administration officials.”
With that, I will start with Jennifer. You should be unmuted now.
Q Thanks for doing this and taking my question.
Just a quick clarification, because we haven’t seen the actual NDC submission yet. I’m curious what kind of language it will include on fossil fuel transition.
And then, you know, there was some discussion, obviously, of the incoming president and his plans. How much downward revision did you all do from the final target based on your assessments and expectations just prior to the election, which I understand were around 65 percent?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thanks for the question.
On the first, our nationally determined contribution will reflect the U.S.’s unwavering commitment to the Dubai consensus and to carrying that forward, and you’ll see that reflected in our submission to the United Nations.
On the second, this is a dynamic exercise. And what we’ve really focused on is what are the multiple pathways to accelerate decarbonization across the economy while continuing to grow jobs and attract private capital. The fundamentals of that exercise, where that economic opportunity lies, largely remain the same: are formed by the techno-economic trends that we see prevailing, notwithstanding outcomes in elections.
The next four years will neither pause the impacts of climate change, nor will the next four years pause the continued acceleration in technology improvement and availability across every sector of our economy to decarbonize.
MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ: Thanks, [senior administration official].
We will go to Lisa next. You should be unmuted now.
Q Thanks so much for doing this. I appreciate it.
To what extent does this target consider that, you know, a future Democratic administration could reimpose regulations o- — you know, on power plants or automobiles and the like? And, you know, similarly, I mean, if a Republican is elected again in 2028 — which would give us eight years without federal regulations, at minimum, and other things — can states meet this on their own?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Great question. We have, you know, in the United States, a track record of continuing to reduce our emissions when administrations that don’t prioritize climate or clean energy at the federal level are in charge.
In fact, the AIM Act, which helped drive down over a hundred million metric tons of emissions from hydrofluorocarbons, was passed in 2020, signed into law by the previous administration.
We have seen the tax code help accelerate private investment into clean energy deployment during Republican administrations and Democratic ones.
And it’s worth noting that — setting aside some of the more recent rhetoric around climate — that historically this has been an area of bipartisan focus. And even in this last few years, after a party-line vote to pass the Inflation Reduction Act, Democrats and Republicans came together to ratify Kigali. Democrats and Republicans came together to help accelerate the deployment of nuclear technologies in the United States.
Those are bipartisan bills from the last two years, and I think they give us proof points that there is possibility even at the federal level.
To go to your analytical question of “what happens if,” this NDC is based on an analytical underpinning that actually allows us to carry forward this level of emissions reduction, largely propelled by state, local, Tribal action, as well as what we are seeing from the private sector and in terms of technology cost reductions.
America is going to claim the biggest share of the economic prize that comes from the clean-energy economy if we have a federal government that leans in and does what’s best for our economy, our people, and the environment we will hand to future generations.
But the lower end of what we have laid out can largely be carried out without significant additional effort at the federal level. That’s not where we should aim as a country, but analytically, we’ve grounded in multiple pathways, many of which do not rely on significant additional federal action.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: (Inaudible) let me — let me add a word on this.
I think what we’re both saying is the direction of travel is firm. Of course it matters who’s elected president of the United States and the level of ambition. I think that’s particularly true in the international sphere where — the president’s leadership by rejoining Paris; by convening the MEF; by putting forward an ambitious NDC in 2021, by both pledging to come forward and raise the level of bilateral assistance in the international sphere to $11 billion, which we met this year — those things matter.
The direction of travel is firm. We’re moving in a direction that is going to invest in clean power, in clean transportation, and reduced emissions from the industrial sector.
The pace is, of course, at issue. And I think what [senior administration official] was just noting is that, given the weight in those states that, as I noted, have such a strong history of innovation and strong contribution to the overall GDP of this country, we’re going to see emissions reductions. We can achieve the goal that the president is putting forward with that action. But, of course, with strong leadership in the Oval Office, we can — we can do that and more.
And it goes a little bit to Jen’s earlier question. We did take account and consulted closely with those economists and modelers who work extensively with our subnational partners in trying to put forward an ambitious NDC, but one that’s also realistic.
MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ: Thank you, [senior administration official]. We have time for a few more questions.
We will go to Sara next. You should be unmuted now.
Q Thanks. Thanks for doing this.
So, I guess just a question on the Trump administration. The president-elect has been quite clear that he intends to roll back and make great efforts to not continue forward momentum on all the — a lot of these climate policies. So, why release this NDC?
And just to clarify, I believe there’s been quite a bit of modeling that shows the U.S. is still short of reaching the 50 to 52 percent target. So, how does it pencil out to increase it by this much?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thanks for that, Sara.
So, a lot to unpack there. First, on the emissions trajectory for 2030, the U.S. will also be submitting a report to the U.N. — the BTR. This is our sort of biennial review of our progress relative to our goals.
There is progress that we anticipate will continue to sort of make as a result of technology improvements, states continuing to promulgate new policies. So, there’s, I think, both the means and the need to fill the gap.
But what we have found in our latest analysis is that we are very much positioned to close that gap. The trajectory right now reaches up to 45 percent — 45, 46 percent, which leaves, as you know, some additional work to do over the next, essentially, five years to close the gap. And that work — I think, part of what you heard from both me and from [senior administration official] is that work is not just propelled by the climate imperative but by a strong set of economic interest to race to close the gap.
The second is, you know, underlying the first part of your question is this notion that one administration can somehow pause the progress we’re making or reverse the direction in which we’re traveling or close off the ability of the collective of state, local, Tribal actors and the United States private sector from moving to where it really wants to head over the next decade.
And I think that just doesn’t — we haven’t seen that play out as federal policy has zigged and zagged in the past. Instead, what we’ve seen is laying out a clear, analytical, and informed target has been animating of all of these actors running in the direction of further decarbonization and economic growth.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think — look, Sara, I think it — it’s important we’re — we are members of the Paris Accord and of — and it’s important to signal to subnational actors, as [senior administration official] just noted, what we think ambition looks like and what people need to work and strive for and to set off that virtuous cycle of investment and enhanced ambition. And it’s important to do that across the globe to show that the United States has the means and the will, at least at the subnational level, to continue to be constructive players in the system and to move the world forward, because I think in every conversation, you know, I’ve had, people understand the stakes that we currently face: the effects of extreme weather, the burden on human security, the ability to deal with the consequences of — that we’re already seeing and that are only going to get worse on climate change.
So, laying out this marker, I think, is, as has been noted, important to the private sector, to subnational actors to give people a guide star. That — that occurred, as I — as I said, during the last Trump administration, and I think it will occur now. But it’s also an important signal to the world about what the United States can do, even in these circumstances, and will do because of the drive, commitment, and resources available at the subnational level.
MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ: Thank you, [senior administration official].
We will go to CNN next. Ella, you should be unmuted now.
Q Hi, everyone. Thanks for doing this call and for taking my question.
I wanted to ask about the differences between this NDC and some of the independent analysis that’s been done. I know that there’s a lot of different analysis out there, but I’m looking at the University of Maryland.
You know, basically, their high-ambition pathway kind of lines up with what you all have here, but when federal action is taken out of the equation, you know, it falls — it falls lower to 54 to 62 percent emissions reductions by 2035. And so, I just wanted to ask about, you know, the difference between some of this independent analysis and the NDC here.
And secondly, just wanted to ask about how important the IRA — I know that we don’t know exactly the future of it, how much it will get clawed back — but just how — how important that is in all of this. Thanks.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So, two — two things I want to maybe point out, Ella, in the first part of your question.
The first is the expectations around what state and local actors can help drive in the economy. The University of Maryland analysis is really, I think, unique in helping compute that, bring together those capacities and capabilities and put them into the model.
As you noted, in their own analysis, when you take out additional federal action and you really make state and local governments be the load-bearing beams, in that — in that set of scenarios, they themselves forecast an ability of the United States, working together, to reach in the — up to 62 percent.
So, I think that, in some ways, is reinforcing of the theory we’ve laid out here, which is that the state and local governments can actually carry a great deal of ambition.
One of the, I think, big factors that distinguishes, I think, our analytical work from — from some of what is out there is a real engagement with the technology — the sort of techno-economic cost curves and projections empowered by what our national labs know and have been able to collect — in some cases on a proprietary basis — with technology providers and firms in the field.
That, to — to us and to our process, has actually provided an even more robust sense of what is achievable if the federal government is largely stagnant or even putting some downward pressure.
This all sort of avoids the possibility and, I think, the — frankly, the real demand over the next several years for the federal government to actually do things that will be climate enhancing.
There is a Farm Bill debate that must get engaged over the next year or maybe two that will pose the question: Will the United States government continue to stand with those 80,000 farmers and ranchers, or will we pull a critical revenue line out of those family businesses; where lawmakers will have to answer the question, as the Europeans and others race towards a trade system that prioritizes cleaner products, will the United States invest in our economic competitiveness to make sure our firms are well positioned for that global race — a hard-to-decarbonize sector that’s actually moving ahead around the world?
So, I — you know, I think the combination of what I think UMD very uniquely and smartly has done to understand and catalog the capacities at the state and local level paired with our sense of what is happening and potentially could happen from a techno-economic perspective actually gives us a sense of real robustness in the range that we have put forward.
Of course, the higher ends of this range require the federal government to do what a responsible federal government would do in the face of an existential risk and the biggest economic opportunity the world has ever seen to invest in America.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: [Senior administration official], anything you want to add?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thanks. I think [senior administration official] did a great job of laying all that out.
I will say that even in that UMD analysis, there is another scenario, which was kind of along the lines [senior administration official] was just talking about, showing a 65 to 67 outcome as well. So, there is some documentation there, if people are interested.
Thanks.
MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ: Great. Thank you. And thank you, everyone, for joining us. That’s all the time that we have today.
As a reminder, the contents of this call and the materials you received over email are embargoed until 5:00 a.m. Eastern tomorrow.
Thanks again for joining us.
2:35 P.M. EST
Mortgage News From Whitehouse.gov
